The Union and journal. [volume] (Biddeford, Me.) 1858-1882, 1860-12-14
The Personal Liberty Law OF Name
Ourht AZ TO be Repealed.

LCIsoual
Ought it to be Repealed.
When nj Augusta las. week, We obtained from
tho Office OF Secretary Of State certain facts OF
record. relating to the passage of that provision
orour Statutes, which is said to be in contra
yention of the Fugitive Slave law. designing TO
use them in the preparation Of an article on the
Maine Personal Liberty Bill. Since our re-
turn, we have received the Kennebec Journal
containing the subjoined timely and able article
which, rs IL covers the entire ground which we
designed to occupy and is, withal, from
the pen Of one Of our abest writers in the State,
We copy 1t entire. Whatever objections
there may he urged against laws Of similar i'm
port in other States, most certinly none. SO far
as il, eonstitutionalty is concerned can be sue
ce-sflly urgci against our law. Even Senator
Toombs when his attention was called to the
subject in the United States Senate by Senator
Fessenlen was compelled to acknowledge that
II Was strictly within constitutional limits rs
fixed BY Judicial decisions
We do not know that We can add anything to
the facts given by the article in the Journal
except to say that the records show that the
law OF 1855, seems to have been reported from
the judiciary Committee, at the head of which
then stood Hon. William Willis. Of Portland.
than whom there is no ADLER lawyer in the State,
and whose well known integrity asa man, rs
also his conservative character fOrbids the idea
Of ITS having proceeded from any other than
the purest motives. II is understood that the
4th Section Of the act was an addition made by
him TO the law, to negative any idea which
might arise. of its own constitutiOnality. In the
revision ofthe Statutes. AS the Journal suggests,
the 4th section was l,ft out, the first COM
mission Of Messrs. Baker. Bell and Hill. proba-
bly, not deeming il necessary, and the second,
Judge shapley, although acting with enlarged
powers taking the same view.
Admitting that ii was designed to give eI-
preston to the general sentiment Of the people
Of Maine, of the harshness. and the barbarity
Of the provisions ofthe Fugitive Slave Law,
and to COMPEL its execution by United States
Officers, ifexecuted At all. all that can be said
against il is, that il may not be IN accordance
with that spirit Of comfy which should exist
between friendly States. But allowing this. 1t
hardly becomes our Southern brethren, who
for years have had on their Statute Books, laws
under which our colored Sesmen. who are free
citizens of our States, have been subjected to
Imprisonment in Southern ports. and which
have compelled our ship owners to pay the
board and expenses Of these freemen, in prison.
and who were 50 imprisoned for no crime eI-
cept their color. 10 complain. These laws have
taken we have no doubt as much In value out
Of the pockets Of our Northern Ship owners, as
the Southern States Of Louisiana, South Caro-
lima, Georgia and Alabama have lost in slave
property by the running away Of their slaves.
II should also be remembered that their laws,
arc not only regarded as being against comfy,
but are also believed to be unconstitutional. Ii
was Tor attempting to test theirconstitutionality
in the Federal Courts that the Agent Of Massa-
ehusetts, Hon Samuel Hoar was forcibly elected
from South Carolina.
Before finding fault with the Personal Liberty
Bills Of the Free States, our Southern brethren
should purge their Statute Books ofthese laws
which are not only against comfy, but against
the constitution. and then they could with some
show ofreason complain. We agree with the
Journal in It's views respecting the repeal Of
Statute. II wound be eowardly indeed to repeal
alaw admitted to be constitutional under men,
ace, and whatever may be done by other States
itlnay be set down rs certain that no Legislature
elects lby the people OF Maine willeonsent to the
repeal Of our Personal Liberty billunder threats
With this statement Of facts, and expression OF
our views, we give below the article from the
Journal asking the attention Of our readers to
it,
Congress has enacted but two laws in regard
10 the recapture of Fugitive Slaves, since the
Federal Government WAS Organized-thc first
under the Presidency Of Washington in 1893,
the second under the Presidency of Fillmore in
1850. The Act of '93 empowered the owner Of
n fugitive FROM labor, or his agent or attorney,
To- seine or arrest such fugitive, and TO take him
before apy Uuitel States judge within the State
where the arrest WAS made, or before any
magistrdis Of a cOHRty, cIty, or tolrn corporate
lrAsreiR such arrest lrdS made; and upon proof
To- the satisfaction Of such judge or magistrate
that the person arrested owed service under the
the laws Of the State or Territory from which
he had Del, 10 the person claiming him, II was
made the duty Of such judge or magistrate to
give certificate thereof to the claimant, his
agent, or attorney. which should be a warrant
Cor removing the fugitive back to the State OF
Territory from which he del.
As the execution Of the Law Of '93 was thus
cOnfded 10 State a. well at Federal officers, the
States came naturally to legislate in aid or in
pOper right. Pennsylvania, among other States,
pursued this course. and in 1895 passed an act
''to give effect to the provisions Of the Consti-
tuition OF the United States relative TO fugitiyes
fromlabOr, for the protection Of people Of color,
and To prevent kiinspping." Under this law
one Edward Prigg Was indicted by the Grand
Jury of York County on the charge OF kidnsp-
ping q negro woman with intent to sell her in
To slavery The defense. In BRIEF was that the
woman was n fugitive slave from Maryland,
legally unprecedented under the law OF 80, and
that having arrested her under the Act Of Con-
grcss he was not bound 10 pay any attention
whatever to State Laws requiring him to e.
tablish his claim, in certain form, before
State authorities. The case went through
various judicial stages. and at last reached the
Supreme Court the United States. The high
tribunal delivered its final decision in the case
In 1872, aud among other points declared tina,
the whole Of that portion Of the Act OF Penn
sylvania which provided the mode IN which the
reclamation of fugitives from labor should be
conducted, ras uaeoRsiitutiona!, because Con
grsss has sreiUsirs Jurisficiioa orsr the subject
The Court further decided that the constitu.
tionality OF the power conferred upon Stat,
magistrates by the act Of Congress of 1873 wa,
doubtful, although such magistrates might, ]
hey chose, exercise that authority, ualsss for.
iiisn by the State Legislature.
Following the tenor Of this decision, Penn,
sylyania at once repealed her statute which hsd
)een declared unconstitutional, and in 1884,
Inder the lead Of her present Senator Bigler,
hsn ainember Of the Legislature. and other in
luential Democrats, she enacted law forbid
ling her state officers having anything At al
% do in the execution Of the Fugitive Slave law,
nd fOrbidding also "the use OF her jails and
,risous for the detention and keeping ofper-
Ons arrested rs fugitive slaves" The Act WAS
teld 10 be entirely In accordance with the de-