The Cadiz Democratic sentinel. [volume] (Cadiz, Ohio) 1854-1864, 1860-02-29
REMARKS OF MIR. WOODS,
of Licking County,

The House being in Committee OF the Who'll
on House Bill No. II: 'To prevent slavehold
ing and kidnapping in Ohio" pending motion
to strike out all after the snactiDg clause, Mr.
Woods said:
Mr.. CH4RMAN:-Aiter careful examination
ofthis bill think this motion ought to prevail
/ am opposed to the bill as a whole and to it
several sections; and will proceed as briefly a
/ cen to state my objections. The first sector
provides, "that Except in the punishment o
crime) every person whose foot presses this soil
or whose lungs breathe the air of Ohio is ant
shall be free." Without stopping to pass any
criticism on the attempt at eloquence in th'
language of this section, have to say that i
confers no new rights nor does it enforce any
old ones with any new sanctions. The consti
tuition of Ohio, in language much more appro
pirate, IN time honored and we'll understood
form of words, which has found q place in all
the free State constitutions as well as in the or
dinance Of 1887, declare that except in the pun
yshnent Of crime, there shall be neither slavery
or involuntary servitude in Ohio. What new
force can this section give to that provision 0
our organic act? If we e-enact one section o
our bill of rights why not re- enact them all? II
has been stated on this floor that the right o
trial by jury was imperilled. If we allow this
section to stand, why not also say that the right
to trial by jury shall be inviolate? Sir, this
section is mere rhetorical flourish, of no utili.
ty whatever, unless it be to reassure the saints
that slavery does not exist in Ohio. | respect
fully refer their agitated minds to the 9Th sec
tion Of our bill of rights and express the hope
that their nerves may be quieted thereby.
The second section of the bill provides, "that
ifany person shall hold or control another
against his will as q slave, or shall bring
At =. o. ala Ia ar,t
for the purpose and intent of manumission) such
person so offending shall be guilty Of slavehold-
Ing aud upon conviction thereof shall be i'm
prsoned in the county Jail not less than three
nor more than six months, and shall be fined
not less than three nor more than five hundred
dollars. e.TEsg 9.raEss Ersse~-r -s-r
The first clause of this section, il its language
is true exponent OF IT'S meaning, makes it an
offence punishable by fine and imprisonment
for citizen OF Ohio, to own and hold slave in
tie State Of Kentucky. This take it, how.
ever is not the design Of tho author Of tine bill
The object Of the section, is to prohibit the
owner from passing through the State with his
slave. or from bringing him into the State and
holding him here on temporary visits OF buSi-
ness or pleasure | have been told that during
the excursion Of the Legislatures Of Kentucky
and Tennessee to this city, some Of our South.
ern guests brough, with them their slave ser
wants. TIE object Of this bill is to punish such
gentlemen, should We ever again extend our
hospi;alities to them, with a fine of not less
than two hundred dollars, and an imprisonment
Of not less than three months in one ofour sa-
lubrious county jsis. What a sore distress it
must be to the philanthropic gentleman who
introduced this BILL that by the delay in its
passage SO good an opportunity was lost to test
its workings and at the same time visit with
condign punishment the guests whom our inyl
tation had seduced upon our soil.
But, sir, hold in my hand a very high au-
thority, showing why we sheuld not enact this
section Of the bill. In the year 1888 there was
upon the statute book of the State of New York
an act Of which the following is section:
"Any person not being an inhabitant of this
State who shall be travelling to or from, or pass
ing through this State, may bring with him any
person lawfully held by him in slavery, and
may take such person with him from this State
but the person so held in slavery shall not re
side or continue in this State more than mine
months, and il that residence be continued be.
yond that time such person shall be tree."
distinguished gentleman was at the time
have named candidate for Governor of New
York. A letter was addressed to him by that
pair of patriots, Gerrit Smith and William Jay
inquiring of the candidate whether he was in IA
vor of the section have just read
h Here is an extract feom his answer:
"But gentlemen being desirous to be entirely
candid in this communication it is proper
should add, | am not convinced it would be
either wise, sxpedient or humane to declare tc
our fellow citizens OF the Southern and South
western States that If they travel to or from
or pass through the State of New York. they
shall not bring with them the attendants whom
custom or education or habit may have render
ed necessary to them. have not been able to
discover any any good object to be attained by
such an act of INHospIrALITY. 1t certainly car
work no injury to us nor can il be injurious t
the unfortunate beings held in bondage once
perhaps in their lives, and at most on occasions
lew and far between to visit country where
slavery is unknown. | will not pres!
the considerations flowing from the nature o
our Union and the mutual concessions on which
it was founded agains. the propriety of such az
exclusion as your question contemplates'
What Northern man with Southern princi
pies, what Democratic doughface, what lick
spittle and tool of the slave power, wrote ant
printed such sentiments as these? None other
sir, than William H. Seward, the man VIII
made the Republican party, and now holds il il
the hollow OF his hand. Like the centurion il
Scripture, he is a man in authority. He say
to this Republican Co. and he goeth, and to a
mother come, and he cometh. Let the friend
of this bill answer Mr.. Seward first before the
call on Us ior the reason ofour opposition to thi
section. Let them show us that the passage c
this bill will not be N act Of "inhospitalty" t.
Southern brethren, and that it is conssten
with 'the considerations flowing from the ma
ture af our Union and the mutual concession
on which it was founded" before we are requir
cd to make further objection to this section.
The third section of the bill provides that
"Ifany person shall seize or arrest, or shal
attempt to seize or arrest, or shall aid in seiz
ing or arresting, or in attempting to seize or ar
rest. or shall use any force or fraud for the pur
pose ofholding, detaining, controlling or influ
encing any othor person with intent to carry @
remove such person out of this State or wit
intent to cause such person voluntarily to depaI
out of this State in order that such person ma
be taken. held, or controlled as a slave in som
other state, territory or jurisdiction, such per
son so offending shall be deemed guilty Of kid
mapping, and shall be punished by imprisonmer
ju the penitentiary at hard labor not less tha
three nor more than five years"
II the object Of this section is simply to pre-
vide in good faith for the punishment OF tn
crime Of kidnapping, I object to 1t because 1t
entirely unnecessary. By reference to Swans RI
vised Statutes, page 276 law will be ioun
which makes kidnapping crime, and denount
es severe penalties against it, and this act hs
been upon the statute books ever since the yes
1881. Eatri qlgststi II
But sir, I believe that the design Of the friend
Of this section goes farther than what ha,
indicated. Their object is to prevent tho owl
or Of 3 slave escaped into the State Of Ohio frol
4 I.
Icsss2 and careful examination of the fouri
ssctiou OF tho bill shows that this 10 not ono
the csses excepted BY that section. aa'fsI
Taking this to be the purpose Of this scctio
I object to it, because it is a violation OF Il