Lewistown gazette. [volume] (Lewistown, Pa.) 1843-1944, 1860-11-29
Pennsylvania and the Fugitive Slave
Law.

tend that one of the principal causes FOL
dissatisfaction is to be found in State Laws
at the north, nullifying the Fugitive Slave
Law To give color TO this false state
ment, they pretend to give a list of States
(see Lewistown Democrat Of week before
last which they say obstruct this law In
some States there are provisions probably
in conflict With the statpte of Congress,
but if so, why not resort to the Supreme
Court, as was done by Maryland and Penn
sylvania number of years ago, and have
those laws declared unconstitutional? For
our part We do not justify or uphold wrong
laws in either section, but those who throw
all the aggression On the North ought to
carry back their memories few years and
recall the expulsion of Mr.. Hoar from
] South Carolina, having been sent there by
the State OF Massachusetts, as an agent to
see that no injustice was done to the free
negroes on board of Massachusetts, vessels,
to the brutal and cowardly assault on Sum-
ner, to numerous cases of kidnapping, and
to the maltreatmen tof Northern men in
the South, too often without cause
The laws passed in Pennsylvania are
principally designed to prevent kidnap-
ing and riotous proceedings in case of an
arrest of fugitive If these conflict with
the fugitive slave law, the singular feature
viii be presented this winter of set of
selfstyled democratic papers and politicians
appealing to the Peoples and Republican
party-or as they like TO style them the
Black Republican party-to do justice to
the South By repeating Gets erery one Of
achtch ,eas passed by legislatures either IN
,7lole or part democratic, and sanctioned
Jy democratic Governors! Even the new
Penal Code adopted last winter, and con-
tanning some OF these provisions, was the
labor of three democratic la,cyers, was pas
sed by democratic Senate, and signed by
a democratic Governor The Peoples and
Republican party having now both branch
es of the Legislature and the Governor, we
hope they will appoint committees of able
men to examine these laws dispassionately,
and if they are in violation of the Consti-
tuition Of the United States or laws made
in pursuance thereof, repeal these demo-
cratic iolations-frst, because it would be
right, and secondly, because the Peoples
and Republican party, with more majority
than many slaveholding States have votes,
can not only afford to be just, but magnan-
imous.
As the public seem to have but little
knowledge of facts relating to this subject,
We quote portion of an ARTICLE from the
Philadelphia Inquirer which will perhaps
enlighten some folks who seem to have !
more faith in democratic" newspaper /
statements than they have in aught else |
that is in print-the Scriptures not ex-
cepted.
In 1926, the Legislature of Pennsylvania /
passed the act g TO give effect to the provis- |
ions Of the Constitution of the United States. |
relative to fugitives from labor for the pro- |
lection Of people Of color, and to prevent kid |
mapping" Under this act person, named |
Edward Prigg, was indicted by the Grand /
Jury Of York county for having carried Of |
negro woman from the State, with intent to |
sell, and dispose Of her as slave The negro
1. 4
who had escaped from Maryland The de |
fendant, Prigg, was the agent of her owner. |
who had obtained warrant from q magis |!
trate, in accordance with the act Of 1926, on |
which the negro was arrested and brought be |
fore the magistrate, who then refused to have /
anything to do with the case. Prigg then |
took the slave back to Maryland without com
plying with the provisions Of that act, re
quiring him tO establish his claim before q
magistrate. And for this he was indicted un /
der the act. The defendant vas found guilty, |
and the case was carried up on appeal to the !
Supreme Court of the United States, which |
gave a pro .torHao judgement against the de !
fendant, and thence to the Supreme Court Of /
the United States. On the argument before /
the latter tribunal the cause was conducted !
on the footing Of an amicable suit between
Pennsylvania and Maryland, Which had be- !
come party in interest and the good faith |
of Pennsylvania 10 passing the act Of 1896
was admitted by the counsel for the defen-
dant. The Supreme Court decided that that
part Of the act Of 1926 under which the de-
fendant has been indicted and convicted for
kidnapping, was unconstitutional; because
under the clause of the Constitution, the own
er Of fugitive slave had the right Of recap
ton, provided he can do it without any
breach Of the peace or illegal violence And
the court went further and decided, though
with some dissenting voices. that the whole of
the portion of the act which provided the
mode IN which the reclamation of fugityes
from labor should be conducrod r~o= "roo-
s'tutonal, because Cougress Aas exclusive