The Ashland union. [volume] (Ashland, Ashland County, Ohio) 1854-1868, 1860-07-11
STATE eoM1TY-KENTUcKY AND OHIO.

Governor Of Ohio and the Governor of Ken
lucky, in reference to the rendition of fugi-
tive. The Governor of Kentucky made de-
mand upon the Governor of Ohio for the sur
reuder of William Lago, who is indicted in
Kentucky for the offehse of having enticed
Charlotte, slave, to leave her master, G. W.
Nichols, of Kentucky. This demand Govern
er Dennison refused to comply with, for legal
reasons furnished him by Attorney General
Wolcott, copy of whose opinion is transmit
| ted to Governor Magofhn. The principle of
| the refusal is thus stated:
eThe act of which Lago is thus accused by
the Grand Jury of Woodford County certainly
is not treason according to any code of any
country; and Just as certainly is not felony
Tor any other crime, Under the laws of this
| State or by the common law. On the other
hand, the laws of Kentucky do denounce this
| act as 'crime;, and the question is thus pre-
sented, whether, under the Federal Constitu.
tion, one State is under an obligation to sur
render its citizens or residents to any other
State, on the charge that they have committed
an ofense not known to the laws CT the former,
nor affecting the public safety, nor regarded
as NAHUM an Sc by the general judgment and
conscience of civilized nations.
"This question must, in my opinion, be re-
solved against the existence of such obligation.
There are many acts, such as the creation of
nuisances, selling vinous or spirituous liquors,
horse racing, trespassing on public lands, keep
ing tavern without license, permitting dogs to
run at large, declared by the laws of most of
the States to be crimes, for the commission of
| which the offender is visited with fine or i'm
prisonment, or with both, and yet it will not be
insisted that the power OF extraditlon, as detin-
ed by the Constitution, applies to these or the
like offenses Obviously, a line must be some
where drawn, Distinguishing ofenses which do,
from offenses which do NOT, fall within the
scope of this power. The right rule, in my
opinion, is that which holds the power to be
| limited to such acts as constitute either trea-
son or felony by the common law, as that stood
when the Constitution was adopted, or which
are regarded as crimes by the usages and laws
of all civilized nations. This rule Is sufh-
GENTLY vindicated by the consideration that no
other has ever been. suggested at once SO easy
of application to all cases, or just to the sever
| al States, and so consistent in its operation
with the rights and security of the citizen"
Governor Magofin made long rejoinder to
this, from which we make the following ex-
| tract:
"The rule adopted by you, it will be seen at
glance, would forbid the surrender of fugi-
tive from Justice charged with crime, in almost
numberless instances, although the crime be
we'll defined upon the statute book of the State.
where committed, because, forsooth, it was not
| crime at law when the Constitution was adopt
| ed, or recognized as such by the usages aud
laws Of ALL civilized nations ] For example:
| Certain injuries and Instructions to telegraph
lines and railroads are crimes by our statute
| and perhaps by yours. Were they crimes at
| common law when the Constitution was formed?
Obtaining money by false pretenses, and other
descriptions of frauds, are now made crimes by
the statutes of some of the States. Were
| they crimes at common law at the adoption OF
the Constitution? Or is it certain that the
laws and usages of faN civilized nations even
now denounce them as crimes and felonies
| Look over your own statute book, and you will
doubtless see many crimes defined which were
otso at the origin of our common government,
or which the judgment or laws of all civilized
nations will approve. Do you issue no requi-
sition for the surrender of fugitive from the
Justice of your laws without first ascertaining
whether the crime with which he stands charg-
ed was a crime at common law at the adoption
| of the Constitution, or is made such by the
laws of all civilized countries!
| ri am not aware how ancient the rule may
be with you, but am satisfied it was not in
vogue when Kentuckians ran with alacrity to
| the rescue of your people against the assaults
of British invaders and their more savage al
| lies. And it can not be that ingratitude is
characteristic of your constituents. It is to
their sober second thought that I would ap-
peal, not to grant us favor or confer privi-
| lege, but simply not to give denial of our
constitutional rights. And that appeal would
make in your own language, when on recent
occasion you addressed your fellow-citizens of
Kentucky, Tennessee and Indiana, at your own
capital Speaking for the people of Kentucky,
as you then spoke for the people of Ohio,
would declare with emphasis
"sBelieve me, gentlemen, the people of
Ohio ask no peculiar privileges under the
Constitution They cheerfuliy recognize as
belonging to their brethren all the rights they
claim for themselves The exclusive right of
the people of every State to establish and
maintain undisturbed their domestic institu-
tions, lies at the foundation of their national
confederacy Without its recognition there
could have been no union of the States
Without its continued recognition as the basis
of all national legislation, and for the regula-
ton of the intercourse between the people of
the States, in theory and in fact, there can be
no practical union of the States. The sover-
| eighty Of the States in all matters not clearly
delegated to the Federal Government must be
maintained = Columbus Speech, January.
1860.
"This was the solemn pledge given to us on
our visit last winter to Ohio by you, as the
| Executive of the State, and be assured, ndth-
ing less Will SatlSIy Inc peope u NenIucAy'
Nothing less should be conceded by the peo-
pie of Ohio. can not convey to you my sur
prise ani disappointment when read the rea-
sons given for your refusal to surrender the
fugitive LAGo, in direct violation, l conceive,
of the sentiments and principles laid down in
the above extract from your speech upon the
occasion alluded to. According to your own
admissions and position SO distinctly stated,
that violation involves dissolution of the
Union.
81 have the honor to be
"Your obedient servant,
/ "B MAGOFFIN.
"P. S-Under sense of duty to the peo-
pie have the honor to represent, and in view
of the large number of slaves annually enticed
away from their owners by emissaries sent