, 1860-10-09

10f fEaCuluR tuX1kaE0 MAFE u O5k1H4, Oh kQ0
2oth Of October, lss0.
The Court laid that inasmuch a. some of tic
questions of 1sw which had been prssented il
theee cases Hero now, it WIS the wish Of tho
Court to consult the Judge Of the Supreme
Court for this circuit, Ar. Jasties Mclean, upon
the points involved, before aentence wac pro
nounced. The whols history Of the case, inc}ud-
ing all the testimony, the ruling Of the Court.
and the argument Of the counsel upon tbs ques.
tions Of Law. hAd been presented to him and by
him considered, sud he had expressed his Cd
tire concurrence npon eTerJ point ruled. It
only remained, tharetora, to pass the sentence
Of The law upon the defendants. John uossack,
one Of the defendants, in answer to the ques-
tion why sentence should not be pronounced,
then request ID [eAvp 10 state come reasons why
sentence upon him should nos be- passed, and
on The Court granting the permission asked,
Of The Court, which has been published. When
Hosssck concluded, the Court addressed him
sebstsutiaily as follows:
It is proper to premise that though Hossack
had intimated to tho Jud3 3e personally immedl-
ately before the meeting Of the Court that he
wished to say sonsshing, and the Judge had
stated that he might do 50 provided he did not
abuse tho privilege iha Court did not expect
euch paper as Wc&s read, and consequently
what was s&id By Tho Court Wis said at Inc mo-
meut without notes, 31d there IVES 10 reporter
present. It is poasible, therefore, in the state
II, there may be fe1 sentences which were not
actually spoken, md that there may have been
some spoken which ase not here SCI down. The
object has been merely 10 give tho leading
ideas Of the Court In the remarks which were
made. s
an sbu1e of the privilege allowed to you to
read such document % We have just heard. II
understand it cor1ectly, the substantial part
Of it is that you fnsiss that tie law, IN der
which you hare been convicted is unconstitu.
tiousl That point Hes fully considered By
the Court, even though it was not made By
your counsel; indeed the binding force Of tho
law was conceded by them. They in terms
admitted the law waa constitutional. And it il
one Of the most remarkable cases Of tue hallu-
cination which will eometimes cume over the
mind on certain subjects, that after what has
occurred, you will riiu insist the law under
which you have been convicted is contrary to
the Constitution. Let me recall the leading
fxets Of the case. The slave had escaped from
| Missouri-he was in the custody Of an officer,
who held him by warrant from Commisuon-
| er, obtAine6 by the person to whom the service
was due, and who was there at the tins Of the
rescue claiming him. You knew all this by
| express information communicated to you at
| the time by the highest judicial officer Of the
State, who appealed TO you in the strongest
manner not to attempt rescue. You chose 10
disregard all these, warnings, and under the
4kk
| set them at defiance, and to rescue the 91ave by
violence from tic hines Of the officer Of the law,
The allegation tia the law Of 1850 il uncon.
atitutional is mere prete1t-it is = cover to
conc al al attack upon the Constitution itself.
It is true The Constitution does not use the word
slave. It LETT slavery where il found it, in the
Statee, aad declared when fugitive escApsd
from one State to another he should surrender
| up to the claimant. There has never been any
diff: renee Of opinion among sensible men who
understand the subject, that the psorisiou in the
Constitution declares mo person held to SER
"thereof, csc ping Into another, shall, in conse.
"querce Of any Law or regulation therein, be
"dhchArged from suth service orlRbor. but ssan
"1e des.rtr<drp Oh aaim Of the party to whom
"Buch service or labor may be dee" included
negro, who, b. law was held IS Stare in the
State from which he escaped. If then, this
be 30, and words {sn be used 50 as to ex-
press q meaning ia tbs case contemplated,
"a obligation wis imposed somewhere,
and tho authority II Congress to infllcs pea
atty on any one who icterirred BY rolence With
this right Of the c:sinant thus guaranteed by
tho Constitution, aid sought to Be enforced un-
der the warrant It Commissioner, is as un-
questionable as its authority to inaicl penalty
for stealing q letter fr,m tue mail, or for no.
latiou of the TeTenuj law. Once admit the
clause in question wufintended to mean slave,
and the conclusion isss irresistible as as any
That it had such n4ning all contemporane-
ous history demous'r4es. He who doubts On
this point IL pr5fa4zdly ignorant on the sub.
ject, and it folly lor him 70 discuss it. Itwas
then an offence under tbs Constitutions in.
reference by force with tbs right Of claimant
for which Congtss could impose penalty.
But it is sad that he slsye ought to have trial
BY jury il the cI3ta to which he has e.caped.
That was q matter exclusively for Congreas to
determine. II person commits an offence
| IL. S.t-
smother, he has 10 trial BY jury in tho State 10
which he has fed. But when an individual il
tried anywhere il the United States, for inter-
ferIng By force With the right OF the claimant
Of al siieged slsve. then he il tried BY q jury.
Then it must be established to the eatiafactioa
Of jury, that thefugitivs was slaye; that the
person whom you rescued vas held to service
rlabor BY the laws Of Missouri, and thus Was
within tie very words Of the Constitution, was
not controverted by your COUNSEL in this case.
There is no possible doubt ia this case. 1t
does not raise 9ny Of the questions which can
be controvezted rrder the Law of 1850. It is
simply whether Congress- can by statute punlsh
any one who forclbiy resists aa ACT which the
Constitution commando to be dime. All these
attacks upon that portion Of the Law Of 1850
which comes up II this case, are ttat}y Intended
n IN impeachment Of the clause in the Consti-
tuition itself. Tbs Law is retezted to because
men have not the courage TO denounce the Con-
ssitution directly. But in fad: it would be
much more mcnty to th,ow aua1 all 7isguises,
and assall the Institution at onte. Tnere may
be some Objectionable features in the Act Of
1850, but they do not como in question here. If
the 1aH OF 1850 was not in existence, STILL under
the Constitution and laws in full force before
1850, what you hare done Wa, a violation Of
your duty a. citizen. It Is absatd to say that
It belonged to the States, undertbo clsuse Of
the Constitution referred to, to surrender up
The fug':i!e i through 56s.,sl eap,ess legisla:
the citizen could interfere BY violence to pre-
vent the surrender. The citizen could in that
case do what the State .ou1d not do, even By
express law. And now' you cone before me-
and claim that you shall not be punished, be-
cause sou deem tho law unconstitutional. foa
cannot be allowed To decide that question. It
would be an easy way for person to escape
punishment, if such plea were admitted
Every convicted man would make it. You ha1e 4
spoken Of Jour children Whist if person
should deprive you Of ono Of your children, and
upon being calle, before the Courts of The
sist that bis e9nseiencx commanded him to do the
act, and therefore The Law must no. v;ota:e his
conscience. How wou}t such plea be regard
ed' This may b. said to be IN extreme case,
but it Is in this wsJ that We can see pst clearly
the monst1ous principle upon which you elaim
not lett to you nor to him. The Courts Of the
country must determine these questions under
the sanctions which rest upon them, In the in.
Vulnerable cases which come before them they
{ cannot allor man to escape because he haa
| some constitutional objections to tho law. Few
persons ike the Law that punisbes than. We
caunot deal with the abstract natural rights OF
MN. We, in administering the Constitution
aud laws Of the country, must take him with
the limited and qualified rights rhich they have
: Constitution and laws which protect you in the
| custody Of your children and in the right Of
: your farm or property Of any kind, also protec,
the claimant in his right to the surrender Of his
fugitive slave; Il you discriminate against
natural right to your children wheE they a,e
| able to care for thense1resr The truth il, to
yield to such doctrine ~ you insiat on, would
.. lead to ana1chy and zeducs every government
on the face Of the earth to chaos. I, Is judge
have to deal with your rights and with those oi
, zsns and inhabitants Of these United States
{ each d you ewing allegiance to the Constitution
. and the laws. Neither Of you caa declare thai
, you will obey this and disobey that Injunction
j Of the Constitution. Yon are both bound b,
sr<r1 injunction, and you as much as he,
have said tits much because / can no,
suffer tbs document which you have jost read
and which contains doctrines 80 much at "a,
q with the true spirit Of the Constitution ans
5 all sound government, to pass unnotieed b.
;, States LIS. if Ill the citizens Of the Norther,
States should set u you did at Ottawa last o.
n tobers The clauses in the Constitution upon th
h subject Of slavery are part Of The great com
pact made BY our fathers, and so long Is it ex
;. ists 10 are bound, rs honest men, TO live up i
n to The propristy Of their insertion IN that ia
- strument. Slavery cac never be abolished b,
Z rour method. It has disappeared from the MOI
r thern States under the sanction Of law, aud no