The Richmond palladium. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1855-1875, 1860-12-27

Richmod, Waye County, Indiana,


4 From The New York Tribune.
The PersOwal Liberty Lave.
y Though South Carolina now makes Il
g Personal Liberty law, especially OF Mass
o chusetts, a convenient pre,ext for secessio
o and revolution, i, is notorious that only fe
r wears ago her political leaders so far fro
g considering the Personal Liberty law ju
{ tification for the revolution and civil wa
actually approved of it as constitution D,
e and unobjectionable manifestation OF the
!. own favorite doctrine of Stale Rights
During Mr.. Burlingame's speech In Coz
gress, June 2I, 1856, in defense OF Massa
sachusetts, he remarked that South Carolio
herself held the Fugitive Slave Law to b
/ unconstitutional. Mr.. Keitt of that Stat
interrupting him said:
Il wish to know from the gentleman iron
Massachusetts, by what authority he say
! South Carolina holds the Fugitive Slave la'
to be unconstitutional!
Mr.. Burlingame replied. "By he author
ity of tie Charleston Mercury" and taking
. copy of that journal from his pocket. b.
read the following:
.'Of the action of Massachusetts, in th,
abrogation of the Fugitive Slave Law. VI
have no complaint to make. II was from
the first miserable illusion; and worse. il
tact, for it was an Infringement upon one o
the NEST cherished principles of the Con
stisution. which provides that fugitives from
labor. upon demand, shall be delivered up
but gives to Congress no power to act In the
affair. The tenth amendment to the Consti
tuition provides that the powers not delega-
ted to the United States are reserved to the
States or to the people. The clause above
confers no power. but is the naked declara-
ton OF q right; and the power not being con-
ferred results to the States, as one OF the IN
c ents Of sovereignty too dear to be trusted
to the General Government. Our Southern
members strove for the passage Of the law.
and strove honorably; but it shows the evils
of our unfortunate condition, that. In the ur
gency Of our contest with an aggressive ad-
versary, we lose the landmarks principle.
To obtain an Elusive triumph. we pressed
the Government to assume power not con-
ferred by the instrument Of its creation, and
to establish a precedent by which, In all at
ter time, il will be authorized to assume un-
constitutional powers. and wearied with SO
many efforts to coufine it to its limits Of le-
gitimate powers. We are pleased to have as
sistance from Massachusetts,. and if the
question shall be determined in her favor,
we shall sincerely rejoice at such vindics-
ton Of the Constitution
To this citation from the Charleston Mer-
curry. Mr. Keitt had nothing tn say. and he
took his seat silenced and contounded. Not
one Of the representatives from South Caro-
lima ventured to reply. And yet the Per
sonal Liberty law of Massachusetts IT that
time was far more stringent than it now is.
1t contained provisions which have since
been stricken gu. because their constitution.
ality was not clear aud unquestionable. Mas
sachusetts has never attempted to nulliiy the
Fugitive Slave Law. Her Personal Liberty
enactment is strictly in harmony with the
Constitution Of the United States and the de-
cisions of the Supreme Courts. She has
amply shown her desire to keep within Con-
stitutonal limits BY the repeal two years
ago of all the clauses OF her Personal Liber-
ty law, the constitutionality of which might
be questioned. though no Court had ever
pronounced them to be unconstitutional
We do net think she is likely to take any
further steps in the way of repeal, and GER
tainly not under the compulsion of threats
from South Carolina.
The argument Of the Charleston Mercury
against the nstitltionality of the Fugitive
Slave act has never been reiuted. and is, in
fact, unanswerable. The only clause in the
Con .titution that refers to fugitives from Ia
Dor is this:
"No person held to service or labor in
one State, under the laws thereof, escaping
into another, shall. in consequence of any
law or regulation therein, be discharged
from such service or labor. but shall be de-
livered up on claim OF the party to whom
such service or labor may be done"
This clearly binds the State into which
fugitive escapes to deliver him up on claim.
but in no wise authorizes Congress to leg
isIate on the subject nor the Federal Exec
u,ive to invade the State and seize the fugi-
tive, as is done by the Fugitive Slave Law.
The powers of Congress are rigidly limited
by the Constitution, the tenth amendment to
which declares that 1.-THE powers not delega-
ted to the United States by the Constitution
MOI prohibited by it to the States, are re-
served to the States respectively or to the
people,
Mr.. jefferson, in the celebr ated resolu-
tons of '9S, referred expressly to the as
sumption by Congress of powers not ex-
pressly granted to il 10 these words: Where
powers are assumed by the General Gov
ernment which have not been delegated. a
nullihcation OF the act IS the rightful reme-
dy that every State has a natural right to. /"
This doctrine OF Mr.. Jeferson's is univcr-
sally upheld by tho Southern disunionists,
and, therefore, on their own principles. ev-
cry State has natural and constitutional
right to nullify the Fugitive Slave Law.
which. as the Charleston Mercury proves,
i. An assumption by Congress of powers not
granted to it. Neither Massachusetts, nor
sny other Free State. however, has vet re-
sorted to this mode Of redress. No Free
State has nullifed or attempted to nullify .
law of Congress. The Personal Liberty
laws merely protect the inhabitants Of the
Free States from kidnappers. and secure to
those who are charged with owing service
or labor . fair and impartial trial. such as
the Constitution OF the United States guar
antees to every person. II q Southern slave
holder seizes his slave in 81 Massachusetts, and
/ proves his claim to him, the Personal Lib
| er,y law offers not the slightest obstacle to
his rendition But il very justly, and right
eously. and Constitutionally, provides tina,
the claim shall be clearly established before