New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1861-01-31

moral wish OF ihe Cmm0i y ealth o. mEfehnaeus
] remember, gentlemen, that when Robespierre
was pleacirg for bis life against the National Corveu-
ton voice said, "Tbe blood Of Danton chokes
YOU" Ard when George I. Curtis asks the Legisla-
iure Of Massachusetts to compromise, the blood OF
Sinus cbckes his utterance To the Commonwealth
from which be was returned. merely wish to indi-
cate II e sources fr,m which this request comes.
What do they ask us in tact 10 repeali This ~ no
new law, ReotlemeD. My esteemed friend, Mr.. Sew
ell reeued 10 il ss su sequeDt tn lSJo 80 1t ~ tech
richly; but Massachusetts has never been without
statute If this hind her statutebook-never Par
don me- a moment, Mr. Chairman. while look back
to the history. We had this saye claIse ~ 81 "a 81
And certain men kidnapI ing coored person IN Penn
E, lvania, Gov. hifin and George Wasbington had
coresrordence together the suhieet which led TO
the epactD eDt Of tie law OF 1893 What did The States
Immediately begin 10 dol The States, by the courts
and by n cir sta'uea Immediately began TO control
that rover within the Darrowest constitutional limits.
If yOn the doctrine down through Sergeant and
Rawle, through The Whole Of the New-fOrk reports,
| through tic statntebooks Of Neu-Jersey and this
| Safe, yon win find that every Commonwealth in-
t8Dty indicated s pupose 10 uphold the Constitution,
but not one iota more not one When, In 1886, Onr
reyisers droped the personal replevin out OF the IT.
ute'bOok one Of yonr committee knows, "a well az
do that of the hest lawyers in the State james &.
| AlvOrd. in argument which Las never been an-
sweIed replaced that statute the book fer the ex
pIess purpose Of curbDg the law Of SO. That was in
| 1887: We cone TO '43. Then came the Laiimer bill,
AZ cane another, then in 30 and then in %. lt il
an Unbroken line 81 statutes The evident nen ion Of
tfs Commonwealth ike her sister, was TO grasp
yllirg she could consistently with her loyalty TO the
Constitution.
Now all ask YOU 20 do to-day gentlemen. is to fol-
low in those same oOt,tpsnot 10 turn back upon the
conIse Of sky seventy year, You talk Of erasing
tbs statute, bu. in fact yOn change the legislation #
Massachusetts for sixty years for that bas been the
essence OF it-that slave should have the habeas
corpus.
Now, gentlemen, again, before proceed to give You
sCme reasons why link this statute should stand LEI
refer 10 another argument H. ID said this fugitive
| alaye ill il constitutional The Supreme Court OF orr
state ard Of the United States say So II i, very true
that Supreme Court lid say in the Simms case;
but il said So not my friends have said on reasoI
| but 'in Iy precedent. CfiefJusce Shaw said the
law If 90 has been held cOnti'uiOnal this law Il ike
il; THE is constitutional He assigned no As
precedent d ertfore this decision bas chat fore and
no more. Iu 1853, tie Supreme Court Of the United
States decided this Law 20 be constitutional Granted
| How much slall we Yield to precedent
How far are We bound 10 yield -oitl do not stand
here 10 saw to lie extreme length of the Democratic
doctrine, that we shall yield no authority. You know
our Democratic PARTY have claimed almost The French
law, flat presidents of weight whatever. Bot
do claim tlis, that precedent the first place, IL
| not to Lave absolute and conclusive weight. What
does James Buchanan eay-and certainly he may be
| oIsideIed some authoIity Southernwise-of such
question as this Speaking of tie books:
Even IL the judiciary had settled the question.
ould never hold myself bonnd by their decision while
actin in legislative character Unlike the SenatOr
from Nartacbufets Mr.. Bates), shall eo7,cRt
r. P0cc hfHheTtics u tie people IN tie hands Of any
| Jufjcjol fribpNoi"
| Tlis was in 1871.
:" No man holds in higher esteem than Do the
Org # Chief Justice Marshall but skoHd acr'r hare
| c.lssaff6 10 MAXI frPH ham he final 0rbtr betjr'SA
he Gorsramstt md he PEI pc i his country on qaeS
| irons of constitutional hbTty"
| As legislators, you are not bound by an unbroken
line Of recttents from the Judicial bench But here
| l. only SIM lie precedent.
| Again, gentlemen, there many where we
| need 70 co"strue law. And here | where ask
| lie immediate attention Of the Committee. How do
we ever cnib statutes By getting them construed
UrGer our doctrine of presidents, Gibbon says he
rrtHUily Of humane men is employed benefcially in
| undermining wicked i.ws. Here tits the turn
| ing TO Mr.. Sewall wbose fame lawyer 1 would
rsiher have than that of ten Chief justices for
single fact. For fifty years, in this Commonwealth,
we carelessly scrunized the Constitution that under
the Fugitive Slave claure, whether man Lad escaped
or Whether LIE brought 10 Boz did not matter.
Tie District Court returned him, all the same. No.
body PIT on their sIecac les # humanity and found
| that the law saln ''esoali nt" not bcinR brought
c,cai ing" My friend, Mr.. Sswall, in opposition to
the " lOle Bar OF Suffolk. start the point that -
| ,aIiug Lad a looT.hOle Lrge enough 10 save every
slave II at WIS brought into he Commonwealth of Mas
sachusetts At hs side stood Ellis Gray Loring who
Gluo,t the moment adomed the idea, and sus-
gir - II With rare ability. And in defiance of profess
foua nence ard H. Bench itself, Mr.. SeWall car
H,d Ii, point, and established the Somerset Of
| Ma yacluotts, the Med case. Who does not envy The
nan WHO can 10 DICK On blCh NE ludt l. the
| only question ol tie att mpis 10 scruniLe statutes
| ard oblge courts TO cOnstrue them.
| Here i, another. Ny fisnd-l am proud 10 call bim
| fo-.ancs &. Oliver IN the Report of 81, makes a
| aborcd argument TO show that no State officer has
night is bound NJ any rate, to act nnder the law Of
| 90. NewJeTsey, New-York Pennsylvania, had ad-
unrd tie same argument. II remained in thar still
uusetted state, every BODY saying " You cal never
charge the statute of 93-Co1gress cannO, act, the
SupItne Cont will not act" That statute never got
the iud ia decision until the PrVg casp in 1870 The
moment got q there, they iudorsed the state
meD Of Mr. Oliver, decidiDg that Safe officer il not
bound to actaId some said he act. We gained
point. Sometimes there would be only two judges
| in the WI ole State. Your fugitive slave was ia New
bmyTort. and you had 10 30 hundred miles 70 get a
man to help you. That WAS great gain.
We obliged order TO ssue paper in season.
TO give COZ densed report Of the remainder of
Mr. Philips address,
When Judge Story rendered he deci ion Of the Su-
prsme Cont On the Fugitiye Slave law, Mr. Phillips
called it Infamous, and he called il infamous,
Oh 10 Outweg reputation ten Tires rs brllnt
Hat If Judge Story. just what that decision jill
with The statute of 80 the Iemnstrants now want to
do They want the privilege of carry ing mp questions
To tie Supreme Court TIE addet point D the history
of that decision which has never been noticed
hut once, and that by Richard lillreih.
BY decision Of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania,
IN tie second volume of Sargent and Rawle, it was
| held that If, by the Inches of the master fugitive
slave permitted tnremnin in the State year,
children born after the expiration OF that year were
free. Yet although Of the two three children in this
case was born after the expiration of year from
the escape OF the mother into PenBsylyan all the
81 dren romauded back into Slavery. Ard there
j. not ore word given TO that child in the decision Of
the Cont.
Now, gentlemen, how does South Carolina behave
81 is tie State that is making the trouble on this oc-
casn. lotme tell you little iece OF her history.
In 1890 she passed act providing that any colprfd
cork ~ steward Of "A vessel coming into the Stale
he tl.fr hot shno