New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1861-01-09

sight of in O discussion tOucninB TUG iit1' :" P0'
sona liberty. To exclude from this benencent
general law poor fellow whose aspirations ana
abilities had enabled him to achieve his own free
dom, was an unhappy and cruel exception ano
has led TO infinite trouble. But let us not aggra-
yate the mistake of the trainers of the Constitu-
ton by giving to their admission oreao'n anu
power they we're never guilty OF Intending
We do not mean, however, to give to the
decision of the Supreme Court in the Prigg case
credit that does not belong to it. Inc in'en-
ton of those who made it was quite as nous
trous as its warmest admirers have ever claimed.
II meant to make slaye-catcbing, in the words OF
Judge fancy, the paramount law OF the land'
and to render impossible the defense OF the
liberty of the citizen who should be claimed IS q
slave. 1t declared that the Constitution, in Its
rendition clause "executes itself, and that the
undoubted right which the State law at home
gave to the master to go into the woods or
swamps, into the next town or the next county,
and capture his runaway man, OF one whom be
called runaway, white or black, as Ii ne were
runaway horse, the Constitution secured MIN
the privilege Of doing in Boston or New-fork'
on Bunker Hill, or at Lexington, WITHOUT Deihg
compelled to submit to any impairment quest'ohS
"A TO his sayeholding rights. 1t was only neces-
.,,v that one who preferred this method OF re-
claiming an alleged fugitive, should DO so witnont
breach Of the peace; his kdnappng-if IL
bappened TO be that, for the claimants word as
TO his title to bis captive was all that was
reouiste-had only to be made without noise. 1t
further declared that the power OF legislation
upon the subject was exclusive in the National
Government, and that, therefore, all State laws,
whether to aid the recapture of fugitiyes, or to
" interrupt limit, delay, or postpone the right of
" the owner to the immediate possession of the
slave" are unconstitutional. 1t nevertheless
maintained that State magistrates might, If called
upon by Federal legislation, act under such
law, unless prohibited by the State; and it
granted to the State its right of police regula-
ton, whereby it might dispose of fugitive slaves
as il would of other vaeabOnds, and which, while
such regulations can never be permitted to
" interfere with or obstruct " the. pursuit of the
savehunters, Knight essentially promote and aid
g the interests of the owners" In short the
whole scope and purpose Of the decision was to
extend slave law all over the Union, to deprive
the individual States Of the power to protect
their own citizens, and to render it impossible
to punish kidnapping II was not singular that
this mopstrous Judicial opinion, announcing prin-
ciples hitherto unheard Of, and so subversive of
law and morality, should have been put forth by
the voice of Northern man, for it has long
been the practice of the South, when any
special degradation was adjudged for the
North, to call upon some of her own sons
to pronounce the sentence. Nevertheless,
Ike vaulting ambition, it o'erleaped ITSELF lite
strength was intended to be in the doctrine that
legislation lay with the Federal Government
alone, as that was a safeguard against any undue
opposition to slaye-hunting in the non-savehold-
ing States, which DIR. Justice Story thought
the t" feelings and the "prejudices' of that sec
ton might eDgender. But it so turned out that
that which WA meant to be its greatest strength
was its greatest weakness; and this was so evil
dent that the scpte mind of Chief-Justiee fancy
could not fail to detect it, nor permit it to pass
without exposing it. If legislation was exclusive
in Congress, then all State laws, whether to aid
or prevent the arrest of fugitiEes are equally un-
constitutional. This was the decision of the Court.
Now, the laws Of any Southern state-and there is
no Southern State without them-for the arrest
of stray negroes, by virtue of which they are
lodged in JAIL advertised by sheriff or jailor and
finally Sold unless the owner has reclaimed them,
are all contrary to the Constitution, according
to the decision Of the Supreme Court of the United
States in this case. Arkansas and Missouri,
and probably other States, have laws regulating
the method of the taking of fugtiyes beyond
their borders, intended, no doubt, to protect
themselves against slave. sealers but they are all
unconstitutional. The law of Missour-and there
are similar laws in other Slave States--under
pretext of which the attempt was made to arrest
Anderson when he killed his pursuer, was also
no other, the English Government may justly re-
fuse his surrender. IT. then, the doctrine of ex-
elusive legislation is accepted, let the application
be universal The South cannot justly complain
of the North because, in few instances, it has
failed to comply with judicial decision which is
universally disregarded in its own States If any
scheme Of compromise shall be adopted including
q Recommendation of repeal of all laws relating
to fugitives, in accordance with the decision in
the Prigg case, let it be no partial recommends
tion If compliance is insisted upon, it should be
q universal compliance We acknowledge the
constitutional bond; but we are willing to go no
title, not one inch, not q single syllable beyond
it. If fugitives from labor have no right to lib
erty, free negroes are none the less entitled to