Daily Ohio statesman. [volume] (Columbus, Ohio) 1855-1870, 1861-02-25
.Gbe Obio 5tatfsma,r
7 Z r N Q
SPEECH OF MR. HUTcHEsON, OF MADISON

SPEECH OF MR. HUTCHES0N, or MADISON.
Housr OF REPRESENTATIVES.
Feb. 81, l96l.}
Hon. R. HUTcHEsoN: SIR;-TThe undersigned
ask for the publication Of your manuscript speech
on the rendition Of fugitive slaves.
LEVI sLUssER. B: MaOARLIsLE
A. u. CORY. JOHN TAYLOR.
w. O. MOORE. d. 0GLE.
I. L. WINNER. MA. DEv0RE.
J. Il. CHASE. HENRY u. DICKEY.
s.w. SHAW. o. HUGHES:
JOHN pSAEGg AWEGGSgTooTT. % a. a. T. Z: SosSE u SEEDhR
WIN, JONES. PATRICK RODGERS.
SPEECH OF Mn. HurcHEsoN, or MADISON County,
DELIVERED IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
FEBRUARY 81, 1861.
The question being on agreeing to the report
of the Judiciary Committee, by Mr.. ROBINSON,
recommending the indefinite postponement Of
H. B. 3l9-To prevent harboring and secret.
ing fugitive slaves and assisting in their escape,
Mr.. HuTcHEsoN, being indisposed, had Mr..
WooDs, Of Licking, to read the following address
to the House:
Mr. SPEAKER:-The object of this bill seems
to be misapprehended It is not to have the
State interpose her authority to assist in the
reclamation Of fugitive slaves, which has been
provided for by q lawef Congress. am aware
it has been decided in the Prigg case that on
the matter of rendition the Jurisdiction of the
General Government Is exclusive. But what
was the real question decided by the Supreme
Court in that case7 1t was simply that, as to
the remedies in recspture, when the owner had
to resort to legal process to secure his right, the
jurisdiction is exclusive in Congress.
The State Of Pennsylvania had, on the 26th
Of March, 1926, passed an act for the purpose,
as declared in its title, of aiding in carrying
into effect the Constitution and laws of the Uni.
ted States, relating to fugitives from labor.
She did this on the application Of Commits
sioners from the State of Maryland, after 1t
had been discovered that the old law Of 1893
was not 80 perfect as to furnish sufficient rem.
edy in all cases
The act went further, and undertook to make
it kidnapping for the owner to seize his slave
and use force in carrying him away-a thing
which he had perfect right to do under the
Constitution Of the United States, provided he
did not commit breach of the peace. II was
upon writ of error, originating in prose
cution for kidnapping under this act, that the
case was carried to the Supreme Court of the
United States. In this state Of facts the Court
held that the act was unconstitutional and
void. ..-..'..-
But the billlbefore the House seeks none of the
objects which were contemplated by the Penn
sylvania Act. Its subject matter oflegisation
and Its intention are outside of and independent
of any of the objects contemplated by the law of
Congress as passed in 1893 and amended in
1850. The effect of 1t would of course be to di-
minish the number OF escapes into this State,
and to facilitate, indirectly, the recovery Of fug-
tives when pursued by the owner. agent. or
officer; butt contemplates no object which has
been provided for by the law Of Congress. The
only provision in the fugitive slave law which
can be claimed to have any reference to the
subjects embraced in this bill. is in the seventh
section, which will read;
SECTION 7. And DO II further enacted, That
any person. who shall knowingly and willingly
obstruct, hinder, or prevent such claimant, his
agent or attorney, or any person or pers ono
lawfully assisting him, her or them, from arrest.
ing such O fugitive from service or labor, either
cih or rhout process as aforesaid, ,or shaK rescue
or attempt to rescue such fugitive from service or
labor, from The custody Of such claimant, his or
her agent or attorney, or other persons lawful
ly assisting as aforesaid, ,ohen so arrested. pur-
suant to the authority herein given and declar
ed; or shall aid, Gbet or assist such person 80
owing service or labor as aforesaid, directly or
indirectly, 10 escape from such claimant, his
agent or attorney, or other person or persons
legally authorized as Aforesaid; or shall harbor
or conceal such fugitive so as to prevent The dis.
couery and arrest of such person, after notice or
knowledge of the fact that suh person was fu
gitius from service or labor as aforesaid, shall
for either Of said offenses be subject to fine
not exceeding one thousand dollars and impris.
onment"& &c. (Vol. 9, U. S. Statutes at large 464)
1t is apparent upon Q careful examination OF
this section that IL is to punish persons who OBJ
struct the execution Of the law, by interfering
to prevent the seizure Of q slave, or to rescue
him from custody, or to assist the fugitive to
escape iohsn arrested, or to harbor or conceal
him, when the claimant, his agent or attorney,
therefore, unless there Ia an attempt at recap
tion, under the provisions of the fugitive slave
law. ~ sa..e..af- yu st
tits proposed by this bill to provide against
other and different offenses from those contem.
plated by the fugitive slave law. The object of
this law was simply to furnish the aid of process
and legal remedy to the claimant of fugitive
slave, and per consequence to punish all persons
for interfering with or obstructing its full and
complete execution, in any of the ways specified
in the law itself. II refers only to Tecaptuye or
reclamation If, therefore, this whole subject is
within the exclusive Jurisdiction of Congress, 1t
Is clear that Congress has not legislated upon 1t
In the PARTICULARS contained In the bill under
discussion. II has been decided, believe, in q
case involving the question Of Jurisdiction upon
| the subject of q bankrupt law, upon which Con-
gress is vested with exclusive Jurisdiction, that
the States might legislate on this subject II they
acted only upon such particulars and with such
objects as were not within the puryiew Of the
law Of Congress. If this can be done In regard
to one subject which Is within the exclusive
power Of Congress, why not in another7 The
power TO legislate for the return of fugitive
slayes, can be no more exclusive than the power
to pass general bankrupt law. ~ .f..a.t Y, T.
Il is here admitted that 1t is the principle Of
the decision in the Prigg case, that the power
| to legislate for the reclamation OF fugitive
slaves is exclusively in CoDgress-that the
States can neither pass laws to AID or obstruct
| the execution of the law Of Congress. But
maintain even by this decision that 1t Is exclu-.
sive upon the subject Of recapture alone, and
that It has reference TO nothing else whatever.
This is clear, not only from the ordinary princl.
| plee Of construction, but will appear from q
| reference to the decision ITSELF The Court say
"To guard, however, against any possible
| misconstruction of our views, Il is proper tC
state, that we are by no means to be understood
! in any manner Whatsoever to doubt or to inter
feye tSitk the police power belcngingto the Statei
in virtue OF their general souersignty," Q6 Peter
625.) ~ b.lssr ~. .siaw .lfs-
This is the Same ''power" to which We resor
in passing all criminal statutes and Furnishing
i offenses which the Legislature may declare TO b
such; and this bill must be passed, II passed at
ali. and for the same reasons of public policy q
other misdemeanors are made punishable in tn
exercise Of this general sovereignty. The Cour
saw that this power, "is ,Oholly distngsdshabI
from the right and duty secured by the provis'