Daily State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis, Ind.) 1861-1865, 1862-03-21
The word. proposed to be stricken gu, viii be

The Secretary read. as follows:
SCI. 2 And b. u fnTfher enacted. That this
act shali take effect from and after IL passage.
Mr. McDougali-If ! understood the proposed
legislation correctly. Il IS simply to inbbt the of
hcers in the fed from beng agents IN and about
this business Of returning fugltives-prohbits
them from engaging in it. I DO not understand
IL 70 impair or effect that provision of the Consti
tuition. which make il the duty Of any person
having custody of possession OF fugitive from
service or labor. to surrender him up the claim
OF the loyal owner. IL i. / understand. mere
measure 10 prevent the Interference OF the army
in these matters. As such, | am prepared 10 vote
for il, bat in voting for IT, wish TO say here that
/ understand il to be simply a provision to pre-
vent the interference Of army officers in this mat
ter not impairing the obligation on the part of
army officer a. well private citizen to
render fugitive from service or labor under the
Constitution and laws Of the United States
Mr. Carlile-Mr. President, have no feeling
other than proper one in regard To this PROPOSE
ton, and do not intend TO -detan the Senate
longer than moment They will see that
have no disposition to make any lactious opposi
ton to the passage of the bill. ! know Senators
desire that nothing shall be done that will throw
the slightest obstacle IN the way Of the accom-
plishment of the great purpose We all have IA re-
storing the Union. Now, put tins question to
the Senator from Massachusetts,: the Senator
been recently appointed Bngadier General and
has gone 10 his own State To discharge his new
duties in his military capacity, and u expected,
presume, also TO do all that he can t. effect the
great purpose had i'm view as civilian. Now
suppose General Johnson shall be called upon to
return to loyal citizen OF bis State fugitive
slave, would you not by this bill. however much
he might esteem the act as one going 10 aid in
the accomplishment of the purpose had in view
tx Ma ct nut pf his fq ID
il; and would he not be subject to the penalty
provided in this act if lie did il?
The amendment rejected
Mr. SAuI.bury-I move to amend the bill by
inserting after the word due III the eleventh
line OF the first section the words, ''or for the
purpose OF eaticBg or dec0ylng such persons
held 10 service labor from the service OF their
loyal masters" ask Tor the yeas and nays on
the amendment
The yeas and NAYS were ordered.
Mr. Anthony would inquire II officers OF
tie army and all other persons are not already
prohibited from enticing decoying siave-r
Mr.. Ho~arG-They are by heavy penalties
Dir. >aulsbury--li person exercising mill
tary authority comes TO my State, where there is
no opposio ION to Federal authority and where the
Federal laws are in fall exercise where nobody
is offering them resistance, aud my slave escapes.
YOU prohibit the Federal officers from returning
him a. me- want. under such circumstances.
the same act To say that neither your Federal OF
fcer, nor any person exercising power or author
ity under you, shall eitice decOy my slave
away from me, or shai entce decoy the slave
of any loyal citizens OF my State or any other
State, from the service cot his master. II you say
you intend 10 keep your army alOOl from this
question, but YOU 40 not intend that they shall re
fugitive slaves, tEcn all ask of you i, that
when they came into loyal community il shall
not be lawful for them. nor for any person acting
under Felera authority. To eniice or decoy my
slave or the slave OF my constituents away That
is the object of the Notwithstanding more,
nothing less.
Mr.. Howard-lf he did ] suppose ne would
simply make himself liable to the severe and al
most nihuman penalties OF the fugitive slave law
ofle50
Mr.. Sherman--The laws of the State would
operate also.
Mr.. Howarl-And he would be subject also to
the penalty prescribed by the law OF tue State
where he is | understand his bill rs simply pro.
hibting military men from dissracing the uni
form they wear, 10y engaging IN the business OF
slave catching and delivering slaves to their
owners--a dsreputable busness--n which no
gentleman, North or South military or civil,
undertake to say, will willingly engage.
Mr. Saulsbury-Upon that question. there Ger
tainly, ~ we all know Is great difference OF Opln-
ion in the country. This amendment of mine
does give some protection to the citizens of Mary
land and the citizens OF Delaware and elsewhere
Suppose your army goes into my State. suppose
it goes into the State of Maryla into the lower
counties of the State of MARYLAND where il has
recently been, and suppose slaves are enticed
away, rs am informed they have been, by per
sons pretending TO be soldiers of the United
States want your law To say that the person
who engages in suca disreputable work rs that
who will entce my slave or the slave of one OF
my constituents away, shall be dismissed from
your service. When YOU say that ii my slave
goes where he Is, he shtll not return him, | want
you to say also that he shall not be the means OF
depriving me of my slave.
Mr.. Anthony-ln voting against this amend
ment. which shall do, certainly do not wish il
to Re understood that | would vote to give any
officer the right to entice slave from loyal
master; but | understand that the law already
prohibits IL; II Is already IN Oiiense, and we are
only re enactng another law.
Mr. McDOugall-What the Senator from
Rhode Island says is true; but the law passed by
Congress making it penal to entice away per
son held To service labor, is not an article OF
war. and there is a vast difference between the
laws statute books, which have To he in
forced through the courts OF justice and the min.
listers of the law and that martial authority
which controls armed men i'm the field. Here il
Is proposed ~ military law--the canOns OF mill.
tary authority--to say that officers of the army
Shdl Tot interfere IN the matter Oh the return o
fusitves by employing or directing their
subordinates. officers men, to engage in
that business which i no Office of theirs
by law. imposed upon them by no
law, would be mere volunteer act theiI
F part under any circumstances, except where they
bad the particular personal custody of the person
held To- service. aun hence would be bound, un-
der the Constitution. to render him up on de
mand hen lesislate against interference q
for the return. would il not be we'll 10 say that a.
You shall not employ your forces for the return
of fu.itve>. they shall not he employed in inter
neddling with the rights OF those who hold these
/ persons 10 service or labor II looks to me IKE
justice ard measuring out equity and constitu-
tional provisions with even hand. have head
the Senator from Delaware has sud that pei
sons connected Oh the army in Maryland and
Delaware and IN this District have been busy 20.
ing abou and saving 10 servants held 10 service
or labor by law. that they were longer bound
10 render service and have been disturbing the
interests and rights OF those States can see
some Justice and reason in this request; and a. We
say they shall not NEEDLE IN favor OF the muster
- think Il but justice 10 say that they shall not
intermeddle with the relations between the mas
ter AMI his servants, particularly in those State,
where mischief may result a. have been in.
formed IL l. resulting here IN these two State