Source: https://lonang.com/library/reference/story-commentaries-us-constitution/sto-340/
Timestamp: 2019-04-25 16:35:19+00:00

Document:
Sec. 1798. THE fourth article of the constitution contains several important provisions, some of which have been already considered. Among these are, the faith and credit to be given to state acts, records, and judgments, and the mode of proving them, and the effect thereof; the admission of new states into the Union; and the regulation and disposal of the territory, and other property of the United States.1 We shall now proceed to those, which still remain for examination.
Sec. 1805. This clause was introduced into the constitution solely for the benefit of the slave-holding states, to enable them to reclaim their fugitive slaves, who should have escaped into other states, where slavery was not tolerated. The want of such a provision under the confederation was felt, as a grievous inconvenience, by the slave-holding states,14 since in many states no aid whatsoever would be allowed to the owners; and sometimes indeed they met with open resistance. In fact, it cannot escape the attention of every intelligent reader, that many sacrifices of opinion and feeling are to be found made by the Eastern and Middle states to the peculiar interests of the south. This forms no just subject of complaint; but it should for ever repress the delusive and mischievous notion, that the south has not at all times had its full share of benefits from the Union.
1. See ante, Vol. III. § 1211 to 1230, § 1308 to 1315, and § 1316 to 1324.
2. See 1 Tucker’s Black. Comm. App. 365.
4. The Federalist, No. 42. See also Id. No. 80; ante, Vol. III. § 1098.
5. See Journ. of Convention, 222, 302.
6. But see 1 Tuck. Black. Comm. App. 365.
7. Carfied v. Coryell, 4 Wash. Cir. R. 371; Sergeant on Coast. ch. 31, p. 384, (ch. 33, p. 393, 2 edit.); Livingston v. Van Ingen, 9 John. R. 507.
9. 1 Kent’s Comm. Lect. 2, p. 36, (2 edit. p. 36, 37); Matter of Washburn, 4 John. Ch. R. 106; Rex v. Ball, 1 Amer. Jurist, 297; Vattel, B. 2, § 76, 77; Rutherforth, Inst. B. 2, ch. 9, § 12.
10. Com’th. v. Deacon, 10 Sergeant & Rawle, R. 125; 1 American Jurist. 297.
11. See Treaty with Great Britain of 1794, art. 27; United States v. Nash, Bees, Adm. R. 266.
12. See 1 Kent’s Comm. Lect. 2, p. 36, (2 edit. p. 36.) See Journ. of Convention, 222, 304.
13. This clause in its substance was unanimously adopted by the Convention. Journ. of Convention, 307.
14. 1 Tuck, Black. Comm. App. 366. See also Serg. on Const. ch. 31 p. 385, (ch. 33, p. 394 to 398, 2d edit.) Glen v. Hodges, 9 John. R. 67; Commonwealth v. Halloway, 2 Serg. & Rawle R. 306.
16. Act of 12 Feb. 1793, ch. 51, (ch. 7); Serg. on Const. ch. 31, p. 387, (2d edit ch. 33, p. 397, 398); Glen v. Hodges, 9 John. R. 62; Wright v. Deacon, 5 Serg. & R. 62; Commonwealth v. Griffin, 2 Pick. R. 11.

References: § 1211
 § 1308
 § 1316
 § 1098
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 § 76
 § 12
 v. 
 art. 27
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.