Year: 1864

"The msiority quote declarations Of Oliver Ellsworth,
Elbrdee Gerry and Roger Sherman, hostile to slavery
and argue thererom that tho constitutional clause relat
ng to persons escaping from service and labor did not
relate to slaves because those Statesmen as members
the Con venton would not have assented to provision
which included slaves We cont mt ourselves with stat
ing, in reply that all those distinguished men were mem
bers M Congress in l793 and supported the fugitive siaOe
aet Of that gear Z" a 49


II is plain to our minds from the history of this
clause that it was engrafted the Constitution as
a fitting complement, in the opinion off trainers,
to the similar provision made in the ordinance of
1887, in its sixth section, with regard to the Ter
ritories of the United States. That the terms Of
the Constitution under this head were understood
to be complementary to those of the ordinance on
the same point is apparent from remark dropped
by Mr.. Pinckney, of South Carolina, in the Con-
vention held in that State on the ratification of the
instrument in whose formation he had assisted.
Commenting on the provision of the Constitution
in reference to fugitive slaves, and which, in con-
junction with his colleague, Mr., Butler, he had
moved in the Philadelphia Convention, he said
owe have obtained right to recover our slaves
IN sohafeoer part Of America they may take re-
tuye, achich is a right zoe had not before" BY





tive slaves might be lawfully" recovered in the
Northeast Territory; and by the third clause
in the second section of Article w. of the Con-
sttution, provision was, in like manner, made
for the recovery of such fugtives in The States
where slavery did not exist, insomuch that Mr..
tuition as securing rights not guaranteed before,
and making those rights equally secure in the
common territory of the Confederacy and in the
pon-slavehoding States. (Elliots Debates, vol.
w., p. 2S6) Mr.. Madison made similar OBJ
servation on this point 10 the Convention held in
Virginia on the ratification of the Constitution by
that State. (Elliot's Debates VOL Ill, p. 453.)


Where the records of our history and the ira
dtions of our legislation are so distinct, it seems
to US that the Of true reform is to be sought
rather in the amendment of the laws than in
notification Of the Constitution on which these
laws are founded Or, if the covenants Of the Con-
sttu,ion have become repugnant to the moral sense
of the people, let them be repealed in the way
pointed out, and not repudiated broken, against
what to be good faith in the eyes of the great
mass of the nation. 1t is known that no one has
been more emphatic or express than President Lin
coin in avowing the opinion that the Slaveholding
States are entitled to efficient statute or the
covery of persons held to service under their laws.
He so affirmed in his Inaugural Address on taking
his oath of Office. Ga that occasion he placed his
opinions on record in the following terms


"There is much controversy about the delivering up OF


fugitive. from service or labor The claase now read ia
in tha al
provisions. a...l


No perscn held to service labor in State under
the laws thereof escaping into another shall II consequences
any law regulation therein be discharged from such
service labor but shall be delivered claim of the
party to whom such service or labor may be due


1T is scarcely questioned that this provision in
tended by those who made it for the reclamng of what
call fugitive slaves and the intention of the lawgiver
the law All members of Congress their support
to the whole Constuton-to this provision much as
any other To the proposition then, that slaves, whose
within the terms Of this clause, shall be deli
vered up their oaths unanimous Now, If they would


make the effort in good temper could they not with near
lg equal unanmity frame snd pass law by means Of
which to keep good that unanimous oath


There some difference of opinion whether this cause
should be enforced by national by State authority but
surely that difference is not very material If the
slave is to be surrender d. it be of but little
quence to him, to Others by which authority it is done
And should any one any be content that his oath
shall 90 unkept merely unsubstanal controversy
to how it shall be kept7


Again ia any law upon this subject, ought not all the
of liberty known in ciyzsd and humane urs
prudence 10 be INTRODUCED that free be not in
| any case surrendered slavef And might it not be
well at the time to provide by law for the enforce
ment Of that clause in the Constitution which guarantees


that he citizens Of each State shall be entitled to all pr
vileges and immunie OF citizens in the several States


II take the official oath to-day with mental


ons and with purpose to consrue the Constitution
laws by any hypercritical rules And while do not
choose to specify particular acts of Congress pro-
per be enforced do suggest that will be much safer
for All, both in official and private stations, TO conform to
and abide by all those acts which stand Unrepealed than
to violate any Of ihem trusting to find impunity in having
them held to be unconstitutional"


We assume that nothing which has since oc-
CURED is held by Mr.. Lincoln to have abrogated
this right regards the loyal Slaveholdpg States.
And if his view be disrcgarded there is still
another course, advocated by Mr. Secretary Chase
while he was a member of the Peace Congress
in this city in the winter Of lS60-6l, which
avoids the odium of seeming to "break the cove
nant of the Constitution" Not being able to con-
cur with Mr.. Senator Sumner in his view Of the
meaning and purport of the clause in the Consti-
tuition on this subject but concurring with him in
his wish to avoid its literal ful6lmcnt Mr. Chase
suggested money Communication for escaped slaves,
as sufcing to preserve the of good faith in
this matter without woundipg the consciences Of
those who revolted against remandng an escaped
slave to servitudc lie spoke in that body on the