Year: 1861

up. 1t was only recently that he had heard
of it in connection with this controversy
1t is thought that the non nslaveholding
states refuse to surrender criminals. He
said that it had been generally admitted
as a rule that if O crime committed was o
crime within the law Of the state to which
the criminal 1ed, then he should be snrren-
dered not otherwise He cited case
of Virginia refusing to deliver some negroes
at an early day in the history OF the coun-
try, and the case Of the Governor of Ken
tucky.


He said lay aside the excitement on the
negro question and he did not think ten
men on this floor would advocate the doc
trine that state could, by its own law,
make what it comedies to be crime and can
by its indictment establisbif necessary, the
evidence Of guilt as well as of escape. The
Honorable Senator from Kentucky said it
was annoying. He knew it was annoying
to have negroes kidnapped from Ohio and
Indiana, and annoying to the Shareholders
that their slaves may be enticed to run
away, but there was higher priuciple 10.
volved


Another cause Of the trouble was said
to be the non-rendition Of fugitive slaves
He admitted the validity Of the clause in
the Constitution requiring rendition He
admitted that that was one of the clauses
in the Constitution that be had sworn to
support, but be must say questions had aTis-
en- as to the construction of this clause. He
believed that the Constitution should be
strictly construed, and he thought it the
duty of the States to make provision to
faithfully carry into effect this clause of the
Constitution, but he admitted with equal
frankness that he agreed with majority of
the people of the U. s., that Congress
possesses the power to legislate to carry
this into effect He said Mr.. Lincoln was
in favor of giving the South the Fugitive
Slave law, and read speeches to support
the assertion. The South complains that
they lose great deal by fugitives and few
are reclaimed. This arises from The fact
that they possess a species of property with
a will Of its own, and desire of its own TO
/ get away. This is no fault of ours, and
| the North is not responsible for that.
The Senator from Virginia Mr.. Mason, J
holds that few years ago Virginia lost
annually 500, 900, and he belle 5ed she lost
the same now. He. would concede that for
the sake Of argument. Virginia had about
| 500, 600 slaves worth about $500 at least
before the panic, making $400, 600 600
The loss of 100000 is only LAO of one
per cent, or about Of mill on the dol.
| lar. This is less than the risk Incurred in
any other species of property in the United
States Suppose the people of the border
States resolve themselves into an insurance
company; how small wonld be the premium
to cover the Joss, and special property has
special advantages. 1t has advantages Of
representation Is it strange that such
property should be subjected to peculiar
risks What will those gentlemen gain
by sevcring the bonds of Union? If they
run this slight risk now, what risk will they
run then, when the Northern States will
be underno obligations TO return their prop
erty ? Would 10 per cent. cover the loss
Of the State Let the bond of the Union
be broken, and slave property would OF
necessity retire from the border


He said that the Abotionists of the
North stand looking with anxiety and pray.
ing that the Union may be dissolved, thai
the North shall no longer be compelled tc
return fugitives. They know what the eff
feet would be, ana desire dissolution
They know the time is coming when tht
slave population of some Of these States
will preponderate so that the physical pow
ers of the State will no longer keep then
in suhjecticn, and they want the Unior
broken up so that the navy and army o.
the Federal Government cannot be called
upon to put down insurrection. They are
as anxious for dissolution as the extremist;
in the Gulf States He said there was one
other matter which he wished to refer TO


The Constitution was the supreme Law
of the land and Of every State, any STATE
law to the contrary notwithstanding. Eve
ry citizen of the U. States, therefore, owes
double allegiance to the Federal Govern
meut, also to the State, and may be guilty
of treason against either or against both
If Congress goes beyond the Constitution
10 euacting law, the law is null aud void
and il State make law against the Con
stitution of the United States it is also nul
and void


: Mr.. Benismin asked if citizen could b
placed in conflict between these two II
{ must of necessity be guilty of treason t
, Que or the other, and be hanged any way


Mr.. Doolttle said he could not Their


was no act of a state making treason wbic
is in conflict with the U. S. Constitution
1t does not make treason, though the stat
declares so.


Mr., Benjamin asked what advantage tha
could be to the citizens.


Mr.. Doolitte said the citizen must act a
his own peril He went on to argue tina
it was not in the power Of the citizens q
state to annul an act of Congress. If
nation can dissolve the connection of th
: Federal Government, if one state can seced
, from all the rest, then all the rest, can s
! cede from the one, which gives power to e.
pei State, so theright of secession involv
, the right of expulsion. He referred
the war Is IL aud the Hartford Conventio
, and said if the doctrine was correct n


New England states could have resolv,
, themselves out of the Union and gone oY
to the enemy, aud taken the fortresses
Boston Harbor and other forts, and ltnrni
our own guns against or If now in time
/ peace Pennsylvania should withdraw 81
! could cut off all the mail routes aud v
could not 60 from N. Y. to Virginia wit