256 



CONGRESS, U. S. 



delicate point, and it was necessary that all parties 

 should be indulged. 



" So much for the testimony of a distin- 

 guished northern statesman to the fact that the 

 Constitution was a deliberately concocted sys- 

 tem of compromises the work of ' a committee 

 for accommodation? specially appointed for the 

 purpose, and in which committee the right's of 

 the slaveholders were distinctly recognized and 

 guaranteed. And stronger still is his evidence 

 as the representative of a great navigating and 

 commercial State, as to the value and import- 

 ance of the equivalents given by the South for 

 all the concessions made in the Convention by 

 the North connected with the subject of sla- 

 very. 



" The eloquence and fervid zeal of Fisher 

 Ames, who, like Hamilton, was cut off in the 

 full bloom of his intellectual powers, urged the 

 acceptance of the new Constitution in .the Con- 

 vention of Massachusetts. He said : 



Shall we put every thing that we hold precious to 

 the hazard oy rejecting this Constitution. We have 

 great advantages by it in respect of navigation, and it 

 is the general interests of the States that we should 

 have them. But if we reject it, what security have 

 we that we shall obtain them a second time, against 

 the local interests and prejudices of other States ? 



" I could refer to the opinions at that day of 

 other distinguished northern statesmen as to 

 the absolute necessity of introducing these 

 compromises into the Constitution, and with- 

 out which no Union could ever have been 

 formed, but I deem it unnecessary. 



" To the same effect, and with like argu- 

 ments, southern statesmen urged in their con- 

 ventions the adoption of the Constitution. In 

 reference to the fugitive slave clause, Edmund 

 Randolph, in the Virginian convention, said : 



Were it right to mention what passed in Conven- 

 tion on the occasion, I might tell you that the south- 

 ern States even South Carolina herself conceived 

 this property to be secured by these words. 



" And Judge Iredell, in the North Carolina 

 convention, referring to this clause of the Con- 

 stitution, says: 



In some of the northern States they have emanci- 

 pated all their slaves. If any of our slaves go there 

 and remain a certain time they would by their pres- 

 ent laws be entitled to their freedom, so that their 

 masters could not get them again. This would be 

 extremely prejudicial to the inhabitants of the south- 

 ern States, and to prevent it this clause is inserted in 

 the Constitution. 



" In the South Carolina convention for the 

 adoption of the Constitution we have these em- 

 phatic expressions from .Charles Cotesworth 

 Pinckney : 



We have obtained a right for the recovery of our 

 slaves in whatever part of America they may take 

 refuge, which is a right we had not before. 



"Mr. Speaker, I may add truly that no such 

 right existed under our Articles of Confedera- 

 tion, yet it is equally true that this Congress 

 of the Confederation would not pass the cele- 

 brated Ordinance of 1787, in reference to the 

 Northwestern Territory, until a clause for de- 

 livering up fugitive slaves was inserted. 



" Mr. Speaker, I could add, if necessary, con- 

 temporaneous expressions going to sustain the 

 same view from the Legislatures and conven- 

 tions of every State to which the Constitution 

 was submitted for its adoption. I now refer 

 briefly to the view taken by the courts and the 

 learned commentators upon the Constitution 

 since its adoption. 



" The passage of the act in reference to fugi- 

 tive slaves in 1793 was not called for by any 

 complaints from the South, but it is historical- 

 ly known that, upon a call for remedial legisla- 

 tion upon the subject of the surrender of fugi- 

 tives from justice, this question also naturally 

 pressed itself upon Congress, many of its mem- 

 bers having been in the Convention when the 

 Constitution was adopted. 



" The owner of a slave, in the absence of 

 any law, has the right under the Constitution, 

 upon the principles of recaption at the com- 

 mon law, to seize and recapture his slave 

 whenever he can do it without a breach of the 

 peace. But cases may often arise when he 

 cannot lay his hands on him by reason of ob- 

 stacles thrown in the way, and hence the ne- 

 cessity of some legislation. This opinion and 

 position is fully sustained by Mr. Justice Story 

 in the opinion delivered in the case of Prigg 

 ts. The State of Pennsylvania. In this deci- 

 sion, announced by a northern judge, he says : 



The full recognition o_f this right and title was in- 

 dispensable to the security of this species of property 

 in all the slaveholding States, and was so vital to the 

 preservation of their domestic interests and institu- 

 tions that it constituted a fundamental article, with- 

 out the adoption of which the Union could not have 

 been formed. 



" I will read no more of that decision. It is 

 lengthy, and fully discusses the constitutional 

 question as to the rights of the slave States 

 upon this subject. I am aware that, since the 

 death of Judge Story, some fanatic has pro- 

 cured a note to be appended to the decision, 

 stating that Judge Story had said, out of court, 

 that the constitutionality of the act was not 

 considered in making the decision. The facts 

 of this note are so irreconcilable with the de- 

 cision that I will not insult the intelligence of 

 the House by further comment upon it. It has 

 emanated from the brain of some abolitionist 

 who never had more than one idea in his head 

 at a time, and'that not a very clear one. 



" To the same effect is the opinion of the 

 supreme court of Pennsylvania, by Chief Jus- 

 tice Tilghman, in the case of Wright . Deacon, 

 5 S. and R., 63. He says : 



Whatever may be our opinion on the subject of sla- 

 very, it is well known that our southern brethren 

 would not have consented to have become parties to 

 a Constitution under which the United States have 

 enjoyed so much prosperity, unless their property 

 in slaves had been secured. 



" And I may add that all our distinguished 

 writers and commentators upon this subject 

 are to the same effect." 



Mr. Hubbard, of Connecticut, followed, say- 

 ing: "I deny that any constitutional question 



