NO SURRENDER OF FUGITIVE SLAVES IN

WASHINGTON.

RESOLUTION AND REMARKS IN THE SENATE, MAY 23, 1862.

MAY 23d, the Senate proceeded to consider a resolution offered the preceding day by Mr. Sumner:

"Resolved, That the Committee on the District of Columbia be directed to consider what legislation, if any, is needed to protect persons of African descent in Washington from unconstitutional seizure as fugitive slaves, or from seizure by disloyal persons."

[R. PRESIDENT, The question presented in

Mthis resolution has a practical value to-day, when,

here in Washington, we are shocked by efforts of slavehunters, coming from an adjoining State, to carry off human beings as slaves. This is menaced on a large scale. Whole hecatombs are to be sacrificed. A Philadelphia paper of this morning, "The Press," which I find on my table, contains, under the telegraphic head, an account of certain proceedings instituted by persons called Commissioners, who have undertaken gravely to decide, that, in a case of human freedom, "it was discretionary with them to allow cross-examination as to identity and ownership." According to these wise Daniels, a person may be doomed to Slavery, even without any cross-examination of witnesses against him. The statement of this assumption shows the outrage which

offends justice and common sense, and, I am happy to believe, the Constitution also, even if it be assumed that anybody now can be treated as a slave in the District.

The much discussed clause of the Constitution bearing on this question provides that "no person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor." It will be observed that this is limited to escape from one State into another State. Nothing is said of escape into Territories, or into the District of Columbia. If made applicable to Territories or the District, it is only by inference and deduction, and not by virtue of any express words.

Notwithstanding this omission in the Constitution, the Act of 1793, providing for the surrender of fugitives from service, was made applicable to escape into Territories, and this questionable precedent was followed in the terrible Act of 1850. But neither of these Acts was made applicable to escape into the District of Columbia.. While Slavery prevailed in the District, it was difficult to raise a question with regard to the surrender of fugitive slaves. But since Freedom has happily become the law here, the case is materially changed. Slaves at last are beginning to have rights. And the question arises, whether, in the absence of express power in the Constitution, and also in the absence of express words in any statute, commissioners can undertake to surrender men into Slavery. Even if there were express words in the statute, we should be obliged to find express words also in the Constitution, which is the source of the power. But there are no words applicable to this pretension either in statute or Constitution.

1

Sir, I have always understood, that, in the interpretation of statutes, and especially of the Constitution, every word is to be interpreted in favor of life and liberty,in favorem vitæ ac libertatis. Indeed, one of the received maxims of the Common Law says strongly, "Impious and cruel is he to be adjudged who does not favor Liberty." If these maxims are not entirely rejected, it is impossible to find, either in statute or Constitution, any power to gratify the hunters now thronging this District in quest of human prey. It is casus omissus in our texts legislative or constitutional, and no commissioner, in the plenitude of petty power, can undertake to supply words which do not appear in statute or Constitution. It is for them only to administer the law as it is, and not to make it, especially against Freedom. They are not greater than the Constitution; and they should know that human freedom, in the estimation of every civilized jurisprudence, is priceless.

The question which I now raise, if I may employ the language of lawyers, is proper for the courts. A court in Washington, properly inspired, could not hesitate in its conclusion. It would deny any such offensive prerogative, unless sanctioned by clear and positive words. In the absence of such words, it would rejoice to set aside the whole pretension. It would not hesitate or halt, but it would do it gladly, generously, justly, and make a new precedent by which civilization should be advanced. Yet this is too much to expect from the courts of Washington, whose sense of justice has been enfeebled by the atmosphere of Slavery.

This pretension is aggravated by the fact that many

1 "Impius et crudelis judicandus est, qui libertati non favet."— FORTESCUE, De Laudibus Legum Angliæ, Cap. XLII.

of these hunters are notoriously disloyal. Sir, it is hard that our Constitution should be violated, and men hurried into Slavery, at the trumpery process of such offensive characters. I think the Committee will find a remedy.

On motion of Mr. Grimes, the resolution was amended by substituting the Committee on the Judiciary for the Committee on the District of Columbia, and then agreed to.

F

INFORMATION IN REGARD TO FREEING SLAVES

BY OUR ADVANCING ARMIES.

RESOLUTION IN THE SENATE, MAY 26, 1862.

MR. SUMNER submitted the following resolution for consideration.

Ꭱ

ESOLVED, That the Secretary of War be requested to communicate to the Senate copies of any instructions to commanding generals, in pursuance of the Act of Congress, approved August 6, 1861, setting free slaves who have been employed by the consent of their masters against the Government and lawful authority of the United States; and also to inform the Senate if any steps have been taken to make this statute effective, and to insure its due execution by our advancing armies, for the benefit of slaves who have been so employed.

June 4th, the resolution was considered and agreed to.

July 10th, a report was received from the Secretary of War, entitled "Instructions to commanding generals in regard to the freeing of slaves," which, besides the instructions, contained communications from General Phelps and General Butler.1

1 Executive Documents, 37th Cong. 2d Sess., Senate, No. 67.