OCR Text |
Show 270 DF.SPO'l'ISM justice of the former, and being found_ in the ~at~e:; that wit hout that evidence the cxecuttve of Vtr~ll11~ oua ht not to have delivered tht>m up ; that totlh tl t!te~ ovrr!tt not to 1·efuse. The governor of Pennsyl· vania however appears to be anxious that thE> matter should be laid 'before Congre:;s, and perhaps such a step might content a ll scropleo.''• . 'fhis opinion of Randolph's :vas SC'nt by VVashtn~· ton to MiHiin, who promJscd, 1t1 rep~y_, to ren~w his demand, accompanied with the a dditional ev1dence pointed out by Randolph. Of the result we are not informed; but when the second Congre~s came together, not long after, for its ~rst sesswn, all t~c pap<'r~, agreeably to lVIiffiin's origmal req~;st, wrre la1~ by the president before that bod:r- Ihese paper. were suffered, in both houses, to he on their ta.bles undisturbed. '!'he opinion of Randolph was deo1ded and emphatic, that to_ carry .o_ut the pr~v1s~on of the constitution respecting fug~t1 vcs from JUStiCe, no legblation was necessary; and 1f not necessary,. why, then, not constitutional,-though th~t was a cm~:;Ide.ra· tion as yet uot much attended to,-smcc the l_e~I~latlvc power of Congress do eo no~ cxte~1d to 1 he s~tt~:dyw~)'?.f scruples, but only to cases 111 w~11ch a uthonty to legts· late is expressly given, or lS t~ccc.l'5sary to carry out powers conferred by the constJ~utJOn on tl~e ge~Jeral government- to neither of whtch categones dl(l this case belonO'. ]n the cour~e, however, of the next session, a co~mittee '.vas appointed i.n the Eenate, consisting of Johnston, of North Carolina, Cabot~ of l\1assach u:-;etts, and Reed, of Delaware," to cons1der the expediency or a law rc:o;pccting fugi.tives fror~ justice, and persons escaping from· the :service of then • It is rnt~er curious th~t! although sev.eral judges have rc~crrn~~ in their opimons, to the ongm of the net of 17!13, o.nd the corrc;>poh cn<'C between Governor Miffiin and Rnndolph, not one ol t r:n has even hinted at the existence of Attorney <?cncral H.anddl~Jc:L~ opinion, which is repuhlisheJ, however, along wd~ tlJC ~thcr . an ment;!1 in Lowrie & Franklin's great folio ~o\lc~t,on oi .Amenc !?~tp fap~rs, ~~i&cf!l)apoous Documents, \ 'Ol. 1. P· 39. IN .UmRICA. 271 ma~ters, and ~o report by bill, (if they think proper;)" " :hJCh ~om m_lftee, about a month after, did report a btll, wh.1~h bill, aftrr some modifteations, pas~ed into the fugJtJve act of 1793. '~1 hat act _consists of four sections, the first two of wh1ch, rclatmg: to fugitives from justice, have been oft~n vouched 1~ to support the right of Congress to lcgu::late rPspechng fugitives from labor. They arc us<•d for th~t purpose by Story, who, speaking on behalf of h1mself ancl sevrn other judcres of the Supreme. Court of the .Uni ted States, in .Prigg v. PennS! Jlvanw! (p. 620,) tnumphant ly flourishes the constitutlon~ llty of _those secti?ns as never having been cal.led ltl question, and the1r provisions as having been un1formly acted upon by all the state executives. And for the best of reasons, too. T hese sections rPquire nothing w hich, inde pendently of t he act of 1793, the governor~ of the s tates were not bound to rio by the conshtuhon 1ts?lf; and though having no aut hority a_s a law, and m that respect a work of supererogation, they may, doubtless, have been convenient as sug~e~t~ng a uniform method of complying with the ~eq?I::<Jtlon of the constitut_ion. As to the penalty tufl~c_t ed by ~he sccoud sectiOn on persons rescuing fu~1hves whJle uqder transportation, t he constitut ionality of that J?rO~ision seems to rest upon t.he same alleged authon ty 111 Congrc!-ls, under which the F ederal courts sustained the constitutionality of the Sedition law, and of the act to punish counterfeiter::J of lhe bills ?f the Rank of the United States; and I therefore torn It ovN, without furtlwr comment, to be dealt with by 1he adherents of the Resolution~ of'98, in which both 1ho•e penal acts were specially and emphatically de. nounced as unconsti tut.ional, for want of power in Congress to enact them. Yet, to help the better to ~ de~tsiOn of the point, I will venture to suggest the 111qmry, whether the O'O \'Crnors of the statPs could be_ subjeeted, by fPderal blegislation, to fine and impns? nment, for declinillg to s urrender fug it ives from JUstice? · |