The Slavery DeCision.
{"character_count": 3334, "word_count": 568, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9330999851226807], "ccnet_perplexity": [1515.5999755859375], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
A decision of the Supreme Court OF The United
States is TO US the end OF controversy so far the
question concerns what is--not what should be
We have therefore neither reviewed nor in any
manner attempted TO contro"ert the positions OF
sshat Court in the OF Prigg u.s. Pennsyl-
spa Tha, decision is, and wil doubtless long
re1ain, practically the law Of the land. 1t
can only be subyerted BY an amendment OF the
Federal Constitution, which is manltestly moral
impossibility while Slavery governs one-half the
Union.


This decision atfir.ns in substance that no State
cuu pass any law securing TO its citizens the right
of Trial by Jury whenever they shall be claimed
as owing service or labor to citizen. OF another
State The claimant has only to comply with 4
law of Consress--by taking his alleged property
before Justice, there by hasty and partc
process satisfying that functionarv (who may be a
confederate OF corrupt accomplice) af tho identity
of the person so arrested with his absconded
chattel, and he hurrio. him OF nanacled TO Nir-
GINA or Mississippi, though ne may be ree-oorn
citizen of Ncw-York or Massachusetts. Two or
three hap-llazard onths, (Which can easily be had
for much less than the market value of a save,)
and convenient Justice (and the claimant takes
his pick may send man into Slavery before ms
friends know that tie is suspected of being born In
chains. II this appears to us in direct contraveu
ton of the spirit of Articles VI and VII. Of the
amendments TO the Federal Constitution. which
declare that criminal shall always bc allowed
Trial by Jury, and in all civil actions at common
law where the yaluc in controversy exceeds twenty
dollars, the right of Trial by Jury shall be pre-
served. Bat what shall we think .f the vehement
dcvotccs of State Rights rejoicing over decision
which denies to every State the first and dearest
of all rights-he right to protect its free citizens
from being kidnapped and en,laved The effect
Of this decision will be to deepen the impression
on the public mind that the existence of Slavery
for some is Inconsistent with and fatal to the pre-
servalion Of perfect Freedom for any.


~ The Sun yesterday, with the average perpcacy
of that Journal asserts that this decision the Supreme
Court ao pus end 10 the controversy which has exist
between the Executives Of this State and Virginia and
demoshes tho positions assumed by Coz Se'rnd IN
port of his repeated resa surrender TO Prgnin
tain fugres from ;,ytice."-Tns iS sheer stupidity.
The Executive controversy referred grows wholly
refusal to surrender alleged Jcitises from justice and
has no connection with the surrender OF usteS from. SID
,e,y. The claim Of Virginia and the decision Of the SUI
rene Court grew Of entirely diherent statements of
facts and founded distinct clauses OF the Constitution
having wholly different objects tSee Art ", Sec q Clau
and 5 Gov Stewards position not glanced at
the decision Of the Cour.Yet this ;nsatemeni OF The
Sun paralecd by another in the paper. which as
that the regular Constitution OF Rhode Island
gives the privileges Of only those who have
freehold estate Of Sl34" The notorious truth that all



State entitled ,lder tnt Conyitution As this
nisaenent calculated seriously TO prejudice the adop
on OF tha, Constitution, its correction is mpervely neccs
>ary.