Rensselaer Union, Volume 11, Number 47, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 7 August 1879 — Secession and the Fugitive-Slave Law. [ARTICLE]

Secession and the Fugitive-Slave Law.

Georgia has always been one of the most conservative and prosperous of the Southern States. In old times it was never a Democratic State. Even to the last its people were for the Union, and were betrayed and dragooned into secession and civil war, into rebellion and disunion. That was eighteen years ago, during which time wonderful changes have taken place. War has had its term, and peace has been employed in reconstructing and repairing the breaches committed by war, and in adapting the Constitution and the laws to* the new and changed condition of affairs. Slavery, the substantial cause of all our troubles, has been abolished, but even at this day the deep-rooted attachment and love for that human curse finds expression, and its destruction is mourned over with bitterness. The Savannah (Ga.) Recorder, in a late issue, thus gives vent to the old love of human slavery: The South had cause for action in 1861. Why ? Because the Northern States had passed their Personal-Liberty bills and nullified the acts of Congress. The State Governments would not render up fugitives, declaring those were not criminals because they stole slaves, which were not property: and the State Judges took it upon themselves, in their State Courts, td set aside the acta of Congress for carrying out the Fugi-tive-Slave law. These were the enormities that drove the Bouth to her condition of determined secession. And any adta of a hostile character in the future toward the South will precipitate a like action on our part, with this important and well-understood declaration, that secession may mean war, but we will be fullv prepared for it. As an expression of unrelenting hatred because of the destruction of slavery, this paragraph may be accepted as a fair expression of public sentiment; but, so far as it is given as a statement of history, it is utterly fallacious.

The slaveholding States were protected in the possession of their property by the encircling territory of Delaware, Maryland, Kentucky and Missouri. These were slaveholding States, and, though the number of slaves held by them was comparatively small, all the laws and the government of these Stales were in the interest of the institution. The bulk of the slave property was south of these States. In all the controversy as to fugitive slaves, Florida, Louisiana, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi and South Carolina, which never lost a slave, were the most clamorous. The border States, which were most exposed to loss by that me&ns, never regarded it as such a serious grievance, never proposed secession for that reason, and never seceded for any cause. Over the border- of these slaveliolding States were the free States of Pennsylvania and New Jersey, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois and lowa. In no one of these States was there any Governmental or legal hostility or nullification 6f the Fugitive-Slave law. In no one of these States was there any “ Personal-Liber-ty” bill that was not designed for the protection oF their own inhabitants, and none for the nullification of the Fugitive-Slave law. The people of those States were not as a rale zealous as volunteers for executing that law. Those States, after a solemn: decision erf the - Supreme Court that it was no part of their duty to provide for the execution of that law by State officers, did not enjoin on their

officers any such obligation.’ The Fugi-tive-Slave law was purely a National law. It was to be executed by the (Jbited States officers on process isshed from the Federal Courts. The Sheriffs of those States (were under no more legal obligatiod lo execute the FugitiveSlave law than they are to-day to execute the Internal-Uevenue act, or to enforce the collection of revenue on Imports. So far as that law was addressed to the people, it was not addressed to State Governments or State officers, but to individuals. Any Violation of the law was of necessity personal. The “States” did dividuals gave a fugitiva bread, allowed him a place of refuge in which to rest, or gave him a dollar or a railroad ticket: It was*matter of taste and of feeling. Some men publicly declared their abhorrence of the dirty work of catching negroes and returning them to slavery. Othert reluctantly assisted the officers when called on for that purpose, and occasionally there was a man who avowed his willingness to do all that “dirty work” that offered. There was a lino of Northern States 200 miles deep, between the Slave States and Canada, in which there was no nullification, no Liberty bills, or any other legal, legislative, or Governmental obstruction to the capture and return of fugitive slaves. No State Government refused to “ render up fugitive slaves,” because no State Government was under any obligation, legal or moral, to do so; and no State Government was ever called upon to render fugitive slaves. Slaves escaping into the North knew they were not safe, and hence their destination was Canada. The Fugitive-Slave law was executed, despite the universal sentiment of the people in all parts of the country. Ic was executed in New England and in'New York. New Jersey and Pennsylvania, It was promptly executed in Illinois and Indiana, and often in Ohio. Considering the fact that there was no legal or other obligation on t.he part of any citizen, except a civil officer of the United States, to execute any process under the law, and no obligation on any person to volunteer in hunting, capturing, or returning slaves to their owners, the law was as fairly executed as it was possible to execute’ ’ any law condemned by the united voice of civilized humanity. If this Georgia man really thinks secession was the result of Northern refusal to execute that law, he must place a low estimate on the intelligence of the South in supposing secession would afford additional protection to that kind of property. To erect the Slave States into an independent power would be to bring the Canada line, so far as slavery was concerned, down to the Ohio River. Then a slave escaping into the North would be as free as if he were in England. Then fugitives would escape by the hundred wherfc one could escape previously. Certainly an independent Slave Republic would be more powerless to protect slave property than if the Slave States had been in the Union. If the Georgian writer will read up the history a little he will find that secession was because slavery had lost political supremacy, and that thenceforth and forever the Government and policy of the United States were to be directed for the general interests of the country, and not in the special interests of slavery. ,J ’Jt was found that the people of the United, States were in sympathy with the civilization of the world in holding that the negroes were part of the human family, and not a separate and distinct race, set apart by their Creator to fill the condition of slaves. Without control and dominion in the Union, slavery was bound to perish, not violently, but certainly; and it was to avert this, and because of an unwillingness to submit to the then already determined change of National policy, that disunion, secession and independence were determined on. It was deliberately considered, deliberately planned and deliberately attempted by the politicians and leaders. It was not because of bad faith or violated compacts. It was because slavery had lost supremacy and control in the Union that slavery sought to dismember that Union, and, as an independent power, to seek a perpetuity against which humanity had imposed an immovable limit. The attempt failed. Slavery perished in the war much sooner than it would have done in the Un-ion, and, though there is a lingering hope, inspired by revenge and wounded pride, that the war may be renewed cession will be “better prepared,” arid that slave-owners may re-enslave the blacks, it is an idle dream. No people once freed will ever be enslaved, and woe be to those who attempt it. A war with such a purpose would be to invoke the contempt and the maledictions of mankind, and arm the human family against the men who would strike a blow for such an accursed purpose. Chicago Tribune.