previous next
[268] soon reported1his bill, with ample reasons for its passage--Mr. Buckalew, of Pa., making a minority report in opposition. Mr. Sumner persistently and successfully pressed the consideration of his bill, offering not to debate it; and, after some discussion, the Senate adopted2 an amendment proposed by Mr. Sherman, of Ohio, excepting the act of 1793 from the contemplated repeal: Yeas 21; Nays 17. The debate was still further continued; but no final action was had on the bill.

Mr. Morris, of N. Y., reported3 from the Judiciary Committee a bill repealing all acts and parts of act3 contemplating the rendition of fugitive slaves ; which was debated with great spirit by a score of members--Messrs. Mallory, of Ky., Cox, of Ohio, and others, opposing it as equivalent to annulling the Constitution. Mr. Mallory observed that the majority had already crushed out the Unionism of the revolted States, and were now extending the process to that of the Border Slave States, and impressively warned the House to forbear. Finally, after having once moved and withdrawn the Previous Question, Mr. Morris moved it again;4 when it prevailed, and the bill passed under it: Yeas 83; Nays 57.

Mr. Sumner demanded5 the consideration of this bill in Senate; and it was, after a fiery debate, ordered: Yeas 25; Nays 17. Mr. Johnson, of Md., endeavored to save the act of 1793; but the Senate refused: Yeas 17; Nays 22. The bill, after being laid over one day to enable Mr. Davis, of Ky., to make a speech against it, was passed :6 Yeas 27; Nays 12--Messrs. Cowan, of Pa., and Van Winkle and Willey, of West Va., voting with the Opposition. The President's signature, five days there-after, made it a law of the land, abolishing for ever the least creditable and most disagreeable function of the marshals of our Federal Courts.

The District of Columbia had been governed mainly by the laws of the States which ceded it; and those laws were framed in the interest of slave-holding. They presumed every colored person a slave who could not produce White evidence of his freedom ; and there had grown up in Washington a practice, highly lucrative to her Federal Marshal, but most disgraceful to the city and Nation, of seizing Blacks on the streets, immuring them in the jail, advertising them, and waiting for masters to appear, prove property, pay charges, and take the human chattels away. Mr. Lincoln's Marshal, Col. Ward II. Lamon, came with him from Jllinois, but was a Virginian by birth, and did not revolt at the abundant and profitable custom brought to his shop by the practice just depicted. Gen. Wilson, of Mass., early7 called the attention of the Senate to this painful subject; saying that lie had “visited the jail; and such a scene of degradation and inhumanity lie had never witnessed. There were persons almost entirely naked ; some of them without a shirt. Some of those persons were free; most of them had run away from disloyal masters, or had been sent there by disloyal persons, for safe keeping until the war is over.” He thereupon proposed a discharge by joint resolve of all persons confined in the District jail

1 Feb. 29.

2 Mar. 19.

3 June 6.

4 June 13.

5 June 21.

6 June 23, 1864.

7 Dec. 4, 1861.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.

An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.

hide People (automatically extracted)
hide Dates (automatically extracted)
Sort dates alphabetically, as they appear on the page, by frequency
Click on a date to search for it in this document.
1793 AD (2)
June 23rd, 1864 AD (1)
December 4th, 1861 AD (1)
June 21st (1)
June 13th (1)
June 6th (1)
March 19th (1)
February 29th (1)
hide Display Preferences
Greek Display:
Arabic Display:
View by Default:
Browse Bar: