The PRESIDENT:—The question recurs upon the amendment of the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
The vote upon the question of agreeing to the motion of Mr. Wilmot, resulted as follows:
Ayes.—Maine, New York, Indiana, Vermont, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Illinois, and Iowa—8.
Noes.—Rhode Island, Connecticut, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, Kentucky, Missouri, and Ohio—11.
And the motion was rejected.
Mr. BARRINGER:—I now move to amend the seventh section, by adding thereto the following words:
"And in all cases in which the United States shall pay for such fugitive, Congress shall also provide for the collection by the United States of the amount so paid, with interest, from the county, city, or town in which such arrest shall have been prevented, or rescue made."
I am certain that no objection can be made to the equity of this amendment. If a municipal corporation shall permit the rights of a slave owner to be disregarded by the rescue of a slave, it not only fails to perform its duty under the Constitution, but becomes an active participant in the crime. Shall the consequences of its own fault be visited upon the people of the whole country? Those who acknowledge and carry out their obligations under the Constitution, as well as those who do not? This would inflict a punishment upon the innocent for the crime of the guilty. It is not right to leave it in that way. It would present an inducement to these violations of law which the provision is intended to prevent. We ought to make the guilty party pay the penalty.
Mr. HACKLEMAN:—If such a proposition were to come from a free State, the mover would be charged with attempting to destroy all hope that the committee's report could be adopted by the people. However, if the friends of the report are willing to adopt it, I do not know that I ought to object. It places the Government in a position where it is bound under the Constitution to prosecute a municipal corporation for the acts of its individual members. It is certainly novel, and introduces a new system into the jurisprudence of the country. Is the mover serious in his proposition?
Mr. BARRINGER:—I am certainly serious. I would like to hear some substantial argument against my motion.