Speech of John Hossack, Convicted of a Violation of the Fugitive Slave Law | Page 3

great men,
under cover of those hallowed words, intended to make a government
that should outrage justice and trample upon liberty as no other
government under the whole heavens has ever done? This dreadful
power, that has compelled the great political parties of the country to
creep in the dust for its favor; that has debauched to a large extent the
Christianity of the nation; that bids a craven priesthood stand with
Golden Rule in hand, and defend the robbing of mothers of their babes,

and husbands of their wives; that bids courts decree injustice; Sir, I
plant myself upon the Constitution, and demand justice and liberty, and
say to this bloody Moloch, Away! Sir, the world has never furnished so
great a congregation of hypocrites as those that formed the Constitution,
if they designed to make it the greatest slaveholder, slave-breeder and
slave-catcher on earth. He is a great slaveholder that has a thousand
slaves; but if this law is a true exponent of the Constitution, this
Government, ordained for justice and liberty, holds four millions of
slaves.
No, Sir! no! for the honor of the fathers of my country, I appeal from
the bloody slaveholding statute to the liberty-loving Constitution.
While these fathers lived, State after State, in carrying out the spirit of
the Constitution, put an end to the dreadful system. The great
Washington, in his last will and testament, carried out the spirit of the
Constitution.
But, sir, the law under which you may sentence me violates both the
letter and the spirit of the Constitution. I have a word to say upon the
articles of the Constitution which it is claimed the Fugitive Slave Law
is designed to carry out.
"No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof,
escaping into another, shall in consequence of any law or regulation
therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered
up on the claim of the party to whom such service or labor is due."
That is the provision that is claimed transforms the Government into a
monster of iniquity. I have read, over and over, that article, interpreted
by all laws of language known to a plain man. How these three or four
lines can transform this Government, ordained to secure justice, into a
mean tool to aid the plunderers of cradles, the destroyers of home, the
ravishers of women, and the oppressors of men, to carry on their hellish
work--how it can do this thing, I cannot see. That article binds the
several States separately not to pass a certain law, but where in it do we
find a Fugitive Slave Law? Where do you find a Commissioner? Where
do you find that the Government is to hunt up and return, at its own
expense, a slave that flees from his cruel and bloody master? Where in

those lines is the authority to compel me to be a partaker in the crimes
of the man-stealer? The General Government is not once mentioned;
but the States in their separate sovereignties are named. But, Sir, this
article expressly provides that the party making the claim shall have
owed him service, or labor due from the party claimed. If Jim Gray
owed service, or labor, or money, to Phillips, I am the last man in the
world to raise my voice or hand to prevent Phillips, or any man, from
obtaining his dues. What I would grant to the devil himself, I would not
withhold even from the slaveholder--his due. Jim Gray claims that he
does not owe Phillips a day's work or a dollar of money. Phillips claims
that he owes him every day's work that has been deposited in his bones
and sinews; yea, the toil of his body and mind both, till death shall end
the period of stipulated toil. Here is a question for legal examination
and judicial discussion. Does the man Gray owe this man Phillips any
thing? The Constitution is very clear and very plain in pointing out the
way this question is to be settled.
Article V. provides that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty or
property without due process of law. That Jim Gray is a person, is
admitted on all hands. Phillips admits it; the blood-hounds, marshals
and attorneys that hunt him, say he is a person--a person held to service.
The amount in dispute is the liberty and life-long toil of a man just
entering into the full maturity of manhood. A great question lies
between these men. But Gray, standing on soil covered by this
Constitution, can be robbed of liberty, or the wages of his toil, only by
due process of law.
Article VII. says, expressly, in suits at common law, when the value in
controversy shall