Professional Documents
Culture Documents
The University of Chicago Press The Supreme Court Review
The University of Chicago Press The Supreme Court Review
Judicial Nationalism
Author(s): Paul Finkelman and Joseph Story
Source: The Supreme Court Review, Vol. 1994 (1994), pp. 247-294
Published by: The University of Chicago Press
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3109649
Accessed: 02-10-2019 00:13 UTC
REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/3109649?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms
The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and
extend access to The Supreme Court Review
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
PAUL FINKELMAN
247
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
248 THE SUPREME COURT REVIEW [1994
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
6] STORY AND SLAVERY 249
14 The term was an insult to describe "northern men with southern principles." In essence,
a "doughface" had a face of dough that southern politicians shaped as they wished.
"Doughface Democrats" were northern Democrats who voted to support proslavery posi-
tions.
15 By 1842, when Story wrote Prigg, the United States had only had three northern
presidents-all one-term presidents-and only two-John Adams and John Quincy Ad-
ams-had been even mildly antislavery. Martin Van Buren, although a New Yorker, was
a classic "doughface." Six presidents (Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, Jackson,
and Tyler)-including all five antebellum two-term presidents-had been slaveowners dur-
ing their term of office; Harrison, a native of Virginia, had been a slaveowner for much of
his adult life, and only ceased owning slaves when he failed, as territorial governor of
Indiana, to get Congress to allow slavery in the old Northwest. On Harrison's attempts to
bring make slavery legal in the old Northwest, see Paul Finkelman, Evading the Ordinance:
The Persistence of Bondage in Indiana and Illinois, 9 J Early Republic 21-52 (1989), and Paul
Finkelman, Slavery and the Northwest Ordinance: A Study in Ambiguity, 6 J Early Republic
343-70 (1986).
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
250 THE SUPREME COURT REVIEW [1994
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
6] STORY AND SLAVERY 251
23 Shortly after the Court decided Prigg, Story wrote to Senator John Macpherson Berrien
of North Carolina to discuss a draft bill on federal jurisdiction that he had sent to Berrien.
He reminded Berrien that he had suggested in that proposed bill
that in all cases, where by the Laws of the U. States, powers were conferred on State
Magistrates, the same powers might be exercised by Commissioners appointed by
the Circuit Courts. I was induced to make the provision thus general, because
State Magistrates now generally refuse to act, & cannot be compelled to act; and
the Act of 1793 respecting fugitive slaves confers the power on State Magistrates
to act in delivering up Slaves. You saw in the case of Prigg ... how the duty was
evaded, or declined. In conversing with several of my Brethren on the Supreme
Court, we all thought that it would be a great improvement, & would tend much
to facilitate the recapture of Slaves, if Commissioners of the Circuit Court were
clothed with like powers.
Story to Berrien Letter (cited in note 13).
24 See Newmyer, Justice Joseph Story (cited in note 1), and Eisgruber on how Story was
antislavery in the beginning of his life.
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
252 THE SUPREME COURT REVIEW [1994
I. A PROSLAVERY DECISION
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
6] STORY AND SLAVERY 253
28 Prigg at 613.
29 Id at 612.
30 Id at 613.
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
254 THE SUPREME COURT REVIEW [1994
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
6] STORY AND SLAVERY 255
II. THE FIRST STORY: THE FUGITIVE SLAVE CLAUSE AND THE
BARGAIN OF 1787
" See generally, Paul Finkelman, The Crime of Color, 67 Tulane L Rev 2063 (1993).
34 Prigg at 610.
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
256 THE SUPREME COURT REVIEW [1994
South a result it wanted and somehow convince the North that the
Constitution dictated this result. The result was a creative, but
historically inaccurate, original intent analysis of the Constitution's
Fugitive Slave Clause.
Story hoped to persuade the North that his opinion was correct
by elevating the Fugitive Slave Clause to a matter of the highest
constitutional order. To do this, he made two important historica
arguments. First, he asserted that the Fugitive Slave Clause wa
central to the compromises over slavery necessary for the adoption
of the Constitution. Second, Story argued that this was well under-
stood during the debates over ratification. In fact, both of thes
arguments are historically suspect. But, before considering wha
actually happened at the Convention and during the ratification
process, it is necessary to examine Story's arguments.
1. Story's history of the drafting of the clause. With a tone of authority
Story wrote:
3 Id at 611.
36 Id at 638-39.
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
6] STORY AND SLAVERY 257
37 Id.
38 Id.
39 Id.
4o Id at 638-39.
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
258 THE SUPREME COURT REVIEW [1994
41 Id at 624.
42 Id.
43 Id.
4 Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States (Hilliard, Gray & Co.,
1833).
45 Id at ? 952.
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
6] STORY AND SLAVERY 259
46 Id.
47 Id.
4 Without any evidence to support his position, Mr. Jonathan Meredith, counsel for
Prigg, argued before the Supreme Court that "it is well known" that "the fugitive slave
clause was the result of mutual concessions in reference to the whole subject of slavery. On
the one hand the south agreed to confer upon Congress the power to prohibit the importation
of slaves after the year 1808. On the other, the north agreed to recognise [sic] and protect
the existing institutions of the south." Prigg at 565.
49 Id at 611.
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
260 THE SUPREME COURT REVIEW [1994
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
6] STORY AND SLAVERY 261
55 "Letters from a Countryman from Dutchess County" (letter of Jan 22, 1788), in Herbert
Storing, ed, 6 The Complete Anti-federalist 62 (University of Chicago Press, 1981).
56 Fragment of Debate at New Hampshire Convention, in Jonathan Elliot, ed, 2 The
Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution 203-04 (J. B.
Lippincott, 1881).
57 "A Friend to the Rights of the People," in Storing, 4 The Complete Anti-federalist (cited
in note 55), 234, 241.
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
262 THE SUPREME COURT REVIEW [1994
58 The only northern opposition to this clause that I have encountered is found in corre-
spondence from and to the Rhode Island merchant and Quaker abolitionist Moses Brown.
In private correspondence, Brown expressed concern that the Fugitive Slave Clause was
"designd to Distroy the Present Assylum of the Massachusets from being as a City of Refuge
for the poor Blacks, many of whom had resorted there on Acc[oun]t of their Constitution
or Bill of rights declaring in the first Article 'That all men are born free & Equal &c.' and
there being no Laws in that State to support slavery, the Negroes on Entering that state
are as free as they are on Entering into Great Brittain and the southern people have not
been able by Applycation of the Governour, Judges or other Authority to Recover those
they had held as Slave, who Chose to Stay there." Moses Brown to James Pemberton, 17
Oct 1787, reprinted in John P. Kaminski and Gaspare J. Saladino, eds, 14 The Documentary
History of the Ratification of the Constitution by the States: Commentaries on the Constitution, Public
and Private 506-07 (State Historical Society of Wisconsin, 1983). See also William Rotch,
Sr. to Brown, 8 Nov, 1787, in id at 521; Brown to James Thornton, Sr., 13 Nov 1787, in
id at 522-23; Edmund Prior to Brown, 1 Dec 1787, in id at 526.
s9 Federalist 42 and Federalist 54.
6o James Madison, in the Virginia Ratifying Convention, 17 June 1788, in John P. Kamin-
ski and Gaspare J. Saladino, eds, 10 The Documentary History of the Ratification of the Constitu-
tion by the States: Virginia [3] 1339 (State Historical Society of Wisconsin, 1993).
61 Id.
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
6] STORY AND SLAVERY 263
62 Edmund Randolph in the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 24, 1788, in Kaminski
and Saladino, 10 Documentary History 1484 (cited in note 60).
63 North Carolina Delegates [William Blount, Rich'd D. Spaight, Hugh Williamson] to
Governor Caswell, Sept 1787, reprinted in Farrand, ed, 3 Records 83 at 84 (cited in note
51).
64 Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, Speech in South Carolina House of Representatives,
Jan [17], 1788, reprinted in 3 Farrand, Records 252 at 254.
65 The Fugitive Slave Clause is in Art IV, ? 2 of the Constitution. Sections 1, 3, and 4
of Art IV all give specific enforcement powers to the federal government. Because ? 2 is
the only part of that article which does not explicitly grant authorize federal implementation,
it is reasonable to argue that the framers did not intend to grant Congress such power.
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
264 THE SUPREME COURT REVIEW [1994
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
6] STORY AND SLAVERY 265
68 Id at ? 952.
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
266 THE SUPREME COURT REVIEW [1994
73 Id.
74 For a discussion of the "localization" argument, see Part V, A, of this article. Ironically,
by nationalizing the return of fugitive slaves, and making the Fugitive Slave Clause a central
part of the constitutional bargain, Story gave support to the antinationalist position of
William Lloyd Garrison and Wendell Phillips that the Constitution was a proslavery "cove-
nant with death."
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
6] STORY AND SLAVERY 267
75 In re Susan, 23 F Cases 444 (US DC, Ind, 1818) (Fugitive slave Susan returned to
slavery with no opinion of the court); Case of Williams, 29 F Cases 1334 (US DC, Pa,
1839) (court discharges a black (Williams) seized by professional slave catcher because court
determines that Williams is not a fugitive slave); In re Martin, 16 F Cases 881 (US DC,
NY, 1827-1840) (in this case of an unknown date, the Federal District Judge in New York
declared that the act of 1793 was constitutional and a New York official then issued a
certificate of removal under the law).
76Johnson v Tompkins et al., 13 F Cases 840 (US C C Pa, 1833) (Justice Baldwin, riding
circuit, upholds damages for a fugitive slave rescued by Tompkins).
77 Id. The fact that Baldwin was an extremely weak justice undermined the value of any
opinion he wrote. More importantly, perhaps, many observers believed Baldwin was insane.
Carl B. Swisher, History of the Supreme Court of the United States: The Taney Period, 1836-64
51 (Macmillan, 1974). His opinion in Prigg supports both observations.
78 Wright v Deacon, 5 Serg & Rawle 62 (Pa 1819); Commonwealth v Griffith, 19 Mass (2
Pick) 11 (1823); Jack v Martin, 14 Wend 507 (NY 1835); State v Sheriff of Burlington, No
36286 (NJ 1836); Pennsylvania v Prigg (unreported, Pa, 1841) reversed, Prigg v Pennsylvania,
16 Peters (41 US) 1 (1842).
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
268 THE SUPREME COURT REVIEW [1994
79 State v Sheriff of Burlington, No 36286 (NJ 1836) (also known as Nathan, Alias Alex.
Helmsley v State). For newspaper accounts of the case, see "Upholding Slavery," 20 Friend
281-82 (June 11, 1836). Portions of this article are reprinted as Important Decision, Liberator
(July 30, 1836), at 124. Important Decision, Newark Daily Advertiser (Aug 18, 1836). The
case was cite by Salmon P. Chase in Salmon P. Chase, Speech of Salmon P. Chase in the Case
of the Colored Woman, Matilda 18-19 (Pugh and Dodd, 1837), reprinted in Paul Finkelman,
ed, 2 Southern Slaves in Free State Courts 1 (Garland, 1988). For a discussion of the Hornblower
decision, see Paul Finkelman, State Constitutional Protections of Liberty and the Antebellum New
Jersey Supreme Court: Chief Justice Hornblower and the Fugitive Slave Law of 1793, 23 Rutgers
L J 753 (1992).
80so Prigg at 621.
81 Id. "So far as the judges of the Courts of the United States have been called upon to
enforce it, and to grant the certificate required by it, it is believed that it has been uniformly
recognised as a binding and valid law; and as imposing a constitutional duty." Id.
82 Id at 622.
83 Id at 621.
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
6] STORY AND SLAVERY 269
84 Id.
s8 Wright v Deacon, 5 Serg & Rawle 62 (Pa 1819); Commonwealth v Griffith, 19 Mass (2
Pick) 11 (1823).
86Jack v Martin, 14 Wend 507 (NY 1835); State v Sheriff of Burlington, No 36286 (NJ 1836)
(also known as Nathan, Alias Alex. Helmsley v State).
87 Wright, 5 Serg & Rawle at 62.
88 Griffith, 19 Mass (2 Pick) at 11, 18.
89 Id at 19.
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
270 THE SUPREME COURT REVIEW [1994
90 Id.
91 US Const, Art IV, ? 1, "Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public
Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. An the Congress may by
general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be
proved, and the Effect thereof."
92 US Const, Art IV, ? 3. Section 4 of this Article empowered "The United States"
to guarantee a "Republican Form of Government" in every state. Thus, Congress, along
with the other branches of government, could act to enforce this clause. See generally,
William M. Wiecek, The Guarantee Clause of the U.S. Constitution (Cornell University Press,
1972).
93 See the discussion in note 95.
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
6] STORY AND SLAVERY 271
94 Ohio attorney Salmon P. Chase had cited it while arguing a case in 1837. Chase, Speech
of Salmon P. Chase at 18 (cited in note 79).
95 In his analysis of Article IV, Hornblower compared the Full Faith and Credit Clause,
which explicitly gives Congress the power to pass laws, with the Fugitive Slave Clause.
Since no such explicit language exists in ? 2, the court concluded that "no such power was
intended to be given" to Congress for implementation of the clauses in that section of the
Constitution. Indeed, Hornblower argued that Congressional legislation over the Privileges
and Immunities Clause or over interstate rendition "would cover a broad field, and lead to
the most unhappy results." Such legislation would "bring the general government into
conflict with the state authorities, and the prejudices of local communities." Hornblower
asserted that Congress lacked the "right to prescribe the manner in which persons residing
in the free states, shall be arrested, imprisoned, delivered up, and transferred from one state
to another, simply because they are claimed as slaves." Consistent with the northern states'
rights arguments of the antebellum period, Hornblower warned the "American people
would not long submit" to such an expansive view of Congressional power. Although this
analysis seemed to lead to the conclusion that the Fugitive Slave Act was unconstitutional,
Hornblower declined "to express any definitive opinion on the validity of the act of Con-
gress." He could avoid this grave responsibility because the case before him had been
brought "in pursuance of the law of this state." However, Hornblower's position on the
unconstitutionality of the federal law was unambiguous. Opinion of Chief Justice Hornblower
on the Fugitive Slave Law at 4-5 (1851), reprinted in Paul Finkelman, ed, 1 Fugitive Slaves
and American Courts: The Pamphlet Literature 97 (Garland, 1988).
96 14 Wend 507 (NY 1835).
97 Id at 526.
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
272 THE SUPREME COURT REVIEW [1994
98 Id at 528.
99 Id.
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
6] STORY AND SLAVERY 273
CHILDREN
'04 Id at 621.
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
274 THE SUPREME COURT REVIEW [1994
105 On the history of the adoption of the law, see Paul Finkelman, The Kidnapping ofJohn
Davis and the Adoption of the Fugitive Slave Law of 1793, 56 J Southern History 397-422 (1990).
'0 Thomas C. Hambly, Argument of Mr. Hambly, of York, (Pa.) in the Case of Edward Prigg
8 (Baltimore, Lucas & Dever, 1842), reprinted in Paul Finkelman, ed, 1 Fugitive Slaves and
American Courts: The Pamphlet Literature 128 (Garland, 1988) (hereafter Argument of Hambly
[with original page numbers and reprint page numbers in parentheses]).
107 Information about this case comes from the printed report in Prigg at 608-10.
108 Argument of Hambly at 8 (128) (cited in note 106).
'09 We have no record of what her last name was before she married Morgan.
"O0 John Ashmore to Jacob Forward, Bill of Sale, March 6, 1821, in Harford County
Historical Society manuscripts. In 1837 Forward would join Edward Prigg and Nathan S.
Bemis in their quest for Margaret Morgan. Forward was one of the four men indicted for
the kidnapping, but only Prigg was returned for trial. Ashmore's total slave property in
1820 is based on the US Manuscript Census, 1820, Harford County, Maryland, p 380 (also
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
6] STORY AND SLAVERY 275
noted as p 76). Ashmore's birthdate, Jan 22, 1760, is found in Bill and Martha Reamy, St.
George's Parrish Registers, 1689-1793 (Family Line Publications) 85.
"' Deed of Conveyance from John Ashmore to Susanna Bemis, May 11, 1821, in Harford
County Historical Society manuscripts. Edward Prigg was one of the two witnesses to this
need.
112 John Ashmore Inventory, Sept 28, 1824, Harford County, Register of Willis, # 1672.
"'3 US Manuscript Census, 1830, Harford County, Maryland, p 387. On April 22, 1845,
Margaret Ashmore manumitted her slave Jim, who she had inherited when her husband
died. Nathan S. Bemis served as the "agent and attorney" for Margaret Ashmore in this
transaction. "Margaret Ashmore and Negro Jim, Manumission Deed, recorded May 10,
1845." Harford County Historical Society manuscripts.
"4 This claim is made by Thomas Hambly, counsel for Pennsylvania, in his Supreme
Court brief. Hambly, Argument of Mr. Hambly at 8 (128) (cited in note 106).
"s US Census, 1830, Manuscript Census for Harford County, Maryland, p 394.
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
276 THE SUPREME COURT REVIEW [1994
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
6] STORY AND SLAVERY 277
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
278 THE SUPREME COURT REVIEW [1994
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
6] STORY AND SLAVERY 279
124 For a full discussion of freedom through transit, see Finkelman, An Imperfect Union
(cited in note 18).
12s "An Act for the Gradual Abolition of Slavery," Act of March 1, 1780, Pennsylvania
Laws, 1780.
126 This might be because Margaret Ashmore did not claim Margaret Morgan as her slave.
She was not part of John Ashmore's estate, and considered free by the local authorities who
took the 1830 census.
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
280 THE SUPREME COURT REVIEW [1994
131 "An Act for the Gradual Abolition of Slavery," Act of March 1, 1780, Pennsylvania
Laws, 1780, ? III, "All persons as well Negroes and Mulattoes as others, who shall be born
within this state from and after the passing of this act, shall not be deemed as considered
servants for life, or slaves; and that all servitude for life, or slavery of children, in conse-
quence of the slavery of their mothers, in the case of all children born within this state
from and after the passing of this act as aforesaid, shall be, and hereby is, utterly taken
away, extinguished, and for ever abolished."
132 Id at ? IV.
133 Commonwealth v Holloway, 2 S & R (Pa) 305 (1816); Commonwealth v Auld, 4 Clark (Pa)
507 (1850). This issue is discussed in Finkelman, An Imperfect Union at 64-65 (cited in note
18).
134 "An Act to Explain and Amend An Act, Entitled 'An Act for the Gradual Abolition
of Slavery,' " Act of March 29, 1788, Pennsylvania Acts, 1788, ? II.
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
6] STORY AND SLAVERY 281
135 This is described in Leslie, The Pennsylvania Fugitive Slave Act of 1826 at 221 (cited in
note 26).
'36 Id at 440.
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
282 THE SUPREME COURT REVIEW [1994
'38 Authorities in Maryland privately acknowledged that Bemis, Prigg, Forward and
Lewis were probably guilty of kidnapping for taking Morgan's Pennsylvania-born children
to Maryland, but they nevertheless objected to the extradition of the men from Harford
County. When he received a letter from the Governor of Pennsylvania indicating that there
would be an extradition requisition for the four men, Thomas Culberth, the Clerk of the
Governor's Council, told Maryland's governor that "The part of the case involved in the
most difficulty, and danger of producing collision and excitement, relates to the children
which it seems, were born in Pennsylvania. They were free by the Law of Pennsylvania,
and according to my reading and understanding of the constitutional and legal provisions
for reclaiming fugitives, do not come within their provisions, and, consequently, the seizing
and taking of them away, (if Esquire Henderson or some other authorized magistrate, did
not give authority) was the 'crime' of kidnapping." Yet, Culberth urged the Governor to
avoid any cooperation on the issue because it was so politically sensitive in Maryland.
Thom. Culberth, Clerk of Council, to His Excellency, Gov Thomas W. Veazey, March
27, 1837, Maryland State Archives; MSA NO S1075; Governor and Council Letterbook,
1834-38, pp 553-54.
139 William Wetmore Story, ed, 2 Life and Letters ofJoseph Story at 392 (Charles C. Little
and James Brown, 1851).
140 In his prize-winning biography of Story, R. Kent Newmyer wrote: "Upon his return
to Massachusetts in the spring of 1842, he spoke of opinion in Prigg 'repeatedly and earnestly'
to his family and friends as a 'triumph of freedom.' " Newmyer, Justice Joseph Story, at 372
(cited in note 1). In the note to this sentence, Newmyer cites to William Wetmore's discus-
sion in 2 Life and Letters at 392 (cited in note 139), and then Newmyer writes, "'Triumph
of Freedom' was Story's phrase, not his son's." But, Newmyer provides no other evidence
that it was the justice's phrase. Ordinarily, I would accept William Wetmore Story as a
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
6] STORY AND SLAVERY 283
good source for what Justice Story said. But William Wetmore was clear
his father's opinion, and by his father's attempt to hide the proslavery fo
Thus, William Wetmore edited out a key section of a letter to Senator
Justice Story set out a way that the South could avoid any aspects of the o
make it a triumph of freedom. Newmyer's own compelling analysis of Sto
William Wetmore's less than honest editing of his father's papers, undercuts
William Wetmore's attribution of the "triumph of freedom" statement t
Story to Berrien Letter (cited in note 13).
141 William Wetmore Story, Treatise on the Law of Contracts (Charles C
Brown, 1844).
142 William Story, ed, 2 Life and Letters of Story at 392 (cited in note 139)
143 Lofft 1 (GB, 1772).
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
284 THE SUPREME COURT REVIEW [1994
149 Paul Finkelman, Prigg v Pennsylvania and Northern State Courts: Anti-Slavery Use of a
Pro-Slavery Decision, 25 Civ War History 5 (1979).
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
6] STORY AND SLAVERY 285
150 William Story, ed, 2 Life and Letters of Story at 394-95 (cited in note 139).
151 Id at 101.
152 Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States (Hilliard, Gray, &
Co., 1833).
153 Newmyer, Justice Joseph Story at 182 (cited in note 1).
154 Id at 101.
iss United States v Hudson and Goodwin, 7 Cranch (11 US) 32 (1812).
156 U.S. v Coolidge, 25 F Cases 619 (CCD Mass 1813).
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
286 THE SUPREME COURT REVIEW [1994
60 William Story, ed, 1 Life and Letters of Story at 437, 439-41; 2 Life and Letters of Story
at 403-04 (cited in note 139); "An Act more effectually to provide for the punishment of
certain crimes against the United States, and for other purposes," Act of March 3, 1825, 4
Stat 115.
161 Story to Berrien, Feb 8, 1842, William Story, ed, 1 Life and Letters of Story at 402-03
(cited in note 139); but see also Story to Berrien Letter (cited in note 13).
162 See Van Reimsdyk v Kane, 28 F Cases 1062 (CCD RI, 1812), discussed in Newmyer,
Justice Joseph Story at 100 (cited in note 1).
"16 Swift v Tyson, 16 Peters (41 US) 1 (1842).
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
6] STORY AND SLAVERY 287
167 William Story, ed, 2 Life and Letters of Story at 395 (cited in note 139).
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
288 THE SUPREME COURT REVIEW [1994
'68 Id at 392.
169 Finkelman, Prigg v Pennsylvania and Northern State Courts (cited in note 149), and Mor-
ris, Free Men All (cited in note 19).
170 Cover, Justice Accused at 241 (cited in note 10).
71 Newmyer, Justice Joseph Story at 377 (cited in note 1).
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
6] STORY AND SLAVERY 289
174 This would in fact happen, and would lead to northern assertions of states' rights. See
the arguments of Ableman v Booth, 62 US (21 How) 506 (1859). See also Finkelman, Prigg
v Pennsylvania and Northern State Courts (cited in note 149), and Paul Finkelman, States Rights
North and South in Antebellum America, in Kermit Hall and James W. Ely, Jr., eds, An
Uncertain Tradition: Constitutionalism and the History of the South 125-58 (Athens, Ga, 1989).
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
290 THE SUPREME COURT REVIEW [1994
175 Newmyer, Justice Joseph Story at 373 (cited in note 1). Barbara Holden-Smith argues
that "Story's antislavery reputation has been exaggerated." Holden-Smith, 78 Cornell L
Rev at 1086 (cited in note 10).
"76 Newmyer, Justice Joseph Story at 373 (cited in note 1).
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
6] STORY AND SLAVERY 291
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
292 THE SUPREME COURT REVIEW [1994
178 Id.
179 William Story, ed, 2 Life and Letters of Story at 404-05 (cited at note 139).
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
6] STORY AND SLAVERY 293
185 Story to Ezekiel Bacon, April 1, 1844, in 2 Life and Letters of Story at 481.
186 Story to Harriet Martineau, Jan 19, 1839, in William Story, ed, 2 Life and Letters of
Story at 307 (cited in note 139).
187 Newmyer, Justice Joseph Story at 346 (cited in note 1).
188 Id at 345-46.
189 William Story, ed, 2 Life and Letters of Story at 386 (cited at note 139).
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
294 THE SUPREME COURT REVIEW [1994
This content downloaded from 47.41.0.7 on Wed, 02 Oct 2019 00:13:17 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms