Norton on civil war

[John Mage]

> In the situation of the Confederacy, "we certainly had bad facts in 
> that case where we were defending state sovereignty by defending 
> slavery," she [Interior Secretary-designate Gale A. Norton]               said in the speech. "But we lost too much. We lost the 
> idea that the states were to stand against the federal government 
> gaining too much power over our lives."
> 
> (((((((((((
> 
> CB:Without federalism and the Supremacy Clause, the slave states would not have been
> able to enforce the Fugitive Slave Law in non-slave states.

Charles basic point is surely correct, and certainly the slavemasters of
each Sovereign State relied upon a slavemaster unity that transcended
the course of the Savannah River (or any other State boundary) in the
event of any locally successful revolt. But technically speaking Article
4 Section 2 of the Holy and Sacred Slavemasters Constitution of these
United States of America ("No Person held to Service or Labour 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 Labour, but shall be delivered up ...") gave a Constitutional
basis totally independent of the Supremacy Clause for Fugitive Slave Laws.

In fact they weren't able to enforce the Fugitive Slave Law in many
non-slave states even with their Blessed and Hallowed Constitution,
Supreme Court, federalism and Article 4 Section 2... And it was (for
instance) the courts of Wisconsin that justified their refusal to
enforce the Fugitive Slave Law by reference to "States Rights."   

john mage