THE BOOTH CASE AND THE CONFLICT WITH THE FEDERAL COURTS
For the first year the business of the new Court was principally of a routine character, involving the usual controversies, public and private, which would naturally be expected to arise in a new state. Important questions were impending, however, and the infant Court was soon to become the theater of a great political drama, which was to claim the attention of the nation. The great wave of anti-slavery sentiment was sweeping over the north, gathering strength and volume with every passing week and the irrepressible conflict between freedom and bondage was on. In order to fully understand how the Court became involved in one of the preliminary struggles in this historic conflict it will be necessary to take a backward glance at federal legislation.
When our forefathers constructed the Federal Constitution, they placed therein without debate or serious opposition the following simple provision: "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 claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due."[1]
The purpose of the provision is very apparent, and its necessity, so long as slavery existed under the protection of
- ↑ U. S. Const. Art. IV. Sec. 2.
