The US Constitution of 1791 and the Fugitive Slave Clause

Norman Coles presents arguments which show that the Fugitive Slave Clause has at least two (and possibly three) meanings. Stewart's arguments are about Constitutional principles, not the practical consequences of believing the Clause was law. Stewart's reasoning is penetrating; arguments relating to ambiguity and legal jargon are superseded by the logical consequence of the fact that if the Clause is about fugitive slaves, its legality rests on false assumptions. Herein lay the potential to avoid a historical tragedy. In the course of time legal and political champions, in conjunction with a growing number of US States, favoured laws which barred slave-hunting, but in the interim legal inadequacy resulted in the unnecessary continuation of slave-holding. This publication is a fundamental reconsideration of the intertwining of American History and American Constitutional Law.