A fresh analysis of the Supreme Court's decision in the Edward Prigg v. Pennsylvania case, a test of the constitutionality of an 1826 Pennsylvania law which placed limitations on a slave owner in his attempts to recover a runaway slave from within the borders of the state. Challenges the traditional interpretation of the case that "states lacked the power to pass any laws on fugitive slaves, including laws to aid their recovery, and that the Constitution did not obligate state officials to assist owners in regaining their runaway slaves." Shows that this view "ignores the differences between the judges on these two issues," and also "disregards the subtleties of Justice Joseph Story's opinion, turning insinuations into legal doctrines." 44 notes.
