As a compact, its execution depends absolutely upon the States, without any intervention of the Nation. _Each State, in the exercise of its own judgment, will determine for itself the precise extent of obligation assumed._ As a compact in derogation of Freedom, it must be construed strictly in every respect, leaning always in favor of Freedom, and shunning any meaning, not clearly necessary, which takes away important personal rights; mindful that the parties to whom it is applicable are regarded as "persons," of course with all the rights of "persons," under the Constitution; especially mindful of the vigorous maxim of the Common Law, early announced by Fortescue, that "he is to be adjudged impious and cruel who does not favor Liberty"[204]; and also completely adopting, in letter and spirit, as becomes a just people, the rule of the great Commentator, that "the law is always ready to catch at anything in favor of Liberty."[205] With this key the true interpretation is natural and easy. [204] De Laudibus Legum Angliæ, Cap. XLII.; Coke upon Littleton, 124_b_. Granville Sharp, in the remarkable testimony already cited (_ante_, p. 108), quotes Fortescue thus: "For in behalf of Liberty human nature always implores: because _Slavery is introduced by man_, and _for vice_; but _Liberty_ is implanted _by God_ in the very nature of _man_: wherefore, when stolen by man, it always earnestly longs to return; as does everything which is deprived of _natural liberty_. For which reason the _man_ who does _not favor Liberty_ is to be adjudged _impious_ and _cruel_. The laws of England acknowledging these principles give favor to _Liberty in every case_." After this extract from Fortescue, we are reminded that "Slavery is properly declared by one of our oldest English authorities in law, Fleta, to be _contrary to Nature_ (Fleta, 2d edit. p. 1), which expression of Fleta is really a maxim of the Civil or Roman Law"; and then Sharp predicts the time when "our deluded statesmen, lawyers, commercial politicians, and planters shall be compelled to understand that a more forcible expression of illegality and iniquity could not have been used than that by which Slavery is defined in the Roman code, as well as by our English Fleta, _i. e._ that it is _contra naturam_, against Nature; for, consequently, it must be utterly illegal, a crime which by the first foundation of English law is justly deemed both _impious_ and _cruel_", and he adds, "The severity of these expressions cannot be restrained without injustice to the high authorities on which this argument is founded." (Letter to the Maryland Society for Promoting the Abolition of Slavery, etc., pp. 6-8.) This testimony of the great English Abolitionist is reinforced, especially with regard to fugitive slaves, when we consider its publication in 1793 by