New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1843-02-09

he delivered up TO the authorities Of 'Tglaie ,,;;i
ho wore One OF ,her the aget OF the owner
OF The neera who aedgsd TO have been sso.e, a
o,Ir sis;ed in reakap slave. BY reference " u'e
hanr. Won in tbs case, you will observe that one or
boit OF bese gentlemen made The atiavts upon whch me
com oianI was mad IN VIZ ina aeaihs' '1e 'n''e P
rh e.nepen proved thai the slave ship carpen.
Tor rmpoyed repairing the schooner on board
y, irb The three prisoners were haads that after The
schooner sailed the slave Rot 10 be found that ihey
h cores reached the karbor of NewYo1k before the
schooner arrived that they board the schooner
and made known 10 The captain Their suspicious INA, e
Knowledge slaves being board and n ma
king slave. The slave found on board
concealed amongst the live oak timber. The three prison
ers were the only colored persons on board.
This all that these gentlemen could testify 10 OF the
knowledge TO show IN the three men had stolen me
slave AS the question involved much feeling, permitted
The gentlemen prove what had been od 10 them by 9TH
One both Of the gentlemen testified that the slave
slave that foolish PrgH,a CT he could
get coed Gges norh and that this suggestion induced hin
TO run away end secrete himself on board the vessel
Ths was all that they pretended could be proved by
else that showed participation on the any
prraied this kind Of evidence, testimony in the
case learn whether there any testimony IN VIZ
Charge preferred also what reliance could he
placed on affdavi,s swearing 10 legal conclusions
satisfied that according 10 the seslniony ne'net
prisoners had committed offence even against me
law Virginia and thai the testimony Was DOT sush as 70
authorize detention of the prisoners l. therefore, dis
owe your E1ceuency an apology for
ing your letter. Sickness my family and constant ofncia
OCCUPATION have been The causes.
tsign.d, very respectfully RsS HsR.i' Il MORRIS.
Recorder of the City of New-fork
This letter, sir, was Immediately enclosed by
Governor Seward to the Governor OF Virginia, and
the latter in his subsequent letters to Gov Seward
acouiesced in silence in the state Of facts there pre-
sented In subsequent letter to the Governor OF
Virginia. Gov Seward referred to this letter with
emphasis, and again the Governor of Virginia &C
auiesced in silence in the truth Of the facts.
This. sir, changes the whole question. fiom
the moment that the Executive of Virginia admit
ted these facts to be true, the case assumed to-
tally different character. 1t stood now as II these
facts had been Incorporated in the original athda-
Wit, where they should have been incorporated and
the question now was whether # the affidavit on
which the requisition was based had stated these
facts developed by the Recorder, the Governor OF
Virginia would have made the requsition-and II
he had dared TO make il such facts, whether 1t
YVES the duty of the Executive of New York to have
surrendered these men. No, sir, it was not. 1t
appeared from the Recorders letter that these three
men were sailors on board this vessel, having no
control over the cargo or the passengers who were
TO be admitted on board-that not more than one,
if any, was impcated-that this one was said to
have advised the slave that he could get better
wages in Newly ork and if this advice was to
be considered a crime, he asked if it was not I'M
heard of that the whole three should be scooped
up at once and placed before the bar OF Virginia
Wbv the Governor of Virginia might as well ask
for the surrender of all the citizens OF New-l ork
because one of their number bad been guilty of an
offence. If these facts had been stated in the
original affidavit, and the requisition had been
complied with by Gov. Seward, he asked--not if ne
wovld not have been .jusifed-but il that House
would not have impeached him. Or should we
lake ground here that the Governor had no discre-
ton; that he must not look aside of the record;
that he to obey orders without inquiry? Was
that the doctrine?
Is this high act of courtesy between sovereign
States to be construed like magistrates man
date to constabie} The provision Of he Consti-
tuition has It's origin in the courtesy OF nations, and
its object is to prevent crime, and to cement more
perfectly our glorious Union. Will these great
objects be promoted by converting it into an abso-
lutte command directed by superior to an infe-
rior, which admits not of doubt, or discretion, or
inquiry-which exacts rigorous and implicit ODE
dience, without delay or question, although It may
manfestly appear to the Executive, on whom the
demand is made, that the requisition is based on
ignorance, or mistake, or perjury?
Sir, it is terrible power-despotic in It's nature
scarcely less so than the odious lettres du cachet
foundations and gave birth to her fearful and bloody
revolution 1t seizes citizen, secretly and silent
ly tears him from his family and his friends, UNI
heard-hurries him in ignominious chains to a dis
tant State, among strangers-and thrusts him,
guilty or innocent into prison 20 await his trial.
For how, among strangers, resting under an accu-
sation of crime, is he TO procure suretes Tor his
appearance? 1t is power which has no analogy
in any other feature in our free institutions. It's
an execution at once upon mans reputation his
property and his liberty. He is tried unheard, he
is convicted unheard-he is doomed TO inevitable
ruin without having an opportunity OF meeting ms
accuser, or Of challenging, or examining wines
ses, or even of opening his lips in defence And
when at length an innocent man, thus torn by an
Executive warrant from his home and his business,
aad dragged away to distant State, is discharged
and turned penniless among strangers into The
streets, what is his redress! Can he sue the Gov
ernor, who has thus wrongfuly demanded him Z
No. Can be sue that State? Ne. Can he sue
his prosecutor No. Will his own State make
him amends, or redress his wrongs9 No. A house
less outcast in distant land, be has no resource
but to beg his way back to his wretched family and
desolate home. Sir can your Executive be too
cautious in exercising this tremendous power?
Would he not be Justly liable to the severest cen
sure, did he not, when doubt exists, insist uison
clear evidence, before he issues that warrant whose
execution almost equally involves the ruin of the
accused, whether guilty or innocent
The power is a salutary, bat most delicate
and dangerous one and unless used in perfect good
faith, and in the liberal spirit of amty in which it
originated, the people will not endure it, They
will soon eradicate it from their Constitution.
Sir, this is not power made to be used on
light trivial occasions. 1t has not been the
practice cfyour Executive heretofore TO issue or to