Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1849-01-19

- - hAt1SS 49,
rage upon both, than that perpetraied in
the present instance it were difficult 10
conceive. The learned Counsel who APP
peared for the stakeholder, notwithstand-
ing his refined skill and long practice in
criminal matters, strove in vain TO prove
that his client was only acting in accor.
dance with the Constitution oflho United
States and the Act Of Congress in regard
to lugitives from service he did not
even show the facts, of which evidence
would have been required by n magis-
trate applied to for the certificate Of re-
moval and valid as were the grounds on
which Belt was discharged, the order
might have been based on several other
omissions in the proof equally essential.
The only material proof ruled out by
Judge Edmonds, was u law of Maryland
passed in 1887 ~forbidding the Legislature
to abolish the existing relations of Master
and Slave except upon specified condi-
tons. 1t was excluded because no wit
ness was produced 10 show that the VOL
ume of laws cited was published by au-
thority ofihe State, or was a copy OF the
edition used in the Courts of Maryland.-
But iflhis had been admitted and further
evidence showing that The Legislature
had not abolished the relation of master
and slave consistently with the provisions
Of the law, there would still have been
wanting proof ofthe character o fthat re-
lation, and that it existed between Lee
and Belt. Admitting that the mother
was a slave, it was still to be proven that
by the law Of Maryland the child follows
the condition of the mothcr-for if the
reverse rule obtained, Bell being 4 muIat-
TO and his father q white man, he would
have been clearly free.
An equally important omission in the
proof admitting him TO have been the
slave Of Lee, was, in regard TO his being
a fugitive from Maryland without his
masters consent. The nephew testified
that the last time he saw him was in a
Railway car with his uncle going towards
Baltimore.
But not a little Of evidence was offer
ed in regard to his escape, and the Court
in the absence of such proof must have
intended in fauorem Hbertatis that Belt
had been brought to New York by Lee
himself, or had left Maryland with Lees
and under either of these suppo-
the power Of the master would
have been gone forever.
The Court ordered the discharge Of
Belt on two grounds-FirSt, that there
was no evidence before the Court Of the
legal existence of Slavery in Maryland,
and Secondly, that Belt if a fugitive ow-
ing service to Lee, and by him arrested
in New York, could only be held by him
in custody in our State for the purpose Of
being taken before a Magistrate for the
obtaining Of a certificate under the act of
Congress. The return expressly showed
that no such purpose here existed.
This latter decision may be important
as determining the construction by the
Courts of this State of the language of
Mr.. Justice Story in delivering the ludg-
ment ofthe Supreme Court in the case OF
Prigg against the Commonwealth of
Observation-Disclosures some lawyers who
have had occasion 10 examine that de-
cision have been inclined TO regard it as
az least a doubtful question whether in
pronouncing the owner (l6. Peters 613)
of a fugitive slave 10 be clothed by the
Constimtio itself, with the like authority
in every State of the Union to seize and
recapture him as he would have had in
the State from which he fled, wherever
he can do it without any breach of the
peace or illegal violence-the Court did
not intend 10 declare the owner vested
with authority no.! merely 10 recapture
but TO rem0re the fugitive without seek
ing the aid afforded by the act Of Con-
gress. And it was such Il construction oil
its language on this point, combined with
its overthrow of all State laws in regard
to fugitives thai created so deep an indig-
nation in the Anti-Slavery party through.
out the Northern States, when the deci-
sion was first published. We of the
North had acquiesced in the compromise
OF the Constitution for the delivery oil
fugitive slaves-supposing ourselves en-
titled before delivering them up TO proof
that they owed service-andinan North.
ern States and New York among Others
had passed laws in perfect good faith de.
claring in what manner that proof should
be given; and directing that a Jury should
be summoned 10 determine the chairman,
right 10 remove a nan rs his slave, Il:
would be the case if he brought trovel
for Il horse or for a sheep. But the de,
cision in Prigg swept all these laws away
Ii struck direct at long unquesrioued prin.
ciples of Slate Sovereignty and Indepen
dence. 1t declared that all State legisla
ton on the subject, however necessary
for the protection of our own citizens wa.
null and void, and that the powers Of leg
%islation on the subject vas exclusive ir
Congress. According TO The opinion o
many lawyers, it went further sill anc
pronounced that the Constitution itsel
gave full power to the master and hi.
agents TO seize his slave by force WHEREBY