The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-11-06

agent attorney hereby empowered seize
any Judge Of circuit district courts of United
States residing being within the State. before any
such OF shall Sc made and upon proof 10 The
.s q sas sss % y sy
magistrate OF such Stale Territory, that the person
reno,y from which he Or she sd owe services or labor
to The person claiming him her. i shall be The duty o.
claimant his agent attorney. which shall be sufficient
warrant for removing The said fugitive from labor to the
| "sso 4 That any person who shall knowingly and vii
ingy obsuc hinder such claimant his agent or ator-
shall rescue such fugitive such claimant, his sgenr
when g the spa as
after notice that he she fugitive from labor az
Ss 5 y s % %hsS sssa %S
be recovered by and for the benefit OF such claimant by
10 The person camhS such labor q service bis
either OF them Approved Feb IL. 1888
The charge in reference the habsas corpus and trial
by jury IS untrue. whatever construction you give TO the
new law II to be silent was 10 repeal then il was done
BY The old law and not by the amendment q new law
there is for complaint But maintain that the
writ Of habsas corpus is applicable to the case OF the ar
rest oil fugitive under this law, in the same sense in
which the constitution intended to confer IT, and to the
fullest extent for which that writ is ever rghtfuy issued
in any In this am fully sustained by the opinion
OF Mr. Crittenden the Attorney General Of the United
States. AS this bill passed the two houses OF
Congress- abolition paper raised the alarm that the ha
beas corpus had been suspended The cry was eagerly
every part Of the Union by those whose avocaon is agi-
,aon The President Of the United States previous 70
signing the BILL referred it to the Attorney General for his
opinion upon the point whether any portion Of il viola
ted any OF the provisions OF the constitution Of the United
States and especially whether could possibly be con-
strued to suspend the writ of habeas corpus.
/ have the opinion Of the Attorney General before me-
in which he givesn as his decided opinion that every
part Of the law is entirely consistent with me Gonslu
ton nd that does not suspend the writ OF hdbeas cor
p1s would commend the entire argument OF the At
oney General 10 the careful perusa OF those who have
% 5 mi hs M sonndnss
dent Fillmore signed the bill.
Here Mr. Douglas interrupted BY person present,
who called his attention the last clause OF the sixth
section OF the bill follows, and asked him wha, con.
suction be put upon il if did not suspend the writ Of
habeas corpus
Sand the certificates in thi. and the first section
toned snail be- conclusive OF the right Of the person or
persons in granted such fugitive TO the
ali moestaon q said person or persons by any process
s,ued by any court. Judge, magistrate % o'her person
4 whomsoever"l
gentleman who propounded the inquiry His object was
TO every point and remove every doubt that could
possibly be raised and be expressed the hope that every
gentleman present would exercise the privilege OF asking
him questions upon any point upon which he was not
entirely satisfied He then proceeded to answer the ques.
ton propounded in regard 10 the sixth section. That
section provides for the arrest OF fugitive and trial
before the commissioners, and il the facts OF servitude,
ownership and escape be established BY competent test
w,
effect which certificate shall be conclusive OF the right
of the person in whose favor is issued to remove the
fugitive to The State from which he fled Then comes
the clause which supposed 10 suspend the habeds
pus And shall prevent all molestailon OF said person
or persons by any process issued BY any court judge
magistrate, or other person whomsoeyer The question
is asked whether the writ of habeos corpus is "pro
cess" within the meaning Of this law. answer that It
undoubtedly is such process and that Il may be Is
sued by any court Judge having competent authority,
not for the purpose of "molesling claimant having
servant his possession tcih such certificate from the
United States commissioner but Tor the purpose OF ascer
tanning the fact whether he has such cercate or not
and il so, whether il be in due form OF law; and u not,
by what au,hoyhe holds the servanti custody Upon
the Of the writ of habeas corpus the claimant will
be required to exhibit to the Judge his authority for
veyng that servant back and he produces certificate
from the United States commissioner in due form OF law,
the court will decide that il has power to modest the
claimant the exercise OF his rights under the law But
the claimant is unable to produce such ceruhcate, or
produces one which is not IN conformity with law the
court will the servant at liberty for the very reason
that the law has been complied with The sole OBJ
ec OF the writ of habeds corpus is TO ascertain by what
authority person is held in custody-io release him it
no such authority be shown and 10 refrain from any
smolesa,ion OF The claimant il legal authority be pro-
duced The hnbsas corpus is necessary therefore, TO
lime 10 prevent violation OF the rights OF freedom
under it. II is essential 10 the security OF the claim
ant as well as the Gr0ecaop s The 90 ba,
the writ OF habeds corpus was not mentioned IN the
biwas suspended on the one hand nor expressly
provided for on the other-mus be obvious The object
OF the new law TO have been TO amend the old one
in those particulars where experience had proven amend.
meas 10 be necessary and all other respects 10 leave
precisely as il had stood for yseven years The pro-
visions OF the old law had been submitted to the test OF
long experience, and subjected TO the scrutiny oil The bar
and the Judgment OF the courts The writ oil hdbeas cor
ps was considered to exist and always esorted TO
when proper In amending the law, there
iect because nobody desired TO change in this respect
But why this extraordinary effort on the part OF the pro.
essed friends OF the black man 10 force such construc-
ton upon the law 10 deprive hun oil the wr oil hdoeas
eoTpus7 The law does not do so in terms II is ever
accomplished II must be done by construction. One
would naturally suppose that there was any room Tor
doubt as 10 what IL The true construction, those who
claim 10 be the especial and exclusive friends OF The me-
gro would contend for that construction which is most
directly the reverse is the fact They exhaust Their
learning and exert all their ingenuity and sk 70 deprive
the negro of all rights under the law and all this done
for the purpose OF making the law odous, and OF exci'
ting prejudice and odum against all who voted ior ~ OF
. were unayoidaby absent when il was passed.
Now word or two in regard TO the right OF trial by
ury The city council in their resolutions say that this
law aboshes the right have already shown you that
the council are msiakentha the law - silent upon
the subject and stands precisely as has stood for
half century. II there is any error In the law as il now
fathers in 1893 The act neither takes away nor
confers the right Of trial by jury leaves that right
just where fathers and the constitution left Il under
the old law That the right OF trial by jury exists IN
this country for all men, black or white, Tree or bond,
guilty or innocent, no will deny who knows any.
Thing upon the subject The right is OF universal appi-
cation and exists alike in all the States OF this Union
always has existed and always viii exist IN spite OF the
iugves slave law, so long as the constitution OF the