The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-10-18
vss- ths sspshlie o. yssssdsy
IN. rsssav.-si.vs Law Ops~ss. = mr. Crssss.d.a


sye slave b having psssed both houses Of Congress
had hesn s9bmiited to you for your consideration, APP
the siz section OF that act and especially the last clause
OF that section conflicts with the provision OF the cons-
luton which declares that "lhe privilege Of the writ q
haoeds corpus shall not be suspended unless when in
cases 81 rebellion or INVASION the public safety may re-
qulre IT," ss,...l.a,
It my clear conviction that there is nothing in the
last clause. in any part Of the rh section. nor. in
deed any part of the provisions OF the act which sas-
ponds. intended 10 suspend the privilege OF the
The constitution in the second section OF the fourth
article declares that person nsia 70 service % 'aoo
another shall in consequence OF any law or regu.
alion therein be discharged from such service labor
but SHALL be delivered claim OF the party to whom
such service or labor may DC due"
II is well know and admitted, historically and Judicial
" that this clause Of the constitution was made for the
purpose of securing to the citizens OF slavehodng States
the complete ownership in their slaves as property, in
any and every State or Territory Of the Union into which
siSania is Psi $500 7devolved on the general gov
eminent, solemn duty to make that security efiectua
Their power was not only clear and full but according
to the opinion OF the court in the above-cied
eresiue the States severaly being under obligation
and having no power to make laws or regulations in
spec. 70 The delivery Of fugiyes Thus the whole
this important provision of the constitution with Con-
gess and accordingly, after the adoption Of the
constitution, the act OF the 18th February, I793 was
passed. and that proving unsatisfactory and inefficient by
(among other causes) of minor in It's
details Congress are now attempting by this bill to dis
charge constitutional obligation by securing more ef
lectually the delivery OF fugitive slaves to their
The sr and most material section in substance declares
that the claimant Of the fugitive slave may arrest and
scrbed in the BILL and provides that these officers and
each OF them shall have judicial power and Jurisdiction
to hear, examine, and decide the in summary
ner; that IT, upon such hearing the claimant, BY the
requisite proof shall establish his claim to the sasfac-
ton OF the tribunal thus constituted the said tribunal
shall give him certificate, stating therein the substan-
al facts OF the case and authorizing him. with such
reasonable force may be necessary, to take and carry
said fugitive back to the State Territory whence he Or
follows "The certificates in this and the first section
mentioned shall be conclusive Of the right of the person
persons in whose favor granted to such ugi
i've 70 the state or Territory from which ne escaped and
snali prevent a moeslanon Of sucn person q persons
OK any process issued oy any court Judge magistrate or
o'h Eh person Wnomsoe An ,,;u 49,,
20 pc consistent WIN tne consuuuon, anu necessary,
hdeeu' 70 eaee 'ne Pieuge wnich sucn
M saa De asiversa " on cia o. he ownels;
una. ,ne oWneI ndepenoent OF any aia rom otae OF
national legislation may IN virtue o. the constitution and
ms own right OF property seize and recapue ms fugitive
MN BACK 10 the state or eory from winch ne ESCAPED
lpigg U.s. commonwealth o. Pennsyiuan,a, 10 Pet 53s
fugitive slave only gives him an appointed and peacea
pie remedy IN place OF the more exposed ana insecure
Gu. no. less lawful mode Of sel,redess And as q the
adds no coercion 70 tnai WMch ms owner himself
might, at his own will rghtfuily exercises and all the
proceedings which II institutes are but so much oil order
ly judicial authority, interposed between hun and his
owner and consequently OF protection To num- and mga
ton OF the exercise decuy oy inc owner himself OF ms
personal authorHy Ids Inc constitutional ana iegai
view OF tne as sancIoned oy the decisions OF the
supreme Court; and 10 tnat lirnit myself
The act OF the l2th February 1893 before alluded to,
80 lar as respects any constitutional question mat can
arse oul OF his OH, y ioen,icaI WIN u au.norzes
the like arrest Of The fugitive slave The like trial. the like
judgment. the like certificate, with the like authority to
the owner by virtue OF that certincae as ms warrant TO
remove him to the State or Territory from which he
capped and the constutonaly Of mat act 10 all those
particulars, has been afnrmed by the adudcatons OF
Slate tribunals and by the courts OF the United States
without single dissent 90 lar as know Baldtons
Il T. T. H., 577, 57s)
conclude therefore that so far as the act of the 18th
February 1893 has been held 10 be constitutional this
bill must also be SO regarded and that the custody re-
srant and removal to which the fugitive slave NAV be
subjected under the provisions of this BILL are all lawful
and that the certificate TO be granted to the owner Is 10 be
regarded as the act and Judgment OF judicial tribunal
having competent jurisdiction.
i With these remarks as TO the constuonality OF the
general provisions Of the bill and the CONSEQUENT legality
OF the custody and confinement to which the fugitive
slave may be subjected under it, | proceed to brief
consideration OF the more particular question you have
propounded in reference 10 the writ habeos corpus and
OF the last clause OF the aI section above quoted which
gives rise to that question
My opinion before expressed is. that there is moth
ing thai clause or section which conflicts with or sus.
pends or was intended to suspend the privilege Of the
writ of habeds corpus think because the bill says
not one word about that writ; because, by the consu-
ton, Congress is expressly forbidden suspend the priv