Weekly national intelligencer., 1850-10-19
OPINION OF MR.. CRITTENDEN.
ATTORNEY GESrRAL's OFRIcE,
N.~S.cL.. I0Sh I0EA

asgs September 18th, 1850.
SIR have had the honor receive your note Of this
date informing that the bill commonly called the Fugitive
Slave Bill having passed both Houses Of Congress- had been
submitted consideration, APPROVAL and signature,
and requesting my opinion whether the m section Of that act
and especially the last clause Of that secton conflicts with
the provision Of the constitution which declares that the
privilege Of The writ Of habeas corpus shall not be suspended
unless when Of rebellion INVASION the public safe
ty may require it,"
II is my clear conviction that there nothing in the last
clause nor in any part of the sr secon nor indeed any
part of the provisions of the act which supend was in
tended suspend the privilege of the writ Of habeas corpus
or is in any in conflict with the constitution.
The constitution, in the second section Of the fourth a
c declares that person held to service labor in one
State under the laws thereof escaping into another SHALL in
consequences of any law regulation therein be discharged
from such service labor but be delivered up claim
Of the party whom such service labor msy be due"
II is we'll known and admitted, historically and judiciay,
that this clause of the constitution made for the purpose
Of securing the citizens Of saveholdng States The
pete ownership in their slaves property in and every
State Territory of the Union which they might escape
(PTgg Commonwealth Of PennsyhDania, is Peters,
539.) 1t devolved the General Government solemn
duty, to make that security e1ectua Their power
only clear and full but according the opinion Of the
in the above cited case erchssve the States,
sy being under obligation, and having power make
laws regulations in respect the delivery Of fugives
Thus the whole power and with it the whole duty, Of carry
ing into effect this important provision Of the constitution
with Congress and accordingly, after the adoption Of
the constitution, the Of the 18th February, I793
passed; and that proving unsatisfactory and Inefficient by
(among other causes) of minor in its de-
tails Congress attempting by this bill to discharge
constitutional obligation, by securing eectualy the de-
livery of fugitive slaves to their The srth and most
material subject in substance declares that the claimant Of
the fugitive slave may arrest and carry him before any
of the officers named and described in the BILL and provides
that these officers and each Of them shall have judicial power
and jurisdiction hear examine, and decide the in
summary manner; that if upon such hearing the claimant,
by the requisite proof shall establish his claim to the satis
faction of the tribunal thus constituted the said tribunal shall
give him certificate stating therein the substantial facts of
the case and authorizing him. with such reasonable force
may be necessary take and carry said fugitive back to the
State Territory whence he she may have escaped and
then n conclusion proceeds foows The certificates in
this and the first section mentioned shall be conclusive of
the right Of e person PERSONS in whose favor granted
to such fugitive the State or Territory from which
be escaped and shall prevent all moleson Of such person
o persons BY any process issued by any court judge
gstrae or other person whomsoever."
There nehng in all this that does not seem to me to be
deem the pledge which containshat such ugves shall
be delivered up on claim" Of their owners
The Supreme Court of the United States has decided that
the owner, independent Of any aid from State or national
legislaion, mays virtue Of the constitution and his own
right Of property seize and recspure his fugitive slave in
whatsoever State he may find him. and carry him back to the
State Territory from which he escaped. (rige VS. Com
rnon,ceaAh Of Pennsylvania, is Pet. 53s) This BILL there
fore, confers right the of the fugitive slave
only gives him appointed and peacsabe remedy ia place
OF the more exposed and insecure but less lawful mode
of fseredre And to the fugitive slave he has no cause
TO complain Of this bill adds coercion that which his
owner himself might, at his will rghHully exercise
and all the proceedings which institutes are but 80 much Of
orderly judicial authority nterpoed between him and his
owner and consequently OF protection TO him, and mitigation
of the exercise directly BY the himself of his
authority This is the constitutional and legal view Of the
subject sanctioned by the decisions Of the Supreme Court
and to that limit myself
The Of the 18th of February 1898, before alluded to-
far respects any constitutional question that can arise
out Of this bill identical with it. II authorizes the like ar
Of the fugitive slave, the like trial. the like Judgment the
like certificate with the like authority to the owner, by
Of that certificate bis warrant, to him the
State Territory from which he escaped And the consti
tuonay Of that act In oil those particulars has been affirm
Cd BY the adjudcaons Of State tribunals and by the
of the United States without single dissent far as
know. (Bald.oin's c. c. r., SIT, 57s.)
conclude therefore. that far the act Of the 18th Of
February l7o3, has been held be constitutional this bill
must also sgarsd and that the custody restraint and
removal TO which the fugitive slave may be subjected under
the provision Of this bill all lawful and that the cert6