The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1850-10-31

Pennsylvania guarantees jury trial to her OWE
citizens, or to persons who are charged with COM
hitting an offence within her borders. Fugiuves
vsrnmest to which the fugitive Oelcnss il is 70 be
presumed, viii do justice to is own subjects or ci
zens, and whether they do so not, u NO concern
of ours. However individuals may fancy they
have mission 10 rsctify oil wrongs on the face Of
herself bound TO the Quixotic enterprise Of
aveDgiDg the oppression of serS in Russia, or
slaves in Georgia. This act of Congress does not
require that Judge should, without trial, surren-
The provision, "tbat in no trial or hearing, under
this act, shall the testimony OF such fugitive be ad
mitted In evidence" Is NO more than the enact
law, that no man shall be witness in his own
cause If this provision were not In the act,
would not receive the testimony Of the prisoner to
prove that he was the person described, or that he
was free man. Il would be temptation to per-
jury which no tribunal should permit to be pre-
scented to any man. No lawyer would urge before
a court such an absurd construction OF the act OF
Congress, as that il means that no evidence should
be heard on the part OF the alleged fugitive. IT.
such were the nteAtion OF the legislature, il was
easy to express il in unequlvoca terms. In truth,
there is nothing equivocal in the language Of the
act; il forbids the Judge to hear the testimony OF
the fugitive but not the testimony of disinterested
witnesses. II almost seems that nothing but de-
to render the law odious, for the sake Of poll
teal agitation, could ever have led to so gross
mlecOnbIFuctlOQ, ana SO great De on our natIOnal
Legislature. IL has been objected also, to this law,
that ii suspends the ha6eas corpus act nasmuch as
1t enacts that the certificate Of the judge, or COM
missioner, shall be conclusive OF the right OF the
persons In whose faver granted, to remove such fu-
gitiye, and shall prevent all molestauon of such
person or persons. by any process issued by any
court, Judge, magistrate, or other person whom.
soever." Butthis Is mistake. The truth is, that
this provision Of the law, forbiddng the testimony
Of the fugitive be received and forbid ling inter-
ference by other process, after certificate, but
an enactment of an established principle of the
common law, added through extreme caution,
corpus is undoubtedly en- immediate remedy for
every illegal imprisonment; bat no imprisonment
is illegal " hen the process is justification OF the
officer; and process, whether by writ or warrant,
Is legal, whenever il Is not defective the frame
Of it, and has Issued In the ordinary of JUS
tice, from court or magistrate having jurisdiction
of the subject matter. "-( Commonwealth vs..
Lechy, Watts, 81.
A person held as a fugitive under the certificate
of Judge or magistrate, under this act, is legally
imprisoned, under process T" from a court magis-
trate having jurisdiction" and cannot be released
by any other court or magistrate, on a writ of
habc0s corpus or honi,ne repfegtando. The act OF
l7S3 has no such provisions as that which is the
subject of complaint in the present case yet in
the case of Wright VS.. Deacon, Is Sergt and
Rawie, 62,) the Supreme Court OF Pennsylvania
decided that certificate under that act legal
warrant 10 remove the fugitive TO the State of
Maryland, and writ of homisss repisgiando would
lie from State Court to try the question OF free
dom and that writ issued under such circum-
stances was" in violation of the constitution of the
United States"
The chief difference between the fugitive ect of
1850 and that Of 1888 is, that the former allows a
warrant TO be issued by judge, and the ares, to
be made by public officer, and imposes more
stringent penalties on those who interfere, by vo-
lence, to prevent The execution OF legal process.
Those who believe that the constitution and laws
Of their country should be regarded and obeyed
have no ground of complaint; and those who do
not, will continue TO rail at both. as usual.
am happy TO say that my brother Kane fully
concurs with me in the views here express
/ am, very respectfully, yours, &c We,
r. q. GniKR.
To CHARLES GIBBONS, Esquire.