The republic., 1851-04-16
NEsDAY MORNING, APRIL le, 1851.
THE REPUBLIC.
From the Boston Daily Journal. april IL.


From the Boston Daily Journal, Apra IL.
Opinion
Of Comn,issioner G. T. CunrIs. IN tie case of the
Fugifire Slaus Sims
On Friday last Thomas Sims, of color, of
about twenty-five years Of age, was brought before
me under warrant, issued at the instance Of
State of Georgia, who claims him a fugitive
from service. Tho hearing Of this case has been
continued from day to day, until the present time
and am now to give my decision.
That decision il would require but very short
time to pronounce, If there had not been raised q
question of law, which must examine and pass
upon. The learned counsel for the prisoner have
argued with grea. ability the question of the con-
stitutionality of tho act Of Congress under which
this warrant was issued, and have called upon me,
az they had right TO do, 70 affirm or deny it. II
should have been glad to have been relieved Of this
labor and responsibility, by any tribunal whatever
competent to assume the desision of the question;
but, inasmuch as my decision final. 20 far the
restoration Of the fugitive to Me State Of Georgia
il concerned and. inasmuch as no court has felt it
to be necessary TO intcrpose to relieve me of this
responsibility, l4rnow of no reason why should
shrink from it, have been told, indeed, by the
learned counsel who closed this case for the pris
oner, (Mr. Charles G.. Loring,) that it seems to
have been the design Of the projectors of this law
to make it odious possible toll the people Of the
free States; and that il it u held to be constitu-
tional, endless agitation must cnsuc.
have been told that my decision will send this
to perpetual slavery; and, az II TO increase to
the utmost intensity the responsibility Of acting
cordng tois imperative regulations have alsobcen
told that there are many persons in this commu-
nifty, fully entitled to remain here, who will be
placed practically and directly in the peril of its
grasp, If it is held to be constitutional.
l am here to decide grave question of law, the
decision Of which, 30 far as the rights of the par
ties before me depend upon it, has been unavoida-
bly, cast upon me. am to decide that question
upon my conscientious convictions of the truth by
an intellectual process, over which consequences
can have no just influence or control. have lis
tened, with all the attention could command, to
what has been addressed to my reason. have too
much respect for the learned counsel, and have too
strenuously endeavored 70 keep my mind in an at
ttude where 1t could appreciate his argument, to
have allowed myself to suppose that any part Of it
was intended to be addressed to my fears. re-
cognise in his suggestions and his earnest asser-
tons only evidence Of the strength of his convic-
tons, and Of his sense of the importance Of the
opinions which he 90 ably and zealonsly maintains.
The learned counsel said to me, in The course Of
nected with the statute under which act, which
must be humiiating to this court, and to every
other that had any thing to do with it, and that
was the clause which made the compensation to
depend upon the manner in which the case was de-
cided. II the learned counsel supposed that the
sum of five dollars was likely to influence my
judgment upon any question in this case, he did
right in reminding me that the statute provides for
compensation But il would, in my opinion,
have been well If the learned COUNSEL before he ad
dressed to me this observation, had examined the
statute to see whether, although it authorizes the
Commissioner to receive q compensation, 1t Inn.
poses upon him any obligation to take it. II il
does not, see no cause for humiliation, and cer-
tainly feel none.
In stating the views which entertain OF the va
rious grounds of objection to the constitutonality
Of this law, urged by the learned counsel for the
prisoner, shall not undertake to answer the whole
Of their course of reasoning My purpose will be
70 the my na
not expect 10 convince under the circumstances Of
the present occasion; nor is it any part OF my duty
to endeavor to do So Ny duty. according to my
stating my own convictions upon the several ques-
tons that have been discussed. Nor shall under
| take to examine arguments that have been made
elsewhere, to follow and refute any processes Of
reasoning or defamation that have led others TO
the opinions which they entertain with regard to
this constitutional question.
Tho first objection taken by the learned counsel
for the prisoner to the constitutionaty OF this act
of Congress is, that the power which tho Commits
sioner undertakes to exercise under il is judicial
power, and the Constitution of the United States
does not authorize Congress to confer Judicial pow
| er upon any persons but judges with stated sala-
res appointed by the President for life, and hold
ing their Offices during good behavior. The Sd ar
ticle of the Constitution declares that "he judicial
power shal extend to all cases In law and equity
arising under this Constitution, the laws of the
United States," &C.; and it also declares that "the
judicial power of the United States shall be vested
in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts
as the Congress may from time 70 time ordain and
establish. The judges, both of the Supreme and
inferior courts, shall hold their offices during good
behavior, and shall, at stated times, receive for
their services compensation which shall not be
diminished during their continuance in Office"
The Commissioner, il is very properly contended,
is not such Judge.
The principal authority relied upon by the learned
counsel to sustain their position that the power con-
kL~C n e,rIsr al
is passage in the opinion of the Supreme Court Of
the United States, pronounced by Mr.. Justice
Story,) in the case Of Prigg W. 1he Commonwealth
Of Psnnsyluonia, 16 Peters, 6l6. That passage is
follows 1t is plain, then, that where claim is
made by the owner, out of possession, for the de-
livery Of slave it must be made, If at all, against
some other person and inasmuch as the right is
right Of property capable o. being recognised sna
adverse TO each other it constitutes, in the strctcst
sense, controversy between the parties, and a
case arising under the Constitution of the United
States, within the express delegation of judicial
power given by that instrument Congress, then,
may call that power into activity for the very pur-
pose of giving effect to that right; and If then It
may prescribe the mode and extent in which it
shall be applied, and how, and under what cir
cumstances, the proceedings shall afford complete
protection and guarantee to the right"
The force and effect Of any passage in tho opin-
ion of court depends, OF course, upon the question
decided, and upon the course of reasoning en-
ploycd in coming TO the decision. The great qucs-
tions raised decided in Prigg's case were, ,whe-
ther a matter of jurisdiction the surrender of fu
gitives from service was imposed by the Consttu-
ton upon the General Government, or upon the
State governments; and, il upon the General Co
vernmcnt. whether Congress could lcgislats TO
carry the injunction of the Constitution into effect.
The decision Of the court was, that this duty was
imposed exclusively upon the General Govern
mcnt; and being imposed there, upon the great
principle that, where there is duty imposed, the
means of fulfilling it arc by necessary implication
part of the grant, that Congress possessed full
coming 10 this result, the court laid down the two
positions contained in the passage cited at the bar
and which have just read. They held, hrst, that
a claim for the possession Of fugitive slave was
case arising under the Constitution Of the United
States, and 90 was within the grant of judicial
power which that Constitution had conferred upon
the General Government; secondly, that being
such case. belonging to the judicial power Of the