The republic., 1851-04-11
Case OF the Fugitive san.s.
Caso OF the Hu8tthve sanass
We continue the report of the examination
of Sims before the Commissioner at Boston:

we continue the report OF the examination
of Sims before the Commissioner at Boston:
From the Boston Post Of 1sssdsy.
The HEARING sEroRE THE CoMMissIoNEn CON-
rINuED.-At twelve O'Clock, yesterday, while the
argument on the hab<as corpus was proceeding
before tho supreme Judicial court, G.. T. Curtis.
esq, United States Commissioner, took his seat in
the United States courtroom. for the purpose Of
resuming the examination, according to the ad
journment ON Saturday, but o note was handed to
delay proceeding until O'Clock, by which time
Mr.. Rantoul would be released from tho other
court. The Commissioner thereupon adjourned
his court till o'clock.
both Messrs. Loring and Rantoul asked for fur
ther delay till O'Clock, whom the decision in the
supreme court was to be given; but the Commis-
sioner declined, and ordered Mr. Rantoul to pro-
Referring to the positions laid down by him on
Saturday. (printed in Mondays Post,) Mr.. RAN
toul entered with great elaboratencss into the
st,tutional argument arising from the grant Of
commissioners. The argument was the same in
substance as that made by him in the supreme ju-
dicial court. He said that, under the Commission
er's certificate, the owner his agent might carry
Sims anywhere and sell him--to South Carolina,
Cuba, or Brazil.
The Commissioner interrupted him, and said
that nothing Of the kind could be done by virtue Of
the certificate. The only authority given by the
certificate was to take the party back to the State
from which he had escaped. IL still left tho ques
tion of the partys right to his freedom in Georgia
open to trial before the competent tribunals of that
State.
Mr.. Rantou replied that the act did not provide
any penalty If the agent carried the party else
where, sold him; nor did it provide for the trial
of the party's right in the State to which he was
remandcd.
The Commissioner asked him if he meant to ar
que that the law was unconstitutional because Con-
gress had omitted to make provision for the protec
ton Of the partys alleged rights, after the grant
ing of the certificate?
Mr.. Rantoul said the practical effect of returning
party was to reduce him to perpetual slavery, for
party presumed to be a slave in Georgia could
neither be allowed liberty to 60 and consult law
yer, would have the means Of defraying the
expenses Of legal proceedings.
In the afternoon MIR. Rantoul discussed the pro-
vision of the Constitution which gives the trial by
jury in all cases at law where the amount in dis
pute exceeds twenty dollars. He also dwelt at
length on the magma charta provision incorporated
into the Constitution, that no one shall be deprived
OF his life, liberty or property, except by the judg
ment OF his peers and with the right OF confront
ing the witnesses. Under the law, the testimony
upon which party was adjudged slave was cx-
parte, and there was in fact no trial at all.
At this stage MIR. Rantoul, on account Of the ar
duous and long g-continued abors Of the day, asked
for an adjournment, and after some discussion in
relation TO the part to be taken by Mr. Loring, the
closing counsel on that side, the Commissioner ad-
As Colonel Thomas, counsel for the claimant, has
the final close the Commissioners suggested to him
that it would be proper for him to furnish Mr. Lor
ing with the points he intended to make, and he
agreed to do so.
Mr.. Rantoul will discuss this morning the point,
that Congress has no power under the Constitution
to pass any law for the restoration of fugitive
slaves.
From same paper Of Vedassday.
Mr.. Commissioner Curtis came in at half past
eight yesterday, and MIR. Rantoul resumed his ar
gument on the unconstitutionality of the law,
maintaining that as the Constitution expressly
authorized Congress to pass any law in relation to
fugitive slaves, Congress could not egisiate in rcla-
tion to it. All powers not delegated to Congress
were reserved to the States. The Constitution di-
and should not be discharged from labor service
by any action of the States and twas clear taking
both clauses together, that the Constitution intend
ed that the States shoud prescribe the manner in
States had failed to carry out that provision could
not give to Congress power not given to it by the
Constitution.
The Commissioner intimated that the argument
would extend to fugitives from justice; and he
would ask of Mr.. Rantoul il he considered that
law also unconstitutional?
MIR. Rantoul said his argument went that length.
He now proceeded TO discuss the authentication Of
the power Of attorney produced by Bacon, the own
er's agent; and contended that, notwithstanding
the certificate of thc.clerk of the court, it did not
appear that the subscribing witness, in his capacity
Of notary public appointed by the court, was au-
thorized by the laws of Georgia to authenticate
power of attorney. He had examined the statutes
Of that State, and could only find that notary was
authorized to take acknowledgment Of deeds.
The Commissioner replied that the clerks certi-
fcate set forth that the notary was authorized by
law to take Acknowledgements Of deeds and other
MIR. Rantoul, in answer, maintained that the
clerk of court not the competent officer to
certify upon any matter of law. He was not, by
virtue of his office, authorized to declare what
the law, and therefore could not certify 70 the
argued at length to show that notary in Georgia
is not ''lega officer" within the meaning Of the
act of 1850.
MIR. Rantoul having concluded, and the court
missioner removed the hearing to the United
States marshal's Office, where Charles g. Loring,
esq, made the closing argument for the defence.
He went most elaboratcly into some Of the points
which had been discussed by Mr.. Rantoul, con-
curing with him, where he did not go beyond him.
He maintained that the decision Of the Commits
sioner once given against party under the law
was final, and without appeal, and was therefore
judicial, and consequently the law giving him such
power was unconstitutional. Hc denied that it
was preliminary proceeding to be followed up by
judicial action in Georgia.
The Commissioner said that he did not under
stand that his certificate if granted, would adudgc
the party to be slave 1t would do more than
certify that he was the party named and intended
in the record for the court in Georgia.
Once beyond the jurisdiction Of the laws of Mas
sachusetts, under the certificate Mr.. Loring said,
there would be conceivable manner in which
Sims, even if freeman, could assert his freedom.
He could have no trial in Georgia-certainly not
trial worthy of the name Of trial. Even in the pa
pers sent with the claim, the Commissioner
would see that the judge Of the court in Georgia
had admitted evidence utterly incompetent, and
that he had adjudged Sims TO be the slave Of James
Potter upon testimony thatneve ought to have been
admitted by him. Mr. LOrin0 devoted considera-
BILE time in endeavoring to show that the act to be
performed by the Commissioner was not an act of
extradition merely but an net deciding by its
inherent force the fate of Sims for life. He pressed
his belief that the judges Of the supreme court did
not on Monday examine the leading authorities
with that care which would give to their decision
the highest degree of weight.
Mr.: Loring put in, as part Of his argument, the
speech delivered by Horace Mann, in the House of
Representatives. at Washington, AZ to the uncon-
stitutionaity Of the Fugitive Shave act. He, how
ever, disclaimcd the denunciatory portions Of the
speech.
Upon the opening of the court in the afternoon