The republic., 1851-04-10

Under the psssisus sesaos Il - oaIy nessuse-
ry 10 make oat 49, }Stfs oass 70 ssnd bach ~
person charged Win cT1mes bot under thls cjannes
roaanf e pri1eItD "hs'd to-psrvice'" ~ Co.,
And sirSSs ver. presumed 70 BE- ~ eli thsy
were peqs otherviss. A citixen Of M.ssaohu,
miisc E & qcsstion Va: J decided. supposs come
a. Is ssids"os asis sse s ssS sSsn sn:y should
tell htm " was al mistAke! The possibility mat
his rights might b dstsrminsd In some other court
h.vs ) trisi IL dsorsiss Ihs coestitution.i pro-
visiea was, thats Haw ~ b service should be de-
hverod up.
merely bscanss Sc was suspected Of being held to
service1 No; the question must bc determined,
and ths trial Of that question notoriously ju
deial sct brt shs highest act Of judicial powor 70
crty. II that was not judicial act, what act
could b : Adjourned till 4o'clock.
AuorHBa PETITION OF TsoMAs sIxs, THE Fuel
TIVE sIAvs, EOa a War; OF HAsEAs ConPus. Al
GuMxNr or HoB1ar RANrouL, ya., IN rTs suPPo1r.--
In the supreme judicial court this morning, \. H.
Dana, esq, pressnted the petition Of Thomas 6ims
the fugitive slave, praying for writ OF hsbsos cor
pss The ehisf jusics, alter consultation with hi.
associates stated The opinion ofthe court, ~ he did
ON Saturday: and gave permission 70 the counsel 70
Robert ksnsoui, jr.. esq then proposed % ar
que the matter, and ask the court to determine
whether Sims IL held by good and sufficient war
rant He wished that i might be allowed ,.,v ss
fatal. The slavo might be carried 70 Georgia, as
they had reason 70 believe he would be, before the
counsel would Be prepared TO argue the point
The court, through the Chief Justice, werc Of
opinion that there was no reason to believe that
the slave would be withdrawn from custody.
The counsel thought there vas great reason 70
oeleve that the party would not q ir custody IN
The court decided that the dsSsndant was not en-.
titled 70 this writ = matter Of right.
MIR. Rantoul proceeded to argue the petition. He
commenced BY reading from The opinion Of the
Chief Justice Of Pennsylvania, in case Of ha-
bsas oospp, brought in the year 1909, before the
The Chis{ Just$ce read from the nineteenth sec.
tion Of the act which provides that notice should
be given t0zthe other party before writ y al
Mr.. Rantoul thought It would be time after tho
party was brought In. The hearing was now for
the purpose Of bringing him in.
Mr.. Dana called upon the court TO rule in the
matter whc re court fGSk e; no Notice o. nd stated
that he should inquire whether George T. Curtis
has right, in aching ~ United States Commits
sioner, % issue such warrant as he has directing
The inquiry arises under the Sd article of tho
Constitution 81 the United States, section lat.
Two questions arise under this clause, which he
1T. The act7on indicated In this warrant shows
audicial power; that the acts done acts Of ju-
dicial power a. much ~ any done under the pow
Of ths or any other court; and such - was not
intended By tho framcrs of the Constitution.
BY The acts Of 1880 and 1850 the Commissioner IL
csllsd upon to decide whether the person owes
vice or labor, which Il an act Of judicial power
and i not granted BY The Constitution to ssid Com
sioner concurrent jurisdiction with the judges Of
the circuit and district courts, which Mr. Rantoul
thin!s jeas IKE giving judicial power 70 the Com
q nv portion 81 : proceeding for depriving .
man oS bis liberty BE- . judicial proceeding. this
was one; for this Involved the whole case Was
as a,Jss y r0Ssdnb s be w.s .x ds hs1s ny
quise him to be carried TO tho State from which ne
had escaped. The law did not require that he should
be carried there.
The MASTER might stop before he got there, and
carry him anywhere else. This proceeding was
final and conclusive. II was nero mockery of
Languages 70 say Il was preliminary. 1t was said
the slave nehf have trial in the State 70 which ne
should be carried. and 70 that trial this might be
But how did this court know that the State to
which be might be carried has . law authorizing
such trial? And if Il had, what guaranty was
there that Il would not be repealed
But, IL all this were 90, IL would be nothing to
the purpose, for this Law made the decision Of this
Commissioners final There would be no power TO
trial wherever he might be carried, because = final
proceeding had been had making him the slave Of
James Potter. What was thsre then TO show that
tho proceeding here was not the final adjudication
This bsinr Disposed Of the question arose, is this
CoSnmisioner the proper judicial power9 Mr.. Il.
ton. he Was not. The Commissioners were sub
jcct 70 removal by the court; and hence did not
come under that essential qualification Of United
States judges, that they be appointed during good
ever the power appointing them chose.
Again, they received no stated salary, inde-
pendent OF the business done. Their compensation
depended upon the amount of business done, and,
in this case, upon ths manner in which IL was done.
Hence, there was no provision for their taking an
oath, ~ required ofjudges by the Constitution. A
Commissioned might act without taking an oath.
The Commissioner, therefore, did not come under
the denomination of an inferior court If this were
true, the act Of George Curtis. in this case. would
be null and void.
He cited from the opinion read by Judge Story. in
the case Of Pennsylvania Prigg. to confirm this
position. re
Not only was the process before the Commissioner
not preliminary, but it was not collateral with any
thing else. Thore was court that could control It.
His proceedings were independent and final. II
70, the acts Of this Commissioner were null and
void; and hence the act Of Marshall Devens was
and oushi 10 BE- discharged BY this court. !
IChief Justice Shaw subsequently delivered his
decision 70 the effect that in the present case was
the unanimous opinion Of the court that the writ
of habeas could not be granted
This morning there has been no more excitement
in Court Square, or in the vicinity of the court
house, than there Saturday, and, in fact, the
excitement appears, in great measure, to have
subsidized. Mcclure, Phillips, and others of the
"vigilance Committee were walking about, in
and out Of the court house, evidently chagrned at
seeing "the streets and avenues leading to the
court house, open and perfectly free for public
travel, rather than being blocked up by a lawless
mob. Besides the officers on duty, not more than
on h,,r<3red md tv or tvvo hundred persous were