The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1851-04-09

sumed innocent till proved guilty; aud Il secured tria
at the place where the suspicion crime existed where
they could most easily defend themselves But should
they be tried before sent back! Now he came TO the
to this.
The person charged with crime had a right to know
that he was charged But the person held to SER
ycewas he TO be sent back for trial Of this charge,
No: the charge to be here tried and decided: and
| 10 be- sent back.
! This case final. 1t was decided without appeal
Comnissoner-so far as to the restoration Of the fu
gitiye TO the place from which he escaped his decision
-as final But he wanted them to show that the law
unconstitutional because the question Of his free
do "a could not be again tried.
Wv. Rantoul-The constitution did not allos a citizen
OF Msssac husefts to be dragged on another state,
unless it decided that he held to ser,S.e And
to deciio that judicial act And it n.t diff
ferent thing to decide whether held service
or Whether he was charged with crime.
Commi ~ioner-1i- question OF being held to service
to be finally decided for the purpose Of REMOVAL hut
he wished tem to show that it unconstitutional sor
Congress nos to make provision for rc-exmnation n
the
Mr. Rantor,--IIis Honor was to decide the question,
whether under this clause Of the constitution this person
held to sefricc-was not this judicial power? II
10 the act was unconstitutional, fos Congress had
sight to confer juiical power on Commissioner
Under the previous section, IL only necessary to
make out primo faeie case, to send back the person
charged with crime; but under this claase relating to
persons held 10 ice" the case was to be decided
And all men were presumed 70 be free tin they were
proved otherwise. A citizen of Massa sh,,sett- was
not dragged away 900 miles till the sneston was
decided suppose somerody should come hesc and take
him away to Texas, rgima fac. evidence. aud then
they shoGid tell him .es all mistake TIE possibi-
h;y that his rights might be determined in oter
court was mere mockery.
was these any pr.babia5,that this man might ha-c
trnl in Georgia. The constitutional provision t,ut
man held TO service shouli be delivered up
But would any court dare to send man back merely
the question must be decrmined and the trial Of that
question notoriousy judcial act and the highest
act Of judicial power, to determine whether msu
entitled to his liberty. II thai was not judicial act.
what coald be
APPLICATION FOR HsBEas CORPUS.
In the Supreme Judicial Co,rt this morning II. II.
Dana Esq presented the petition of Thomas Snms the
fugitive slave praying for writ Of habeds corpus The
Chief Justice after consultation with his associates.
stated the opinion Of the Court, he did saturday aud
gave permission to the counsel to a-yue the petition
Robert Rautopl. Jr Esq, then proposed to argue the
matter and asg the Court 10 determine whether Smms il
held by good aud sufficient warrant lie wished that
it might be allowed right. to avoid delay,
which might prore fatal The slave raght be carried
Georgia a. they had to believe he would be. be-
fore the counsel woui be prepared To argue the point
The Court. through the Chief Justice. were Of opinion
that there reason TO believe that the slave would
be Withdrawn from custody.
The Counsel thought there great to believe
that the party would not be in custody in the Court
House any great number Of hours from this time
The Count decided that the defendant was not entitled
to this writ As matter Of right.
MIR. Eantoul proceeded to argue the petition. He
commenced by reading from the opinion OF the Chief
JuNtice Of Pcnnsyvan in case OF isbsas c,yas
brurght in the y,sr 1893, before the Court
The Chief Justice read from the 10th gec.ion of the
act which provides that notice should be given to the
other party before u writ Ii allowed
Mr Rsntoul thought u would be time after the party
was brought in The hearing was now for the purpose
a bringing him in.
Mr. Dana called upon the Court to rule in the matter
which the Court took notice of.
Mr. Rantoul resumed his reading. and stated that he
should inquire whether Georgc 7. Curtis has right in
acting L. ). Commissioners. TO issue such
as he has. directing the arrest of Smms
The inquiry ariscs under the "a Article of the Const-
tuition Of the United States. Section LIST.
Two questions arise under this clause which he pro-
posed 70 argue -
cial power that the acts done are acts Of judicial power
as much any done under the powers of this any
other court; and such was not Intended by the
Trainers OF the constitution.
By the acts 1890 1850 the Commissioner is called
upon to decide whether the person service labor
which act Of Judicial power and Is not granted by
the constitution To said Commissioner The act of 1850
gives to the Commissioner concurrent jurisdiction with
the Judges Of the Circuit aud District Courts which Mr.
Esntou thinks locks like giving judicial power 70 the
Commissioner
IL any portion of proceeding for dcprivins man Of
his liberty be judicial proceeding this one; Tor this
involved the whole Was this a preliminary pro-
cccdngi Was there any provision for further tria'
fiom which lac had escaped. The law did require
that hc should be- carried there.
The master might stop before he got there nnt carry
him anywhere else This proceeding iinal and con-
elusive u was mere mtekery Of language 10 say Il
preliminary IL said that the slave might have
trial in the State which he should be carried ami
that trial this might be preliminary
Eut how did this Court know that the State to which
lie might bc carried has law authorizing such trial,
Aud II il had what guaranty there that II would not
be repealed!
hut il all this were so Il would be nothing 10 the nur-
pose. for h law made the decision of this Commissioner
final There would be power to touch him in Georgia
lie would be deprived of trial wherever he might b.
carried because final proceeding had been hal making
him the slave ol James Potter What was there then To
show that the proceeding here not the aual adud
cation Cf the case,
This being disposed Of the question arose Is this Com
missioner the proper judicial power SIR R proceeded
20 shGw that according to the constitution he not
The Commissioners were subject TO removal by the court
aud hence did not come under that essential quahca
tion q United states Judges that they be appointed du
ring gccd behavior. They were subject to removal whom
ever the power appointing them chose.
heor-they received no stated salary, independent Of
the buiness done. Their compensation depended upon
the amount a business done and in this upon the
manner IN which II was done.
Hence. there was no provision FOR their taking an
cath, as rtqur, Of Judges by the constitution com
mistioncr might act without taking oath The
missioner. Therefore did not come under the danomna
ton cf inferior court IL this true, the act of
George Cmis In this case would be null and void
lie cited from the opinion read by Judge story Nv the
case q isnn'ytana Vs. Prigr to confirm this position
Not only wa the process before the Commissioner not
preliminary but u was not collateral with any thing
else. There court that could control II. llis
proceedings we're Independent and final II 20 the acts
II this commissioner we're null AMI void. aud hence
the act oi Marsha Dcvcns null and voii and Thomas
Smms Illegally held and ought 70 " discharged by
The writ was denied.
INCIDENTS, ere.
Mar hal Tukey arrested this morning at his ice.
~ rcfuiy III ria CoFhurn Vr fr pass brought
~ ceoT,d n NAMED John Rendolf Tho writ alleges.
that the 9TH q April last Saturday said Turkey
sauted imprisoned and restrsined Il his liberty AMI
he'd aud caused bc searched by thrutng his hand
in his pockets the said Eandf to his damage he say
to the amount of $1,000 Mr.. Tukcy gave bail % ap.
pear at the next term a the Court If Common Pleas
The circumstances of the case are that Mr Tukey
inloI med that Rsndo had been Ia Court square.
with n weapon In his hand lie accordingly had him
arrested and searched, and mo weapon being found. h
set at liberty again.
On Saturday last writ cf rcpleyin placed in IN
hands q Deputy sheriff Coburn for the purpo q tax
Ing simms the alleged fugitive out ~ the hands of tn
United states Marshal The writ i issued under tha
section of the Revised statutes which u denominate
AN ret restore the trial Ny Jury questions q per
soual frcedcm passed Ia 1895 In " the prisoner
bcug given up, bond is required ~ the ocer for the
keeping the prisoner until the matter s decided
tptn application a. Marfha pcycns he refused tc give
up his prisoner an1 thus the matter rests ~ present
This morning, warrant vas put into the hands Of
deputy sheriff for the srrst of John Bacon the agent
fer the claimant of Simns and NJ ;. Dc Lyon. witness