Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1851-01-09

arrested, pursuant To the authority herein
given or declared or shall harbor or cou-
ceal such person, after notice that he or
she was fugitive from labor as aforesaid,
shall, for either of the said Offences forfeit
aud pay the sum Of five hundred dollars
Which penalty may be recovered by and for
the benefit of such claimant. by action Of
debt, IN any court proper to try the same
saving, moreover, 10 the person claiming
such labor or service his right Of action for
or on account of, the said injuries OF either
OF them. Approyed Feb. II, 1893
The charge in reference to the habeas
corpus aud trial by Jury is untrue, whatever
construction you give to the new law. If
to be silent was TO repeal, then il was done
10y the old law, and not by the amendment
or new law as 1t is called If it does not
suspend or abolish either, there is no cause
for complaint But | maintain that the writ
of habeas corpus is applicable to the case
of the arrest of the fugitive under this law,
ia the same sense ia which the constitution
intended to confer IT, and to the fullest ex-
tent for which that writ is ever rlghtfully
issued in any case In this am fully sus-
tanned by the opinion of Mr. Criitenden,
As soon as this bill passed the two Houses
Of Congress, an abolition paper raised the
alarm that the habeas corpus had been sus-
pended. Tie cry was eagerly caught up and
transmitted by lightning upon the wires to
every part of the Union 10y those whose avo-
cation j. agitation. The President of the
United States, previous to signing the bill,
referred 1t to the attorney general for hts
opinion, upon the point whether any pot-
ton of II violated any Of the provisions of
the constitution of the United States, and
especially whether II could possibly be
construed to suspend the writ of habeas
corpus.
have the opinion of the attorney gener-
al before me, IA which he gives 1t is his
decided opinion thai every part Of the law
Is entirely consistent with the constitution,
and that 1t does not suspend the writ of
habeas corpus. ! would commend the en-
tre argument of the attorney general TO the
careful pefusal Of those who have doubts
upon tins sablect. Upon the presentation
OF tins opinion, and with foil confidence ia
It's soundness, President Fillmore signed
the bill.
Here Mr.. Douglass was interrupted by a
person present, who called his attention TO
the last clause Of the seventh section Of the
bill as follows aud asked him what con-
structIon he put upon 1t, If it did not sus-
pend the writ of habeas corpus;
Aud the certificate in tins and the first
section mentioned shall be conclusive Of
the right of the person or persons IN whose
! favor granted 10 remove such fugitive to the
state or territory from whence he escaped,
and shall prcrent all moestatlon of said
person or persons by any Preeasss issued hy
any court, Judge, magistrate, OF any person
Whomsoever."
Is there any other provision Of this law
upon which an explanation Is desired
A gentlemen present asked an eXplana-
ton of the object and effect Of the record
of court, from another state, provided for
in the tenth aud last section of the act
am glad, sani NJ j. that my attention
has been called to that poms: for heard Il
construction given to II ia the Npeeches last
night, entirely different to the PLAN read
ing and object of that provision. 1t Is said
that tins provision oftls law authorizes the
claimant to 90 before IA court of record of
the state where he lives, aud there establish
by erparfc testimony, in the absence of the
fugitive, the fact of seryitude, ownership
and escape, and that when record of these
facts shall have been made, containing a
minute description of the slave, II shall be
conclusive evidence against a person cor
responding to that description arrested IN
another state, and shall conslgn the person
SO arrested to perpetual servitude. The Law
contemplates no such thing, and authorl-
yes no such result ! have the charity to
believe that those who put this construction
upon it, have not carefully examined this
part of the law. The record from another
state predicaled upon satisfactory proof
to such court or Judge" before whom the
testimony was adduced and the record
made. is to be conclusive of two facts
lst That the person named IN the record
does owe service to the person in whose
f behalf the record is made
I'd. That such person has escaped from
service.
, The language of the act is that the
t " transcript of such record authenticated,
! &c. shall be held aud taken TO be full
. and conclusive evidence of the fact OF es
a cape, and tia, the service or labor Of sucf
person escaping is due to the party IN suci
record mentioned" The record is conclu
= siye of these two facts So Far as TO authorize
+ the fugitive to be sent back for trlal unde
i The laws of the slate whence he escaped
bit IL is no cridcace that tie person ARRESTED
e hare is the fagifire named ia the record
; The question of identity is to be proven
here 10 tile satisfaction Ul the commissioner
: or Judge before whom the lrlal Is had b.
4 other and further eoidcace." This Is th'
f great point IA the case The whole qles
+, ton rests upon 1t. The man arrested ma,
d correspond 10 the description set forth II
h the record, aud yet not be the same lndlyid
i ual We often meet persons resembling
Z each other to such an extent thai the one d
e mistaken for the other The Identity OF IN,
i person becomes matter of proof 10 be es
= labllshed by testimony of competent WIT
c nesses, and to be decided by the rlbuna
II before whom the irlal Is had, conscientious
It y aud imparIlally, according 10 the evi
y dence ia the case. The tral III that IA
y stance would be precisely the same as II
e the case II the arrest OF a White man on tn
h charge of being fugitive from justice II
d another state. la that case the writ OF TIA
e governor, and the indictment or even altl
Il.