The southern press., 1851-04-10


He proceeded to speak Of the case where a
person ia charged with crime in another State.
This provision was inserted for the benefit of
the person charged, that he might have a fair
trial, in the district where he WAS charged "
have committed the offence. This law was most
humane.
1t went on the principle that man was to be
presumed innocent till proved guilty; and it &C.
cured trial at the place where the suspicion OF
crime existed, where they could most easily de-
fend themselves But should they be tried be-
fore sent back Now he came to the next see
ton, where the language was in direct contrast
to this.
The person charged with crime had right to
know that he was 80 charged. But the person
"held to service"-was he to be sent back for
trial of this charge? No; the charge was to be
here tried and decided and unless he was SHIELD"
to service, the commissioner was to be sent back.
This case was inal 1t was decided without
appeal.
COMMISSIONER. So far as to the restoration
Of the fugitive to the pla.e from which he es-
capped, his decision was final. But he wanted
them to show that the law was unconstitutional,
because the question Of his freedom could not
be again tried.
MI. RANTouL Tho Constitution did not al
off to another State, unless it was decided that
he was held to service. And to decide that, was
a judicial act. And was it not different thing
to decide whether man was held to service, or
whether he was charged with crime!
COMMISSIONERS. The question Of being held
to service was TO be finally decided for the pur-
pose of removal but he wished them to show
that it was unconstitutional for Congress not
to make provision for re-eyaminatOn OF the
case.
Mr. RANToUL His Honor was to decide the
question whether under this clause of the Con-
stitution this person was held to service. Was
not this a judicial power? If 80, the act was
unconstitutional, for Congress had no right to
confer judicial power on commissioner
Under the previous section, it was only neces-
sary to make out prinaa tacia case, to send
back the person charged with crime but under
this clause, relating to prisoners held to SER
vice." the case was to be decided.
And all men were presumed to be free till
they were proved otherwise. A citizen of Mas
sachusetts should not be dragged away 1000
miles till the question was decided. Suppose
somebody should come here and take him away
to Texas, on prima facia evidence, and then
they should tell him it was al a mistake! The
possibility that his rights might be determined
in some other court, was mere mockery.
Was there any probability that this man might
have trial in Georgia? The constitutional pro-
vision was, that man held TO serrice should be
delivered up.
Bnt would any court dare to send a man back
merely because he was suspected of being held
to service? No, the question must be deter
mined, and the trial of that question was noto-
riously judicial net, but the highest act of ju-
dical power to determine whether man was
entitled to his liberty. If that was not judi
cal act, what act could be?
Adjourned till o'clock.
Another petition of Thomas Sims, the fugitive
slae, for a ,oru of habeas corpus.-Argument
of Robert Rantoul, .jr., in It's support.
In the Supreme Judicial Court this morning,
r. Ii. Dana, esq. presented the petition of Thos.
Sims, the fugitive slave, praying for. writ of
habeas corpus The chief Justice, after con-
sultation with his associates, stated the opinion
of the court, as he did Saturday, and gave per-
mission to the counsel to argue the petition.
Robert Rantoul, jr., then proposed to argue
the matter, and ask the court to determine
whether SIMS is held by good and sufficient
warrant. He wished that it might be allowed as
a right. so as to avoid delay, which might
prove fatal. The slave might be carried to
Georgia, as they had reason to believe he would
be, before the counsel would be prepared to
argue the point.
The court, through the chief justice, were of
opinion that there was no reason to believe that
the slave would be withdrawn from custody.
The counsel thought there was great reason
TO believe that the party would not be in custody
in the courthouse any great number Of hours
from this time.
The court decided that the defendant was not
entitled to this writ as matter of right
Mr. Rantoul proceeded to argue the petition.
He commenced by reading from the opinion of
the chief justice Of Pennsylvania, in case of
haJeas corpus, brought in the year 1909, before
the court
The chief justice read from the 10Th section
of the act which provides that notice should be
given to the other party before writ is allowed.
Mr. Rantoul thought it would be time after
the 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, which the court took no notice Of
Mr. Rantoul resumed his reading, and stated
that he should inquire whether Geo. r. Curtis
has right, in acting as u. S. commissioner to
issue such a warrant as he has directing the ar
rest of Sims.
Constitution of the United States, section Ist
Two questions arise under this clause, which
he proposed TO argue:
lst. The action indicated in this warrant
shows judicial power; that the acts done are
acts of judicial power as much az any done un-
der the powers Of this, or any other court and
such as was not intended by the trainers of the
Constitution.
BY the acts of 1890 and 1850, the commits
sioner is called upon to decide whether the per-
son owes service or labor, which is an act of ju-
dcial power, and is not granted by the Consti-
tuition to said commissioner. The act of 1850
gives to the commissioner concurrent jurisdic-
ton with the judges of the circuit and district
courts, which Mr. Rantou thinks looks like
giving judicial power to the commissioner.
II any portion Of proceeding for depriving a
man of his liberty be n Judicial proceeding, this
was one for this involved the whole case. Was
this preliminary proceeding Was there any
provision for further trial !! The law did not
require him to be carried to the State from
which he had escaped. The law did not require
that he should be carried there.
Il, l.. a.,