Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1851-04-17

lhi'hi huiilNIhlloU l MS
has been especially loud in the Slave States
The reckless and the unbrided press Of
the South opened in full pack on our
State, like hounds on stag at bay; and
not few of the journals of northern cities
Joined the chorus But it has been city
journals only, for the most part in the nor
thern States, that have attempted to read us
homlles on notification. The country
press has been more generous While these
charges of notification we're ringing out
from so many sources, al attempts to get
hearing for our State, either in Justification
or extenuatlon Of her high offence, were
iruitess but now that the clamor is snbsi-
ding, perhaps a few words may be heard in
her defence.
There is no cause why Vermont should
be thus yiified. She has ever maintained
an adhesion to the URSpn as firm, an obedl.
ence to the laws as ehiul, as any other
State IN our coniederacyf aud she has new
er given occasion for the charges brought
against her. 1t is well known that large
majority, probably nneteen-twenlie,hs of
our citizens, were decidedly opposed to the
passage of the Fugitive slave law. The
love OF liberty Is perhaps the strongest prln-
cIple IN their nature, aud they could hardly
brook the idea that the cause of freedom
should take such huge backward stride as
that law contemplated. But when it finally
passed, they considered the matter settled
aud obedience to the law was thencefor-
ward the duty of all good citizens, until it
could be repealed or modified. They did
believe, however that if Vermont could no
longer be the asylum Of the oppressed. who
tt,t L l..
mountain air, vet every possible measure
should be adopted, to guard their own citi-
zens from the ruthless grasp of the slave
hunter; aad for this purpose the law of the
last session Of our Legislature was enacted,
which has been stigmatised as an act of null
LITIGATION: and which charge some leading
Wing and neutral papers, IN the good cities
of Boston and New York, have been most
otficious IA reiteraiing.
The two essential features of this law
which have been objected To, are the pro-
visions in relation TO the issuing of the writ
of habeas corpus, aud IN relation to a trial
by jury.
The special legislation in our State in re-
gard to the writ of habeas corpus was rem
dered necessary by the change in our Judi
ciary system, which takes effect this year,
aud the ACT gives no new powers to our
Courts. The Constitution of the United
States, (the authority of which Vermont &C.
knowledges, as well as her reyilcrs) pro-
ydes expressly that 81 the privilege of the
writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspend
ed, unless when in cases of rebellion or IN
yasion, the public safety may require it,
The opinion OF the Attorney General and
the proceedings in the case Of Long in New
York, seem to settle the question IN regard
To this privilege beng extended to persons
claimed fugitive slaves Judge Story
remarks" Although writs of habeas cor
pus have been issued by State Judges and
State Courts, in cases where the party has
been in custody, under the authority Of pro-
cess of the Courts of the United States.
there has been considerable diversity of
opinion whether such an exercise of author
ity Is constitutional; aud 1t yet remains to
be decided whether 1t can be maintained"
Story on The Constitutions The utmost,
then, that can possibly be alleged against
Vermont is, that she has passed a law which
gives powers to her Courts, the constitu-
tionality OF which may be questioned and
1t would cartainy seem that this question
should be fairly smiled before the wholesale
charge of nulIicaton Is land upon her. es-
peclally when opinions Of eminent lurists
aud the proceedings of other States make
SO clearly in her favor.
la regard to the provision for trial by
jury, 1t may be remarked, that the only
question Of fact which can DE submitted
under this law, is that of identity II has
reference to the triaI Of the question, not
whether the individual claimed is actually
slave, but whether he is the person that the
slaye-catcher asserts. The claimant comes
into our State, aud seizes a person, who he
says, is a slave, Robert. The person selz.
ed saws he is a citizen of this State, and not
Robert. Before he is dragged of, our law
says this question must be settled. Ii he is
the person claimed, he must go in obedI-
euce to the law OF the Union, aud drag on,
his miserable existence IN slavery. II, how
ever, be is not the person claimed, but a
cuizen Of Vermont, lie shall not like au-
other Adam Gibson, be forced of TO hope
less servltude. The rights of our citizens
shall be maintained. Ii he IA slave, he
shall be faithfully given up, but if he is a
. citizen of our State aud not a slave, moth
lug IN the Constitution or laws of the I'm
ion requires that he should be delivered uI
/ to false claimants. 1t may be objected tina
the fugitive slave law provides for a specific
, method of trial. True, II does provide fo
, a single Commissioner-no a Court-wh'
may remand back fugitive to slavery fo
, life, but 1t gives him no power over tie fret
, cillzens Of our State. When our lury ha
, decided that question, the Conn isslone
/ can exercise his powers, ifthe person claim
: ed is identified. Our jury cannot eonside
= the abstract question of slavery, but wheih
, er this individual Is the Robert claimed.
, On both Of these points 1t is claimed
, that the law of our State embraces nothln
, at variance with The Constitution or laws q
! the Federal Government But If IN any re
} spect there is a collision, the people of Yer
mont will freely submit the question to tn
highest Judicial tribunal OF our land AM
cheerIully abide the decision. Ii the Su
, preme Court should decide that any Of th
provisions of this law are incompatible wit
, the laws of the United States, II Will un
doubtedly be repealed or modified but un
, al there is such a decision, all the storu
aud buster OF the South, aided by the \
Y. Herald and journal of Commerce, ah'
,ha,r ready echoes IN Rosio, will nr,Dabli