The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1851-04-13

illegal officer within the meaning Of tin statute am
OF opinion Una, he Is notary public, ~ the nature
civilized states Is general certifying ofi>r, to the
written acts Of individuals intended to be u~ed in
other country than that where they are executed Ills
authority for this purpose does not depend upon the
cea law but upon the nature Of his Office understood
and admitted everywhere aud in this respect no dxs
essentially from many other magistrates the en- OF
Lord Kinnard " Lord ssltoun, Maddoxs Oh r. it
held, that deed is formerly executed in a foreign
country and the execution is authenticated by notary
prbhc this Ia sufficient proof to entitle il To be
tows. Il i not received without proof Of bis ot,ce
! f. the evidence which has been offered
here t. establish the right OF the claimant to remove
from this district TsomassSimas the prisoner at the br
Two propositions TO be Established afirmatvcy by
the claimant in every under this act. J. That
pcrsos owing sesyice labor to claimant escaped
the Stste where zach service labor due =
That the prisoner undes arrest is the who e
The statute sescrbes particular mode in which the
6rt Of these propositions may be proved although 1t
does not connc ahc claimant to that particular form OF
proof IT, howeycy, the claimant fit TO make Of
this mode Of provsng the f,t of escape by person
owing service the c,dence when put into the form
quired by the statute il conclusive Of that fact but of
nothing beyond IT, The scconh proposition snvoving
the identity Of the prisoner with the described to
have escaped remains 30 be proved ~ Independents and
satisfactory evidence ard Is open to oontestaon IS long
doubt can exist abort It,
The provision Of the statute which rrescrbcs the node
In which claimant may make this conelus,e proof Of
the fact of an escape by person owing service to an
has already been read.
1t Is not 1T all difficult to the reascr for the intro
ducon Of this provision into law designed to fur
nh eff, ctual remedy than the old for the
cption of fugitses from service. Congress evidently
considered that from the great extent of the Union there
mutt be vast mptudcs Of in which t~ owners OF
fugthes could not personally leave home send in
the witnesses be able to prove the fact that
one had capped who owed service. 1t was there
necessary to provision by which this fact
could be proved without transporting witnesses from
end Of tn. Union TO the other for the fact lies AZ
the foundation in every Of tho right to arrest and
rmoyc an all, ge Il fugitive.
This provision was madc the section above citad
and in my mind there j. great security to liberty in its
sha Argt aruhlr
safeguard to have judicial inquiry into the fact before
the claimant sets forth in pursuit. that some who
owed him service has escaped 1t has manifest ten
doncy to increase the diic ncs of setting fictitious
and unfounded claims IL furnishes to the tribunal in
free state called to make arrest the satifac.
tory assurance that tribunal Of the vicn .c
has verified the fact thai there certain slave, and
that that slave has escaped Any one VINO has hcin
called upon in free State TO ,ne 10 arrest
Of these fugtves must have felt the force aud value of
such a ycrfcation.
In the next place the statute by requiring the claim
ant to make description OF the psrson who he has
escaped and by requiring that description to be made
mster Of record has furnished to tho tribunals in free
state. making arrest, additional safeguard against
imposition mistake. A written description, made
with all the convenient certainty that the admits
Of and made too IT time and place. when and where
the claimant cannot nicely adapt to the exgcnceS Of
the arrest which he intends To MAKE placed before the
court or commissioner here. the very ground work
a the In the third place, the statute, by making
the record conclusive Of the fact OF and that the
service o the party escaping was due to the claimant
makes the recorded description also conclusive. The
claimant cannot alter it, or amend it, by making one
hand and TO that record he l. bound. he pre-
spnts IL 10 the commits lie bring the person
arrested within that description to the satisfaction OF
the mind Of the commissioner, by competent and inde
pnden proof by the opportunities Of inspection ex-
animation, and comparison or he fails to make out ms
on the other hand the making tho record conclu-
sve TO the description 81 the party who has escaped,
work prejudice TO the party arreedi for II he Is
party intended be described IL ~ Of
qucnee to him whether the description be strictly
rate not and IL he L. the party intended to be rs
of his escape Whatever others may say, think,
therefore OF this provision the statute feel quite
confident that there Il right minded man in this
country who has been, l. likely to BE-, called To
indcial duties under IL and who fclt
will not be likely to fee nexprcssibe satisfaction
and relief TINT the law has been made In this particu-
lar what II H.
Let me suppose for a moment, that the statute had
provided such record, that being provided IL
not rrsortcd TO, but witnesses sent here to
tablish both the propositions which are involved in the
-sue In the first place the warrant must be granted
without any errssn,y that the first proposition viz,
that there certain slave aud that hs has escaped
be established. In the next place, thr witnesses
who Ia establish this proposition are ako u swear
to the id nifty Of the arrested; and they tcs
tiiy to both propositions after The arrest has boon
made IL u manifest that under this form of proceed
ing. the opportunities for perjury and misrpfcen
ton in e their Infinite variety of shades are vastly Ia
crcafed.
There no check upon the witnesses the question
Of identity because there is standard to which that
question he brought The witnesses may adapt their
description of the party whom they they knew a.
slave To the 0f the party under arrest; they
may do vfully unoon.ciousy but whether Il i
done frcm corrupt design from the mere eject OF ca
gorncSs or zeal rs very easy 70 that In nice
critical question of identity the dangers that would
arss from the blending of both the propositions into
one might be appalling lIut the statute ha- provided
a fmm ~ preceding which keeps these Propositions
clearly and logically distinct and makes the one
dcgrcc check upon the othcr aud as this l. the
most convenient friu ~ proceeding Tor the claimant
there j. every reason TO expect a. there certainly "
hope that II will generally VI not unisernoily be re-.
sorted to
In the en- 80 before me- the agent of the claimant has
pfesented to the transcript of record duly author
ticated made lv and before the lion Henry ~ Jack
son Judge ~ The superior Court II the Eastern DE-
trict of the state III cra from which Il appears that
on ar about the 2l day IL February att one Thoina.
Simns s-eaped from the state of Georgia while 0wing
seiyice or labor to iamrs Potter the claimant The
e,,d also contains a deseription a, tho said Thomas
Simms which il i nos necessary to raciie This branch
n the enquiry IL Therefore fuuy madc ott namely that
there was =. r,an Fcrsen NAMED Thomas simms. who