Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1851-05-22

legisate IN all cases, where they are not express
" prohibited, or by necessary implication, the
claim for the states TO legslate is mainly advo-
Gated on the ground tina; they are bound to pro-
tect free blacks and persons of color residing in
them from being carried into slavery bv any sum
mary process The answer to this is, that iegis-
laiion may be confnedto thai end and be made ef-
.feetudi tcithom making such a remedy applicable
10 fugitive siores. There is no propricty IN maxi
ing remedy to protect those who free the
probable means Of freeing those who are not So
10 Peters, $50
Judge Wayne had in preceding paragraph
denied the right of the state to try The he of the
master, which we have fully conceded. That
pertains to the authority which is to deliver up,
when the title is shown-that is, to federal au-
thority. But Judge Wayne sustains fully all
that we contend for: the states are bound 10
protect free blacks and persons Qrcolor residing in
them from being carried into siarery by any sum
mary process" Vermont has acted upon that Oh
legation The states may legislate for that pur-
pose. That legislation may Be confined 10 That
end. aud be made eeeciuaI, tcithout making such a
remedy applicable to fugitive siaves" Most com
Petely does that description apply to the act Of
Vermont; It is confined to that very purpose; it
IS not "appcable to fugitive slaves bit in It's
very terms to the Z" inhabitants" Of the s,ate-the
inhabitants who are presumed 10 be free men, not
slaves. Judge Wayne is a prophet: the act Of
Vermont confirms that distinction to him beyond
peradventure. Had he the gift of second
sight" and scanned the habeas corpus act. il
strikes US that he could hardly have improved his
description of it. We think it safe to abide on
these authorities.
Objections briefly anseered.
First let US notice an objection of the Union
Hhg-the only one, we think, which is not en-
tirely swept away by the positions which have
already been established. The objection is,
that though the Vermont act is limited to "inhab-
itants" of Vermont, yet the habeas corpus may
be issued in every case-m fact in the case of
a fugitive slave. We answer-lst. this Is not
certain. Were 1t admitted that the person in
arrest is fugitive slave, the Judge might de-
cline to grant the writ. That was the very
course taken by the Supreme Court of Massa-
chusetts IN the case of Simms ID, if the writ
should be granted in such case, the Judge must
io''iu '''V 'i' "i'eli u'e 'a'' u'"' ne Is 'ug'
tive slave appears 3D., if it is not admitted that
the man is fugitive slave the writ of habeas
corpus mist be granted. The Wing objects that
sun tue man may Dc 'ugi'Yo SlNe' ana 'here-
.o'e not "'lllh STATE Iu'lsu'c'loh' certainly :;
but that must be shoicn before state jurisdiction
Ia excluded. Il is in fact the only thing which
is 70 be shown Judge Mel can well stated the
principe Jana Sood zeal ihore'i IN MS OPINION
III '''e erigs case'
ile presumption IN hon-Sl'Nenoiuing Sta'e
,be freedom, If H. norson he claims rb,s nro'
sumption may be rebutted but until it is rebuff
ted, by the proof required by the act OF l193,
anu also, IN my luuglnehl y "e onstt"lon,
nbeveJ 1.-THE rirbt oftbe master nnder tba me-,
of Congress is "quatfed and limited TO The sub
jeci for tchich II 'cds made. y" The presumption
ol iie Sea'e ''as u'e og'ofeu man Is re may ge
r,,,l, in oroyirt II m, ,oa,, mo, tho asser,io,
Of the master be erroneous also and if so. how
Is his act of force to be remededG The colored
person Is taheh' ana iorcloiy cohVeyeu peyohu
ina. o,,ibor;-,j ,ts ant NJ co,es. no.. he Ca
siitldion. man be prohibited by HE State
Thus This objection falls and also another
plansble and sonewha, popnlar one with onpo-
nen,. of tl,e Vermont act "a wit. hat gtgfe opd
EIeral i,risJ.eiion clash. There Is no real clash
of jurisdiction. The purpose OF the habeas cor
ms il s;o,nv n se,le the f,ct ,ytheher r. ease haze
,,rs., ,ob;cb 3, ,,yb;n erc,,,;rs f,i.,cl ;,;.3c-
ton7 lin has arisen the stnte eourt Yields
and re,pords the nrisoner There i n he sure
an interference with federal ontbor;tv So far as
10 take the prisoner from its nossession for the
r,,roosa Of sa,t,iro, tho fart Of =, uc,sa- F.1srI
authority. too nav he excluded from further A.
tocb;ng fex,on, bv writ If error IN the Sonrep,o
Conr, hv discb,rcs IF tbc nriso,or e bo 10
-.
-" oa'e p"' ''''' "apPenS' or may naPPeh
IN erery case OF habeas corpus, where the person
is detained by warrant OF one court and taken
ant nv writ of habeas cornns fro,o another If
IL
'''s oUjecuon proves d'y''''g' '"en' proves 100
inuch; It would totally abolish the right Of ha-
beas corpus in every case where a man is under
,rros, nv order of n court Indeed we do NOT
H. sh;o.,;,., Ill 49,, IN, 60.
-, -. :,
a. IN, -.
- 49, - 'D,' =.