Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1853-09-15
Slave Case-Judge MoLean's
Opinion.

| In the late slave case, heard aud derrmin-
ed by Judge Mclean, of the United States
Supreme Cours, at Cincinnati the facts of
the case being clearly in favor of the claim
ant, defence was taken by the counsel for
the fugitive, on certain law points, which
the Judge ruled against them. From the
reported opinion we quote:
at has been urged that it has not been proved
that Kentucky was savehoIdlng State Judges
the Supreme Court OF the United States rec
ognlze the laws Of all the States,as do the State
Courts the laws OF each country. The jnrlsdlc-
ton of the supreme Court of the United States
extends throughout the Uuon and into the Ter
rltories. Its Judges are presumed TO know
the laws of each State, and the extent OF State
jurisdiction. do not say that such would be
the rule were this examination before a State
Judge, or Commissioner Of the UDted States
"IG many of the States a special law has
been passed, recognizing the statute laws OF
other States. In such cases. nothing more than
an exhibition OF the statute law would be neces
sary. But where trial like this Is had in
State where no such provision exists, the State
Judge, and perhaps the Commissioner might re-
qulre legal proof OF the existence OF slavery IN
the State where the claimants resided. But this
Is not necessary before Judge of Court whose
Jurisdiction Is commensurate with the whole
counlry Kentucky IS known to be slave
State"
Incidental to the argument Of another
point, the Judge said
ut has been claimed that the STAKEHOLDER had
the right to take his slave INTO the Territories
where it was not legaIized. and where long
usage had not sanctioned the institution Usage
constitutes law, after sufficient lapse Of time.
But the Supreme Court has decided the clam to
be without foundation. Slavery exists only by
local law"
On the constitu,ionality of the Fugitive
Slave Laws of 1893 and lS50-,hat is, on
the power of Congress to eglsIate upon the
subject. he says:
81 will refer to the Judicial authority that
has recognized the power of Congress to enact
laws providing Tor the return OF fugilives from
labor. In the case OF Prigg Us. the State of Pa,
the Judges Of the Supreme Court decided,
without dissent, that Congress had the power TO
legislate OIL this subject. Some of the Judges
thought the States had right to legisate on the
decision that Congress had the power to adopt
he law of l793-the law OF 1850 was not then
enacted.
"The Supreme Court of every State in the
Union. before which the question has been rais-
ed has recognized the same power in Congress.
AT an early period in the history Of Massachu-
setts and possibly in other States, though it has
not attracted my attention, this doctrine NAV
have been doubted; but it has since been af.
frmed, and no court OF respectable standing
now doubts it,"
This construction he enforces, or endea.
vors to enforce, by the fact that "those
who enacted the law of 1893 were not 10
norant of any of the provisions Of the Con.
sti,ution for they had been scanned with
great ability, and especially in Virginia"
This, It seems to us, is giving too much
effect to contempnraneous construction by
authorities not Judicial, nor, as it has ap.
peared since in this matter. altogether Judi
cous. The act of 1893 conferred upen
the State magistrates power to hear and de-
termne fugitive slave cases But it has
since been decided, over aud over again BY
State tribunals, that Congress cannot give
jurisdiction to State Courts or magistrates
10 any matter, and especially cannot CON-
pei them to accept it. The Prigg case il
self asserts this doctrine; and the Fugitive