The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1853-11-24
FEDERAL AND STATE RELATIONS.

Our readers have not forgotten the case of
John Freeman, a colored man, residing at In.
dianapos, who was seized last January by
Pleasant Ellington, Of the State of Missouri, as
his fugitive slave. The claimant was so conf
dent and vindctive, that he not only refused
bail for Freeman, but rejected all propositions
of purchase at any price, should it turn out
that the man was his slave. Two months af-
forwards proof was produced that Freeman
was not slave. Being discharged, he COM
menced suit against the Marshal, John l.. Rob-
inson, for malieasance in the premises There
upon, Senator Bright submits the case to the
Secretary of the Interior, propoundIng two in.
quiries:
/. Whether the case can be transferred from
the Courts of the State of Indiana to those of
the United States? And
2. Whether the Marshal may be authorized
to employ counsel in his defence at the charge
of the United States!
The Secretary refers the subject to the At
torney General who, in letter to the Pres-
dent, dated l4th instant and published in the
Washington Union on the 10th, is of opinion
that the case cannot under any existing pro.
visions Of law, abe removed to the Courts of the
United States, although it may be made the
subject of revision there" AS to the second
point, he is of opinion that it would be proper
for the President to authorize counsel, at the
public charge for the defence of the marshal"
The right of the President to do 80 is emphat-
ically affirmed but whether he shall exercise
the right or not in every case, is for his own
judgment to determine.
81 shall not attempt to lay down any gen
eral rule of Executive discretion in such cases,
for the reason already minated, that this dis
erection must of necessity be guided by the par
ticular circumstances. But questions in the ex.
ecution of laws which affect the relation of the
United States to foreign Governments, or the
relations of the States between themselves, or
them and the Federal Government, may, it
seems to me, call occasionally for the employ
ment of counsel in behalf of the ministerial Of
fccrs of the United States whose official acts
are in controversy.
sin fact, the Government of the United States
acts in the domestic affairs of the country chief
ly through its judicial and ministerial officers.
Attack on them while administering the laws,
80 as thus to render acts of Congress ineffective,
is the first step, as all tho history of the coun-
try indicates, in the progress OF insurrection !;
and the defence of those officers, in such contin-
gencies is the defence Of the integrity and sta
bility of the Government. (See United States
Us Vigol ii Dallas, GAG; United States Us.
Mitchell, ii Dallas, PAS; United States Us. Fries,
pamph. Phil, 1900; Shay's case, Mnot's His
| tnry &c ho In -, al ttol
I'll think the class of cases, of which the
present IL 0ne belong to the same category in
their nature, and in their relation of import
ance to the public welfare and to the duty Of
the President: seeing that the faithful execu-
ton of the acts of Congress for the inter. State
extraditon of fugitives from service, in the face
Of organized combinations TO defeat or resist
that execution, and to harass those engaged in
il by vexatious suits or other unlawful or I'M
Just contrivanccs, is plainly essential to the
peace of the country and the safety of the
Union.
There is recent provision Of law which
expressly recognises the power oil the Presidcn,
in the premises. Ii liz the act of August 81
1852 CHI. 1903 8. | /, which enacts, That where
the ministerial officers Of the United States have
or shall incur extraordinary expenses in exc.
cutting the laws thereof the payment of which
Is not specifically provided for, the President OF
the United States is authorized TO allow the
payment thereof under the special taxation Of
the district or circuit court Of the district in
which the said services have been or shall be
rendered to be paid from the appropriation for
defrayng the expenses Of the judiciary lSes-
sion Laws, ls5l-'52, p 99) For aught can
sec to the contrary, this provision Of law is d.
recty applicable to the subiectmatter and
was designed to be so by Congress
u advise therefore, that the authority pray
cd for be, under suitable regulation, given in
this case to the Marshal
Well, We suppose the law must be reyerenced,