Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1853-11-05
WHOLE NO. 422.

lf I'll is h's meani 4 Il is m ,nstfous and II u
be not his meaning, reasonable reward VIII bu
paid to any one who will inform us what he docs
mean. The act Of Congress 70 which the learned
Judge refers for his Justification has nothing 70 do
with tho case before him-and, with the inscrprcfar
ton he has given It, it would be utterly subversivs
pf tho Constitution. and the sacred rights Of 0hs
Statcg. If an officer, holding warrant from the
United States--comn'its murder while executing ii,
IN Ponnsy sylvania-is that an act done in pursennte
Of his warnnt7 Is a United Sta,os jude TO boar
"a the case FROM the State nu,hortics--and ds-
charge the offenders from process--and encoura>s
l repetition Of offences Which he has no power 70
try. l' not this degrading, and trempling upon
State rights? Il II not to he supposed that that tho
State Tribunals are competent to all the purposc
Law and Justice II these men were justified
uudcrthcr warraut--had warrant and announced
their warrant and acted within its limits--in other
words, I'7suef it, would It not have been secure
reliance before a competent Court2 And was nod
Judge Gricr bound 30 TO consider ti Why then
should he throwing out slurs upon every jurisdie-
ton but his own. issue habeas corus, when war
rant had issued by State Magistrate, before and
hearing hal taken place-thereby defeating all 10
Ultimate iuqrry?
The learned Judge SAYS that tic United States
has but limited authority. That IL true; but by
djnt of implication and construction, he reuders
ihat authority illimitable and tramples down the
rights constitutionay vested in the States. He
cannot deny the doctrine tn what her States haNo
not given, they have reserved. Will be show when
or whore The States have given any such authority
rs hc claimsl Congress have never given IT, and
have Constitutional right TO give Il. II this a.
sumption of power on the part Of federal Judge
be allowed State rights are entirely merged and
lost whenever ey come in contact with the United
States assumption and this in civil as well ns crim-
inGl matters. Suppose, for instance the Marshal
and his men should be arrested on a cap.as from
the Supreme Court of the State Of PENNSYLVANIA
under acatur Of bail on $4,000, and the defen.
dauts for want of bail. were imprisoned would
Judge Grior the ground that the defendants were
hor officers and were acting in pursuance Of q
United States warrant undertake to grant habeAs
corpus-to 20 behind her arrest-to allow tho pfie-
oncrs to become witnesses-to exclude all testimony
on the part Of the plaintiff perhaps to refuse 70
hear his counsel, and to discharge the defendants
from confinement; nay notonly this but TO threaten
the Supreme Court, and all subordinatcs with pun
ishment for having ntorferod with his officers -
nay, not only this, but to threaten 10 write TO the
District Attorney Of Luzcrnc county, and request
him to proceed against one or all of the witnesses
for perjury. -r
The obligations Of Judge Grier are sufficiently
onerOus; he has occasion to incrcse their weighs,
nor has he any excuse for doing so. There rs not
n Southern Judge in the Union that would venture
upon the measures which he has adopted Even
men who are opposed 10 abolition are shocked, as
has been truly said, "by an avowel Of sentiments
which, even in 1873, would have found no defeud-