Mineral Point tribune. [volume] (Mineral Point, Wis.) 1854-1858, 1854-08-09


pronounce legislative enactment void
because unconstitutional, and | am there-
fore unable 10 concur in the opinion that
This law is Unconstitutional.
shall briefly state my views upon these
questions. The 9TH section of the act of
Congress of September Is, 1850. provides
that certain commissioners appointed by
the federal and territorial courts. " shall
have concurrent jurisdiction with the iudg-
es OF the Circuit and District Courts of the
States IN their respective circuits and
districts within the several States. and the
Judges OF the superior courts of the terri
tories, severally and collectively. in term
time and vacation, and shall grant certifi
Gates to such claimants upon satisfactory
proof being made. with authority to take
and remove sush fugitives from service or
labor, under the restrictions herein con-
tanned to the State or territory from which
such persons may have escaped or fled -
10 my mind, the granting of these GER
tlhcates, upon satisfactory proof being
made" looks very like the exercise of iu-
dlclal functions, because although the
granting of the certificate is merely a
ministerial act yet the determination up
on the suflicency of the proof would seem
to involve judicial power And in this
connection it is urged, that Congress can
not confer judicial power otherwise than
IN accordance with section |. of article 5
OF the Constitution Of the u. S. which
contemplates Courts only, the Judges of
which shall hold their Offices during good
behaviour, and shall from time to time re-
celve a compensation or salary for their
services Now it is evident, that these
Commissioners are not Judges. nor can
Ithey hold or compose C01lJfS within the
meaning of this section of the Constitution.
for they hold their appointment atthe will
OF the Court appointing Them and are not
liable 20 impeachment But The judges of
several of the territories of The T. s., who
hold their appointment from the Presi-
dent are noe appointed 10 hold during
good behaviour; and, if [ am not mis-
Etaken, There is no instance of Eheir having
been held liable 10 peachment-at least
Ithat they are noz so liable, has been ad
vanced by an Attorney General of the
United States.
IL is said, territorial judges are appoint
ed under the power given TO Congress by
the second clause of section 5, of article
4 of The Constitution, on The ground that
The establishment Of a judiciary for the
territories, is necessary incident 10 the
acquisition of territory, and the power to
make all useful rules and regulations for
those territories, but if the power to leg
islate upon the subject of fugitives from
labor be vested in Congress, il would seem
that the performance of judicial acts might
be vested in other than Judges or Courts,
under the Constitutional provision (arti
Gle Sapfiou / \ cucb
case of newly organized Territories
But il has been repeatedly held, thai
where, by an act Of Congress. STATE Couts
or magistrates, are authorized 20 perform
acts OF judicial character arising out of
fhe acts OF Congress. they may lawfully do
so, If not prohibited by the STATE law
Now if judicial power can be conferred
by congress upon others than courts or
judicial officers known to the constitution.
/ 1t seems to me that it can make little diff
ference whether the power be vested in
State court or officer, or in a commission
er or officer of the United States who is
not judicial officer In either case the
power Is vested in tribunal or officer
not court or judge contemplated By the
clause of the constitution referred to.
| But there certainly is degree of force
IN the objection that the power to hear
and determine complaints and summary
applications which may and often do in
volve important rights of personal liberty
and require the exercise of much profes-
slonal experience and wisdom. ought not
/ to be vested in the class of officers who
are knowD as commissioners of the feder-
al courts, who hold their office at the pleas
ure of the courts, and although in many
instances gentlemen of acknowledged a
| bllIty fill these offices yet this of Itself af
| fords no complete answers to the objec
ton.
Without further remark on this point /,
proceed to the question of the right of the |
alledged fugitive to have the fact of owing
service or labor ascertained by the verdict
of jury
The right Of trial by jury is highly and
justly esteemed, and is expressly protect /
ed and preserved by our State Constitu
ton, and it cannot be denied that this /
/ right extends to all persons within the
State regardless of color, and to the fugi /
! tive from labor or slavery as to the free
man. in all that relates to or effects his (
! life, liberty or property: subject 10 the sew
eral provisions of the constitution Of the /
I. S. But suppose that demand by the
Executive Of any other States Of this I
Union upon the Governor Of this State 1
has been made, to surrender any citizen, (
whether he be white or black, upon a charge
Of felony committed in the State from
which the requlsltIOn comes. 1t may be .
that as in the case of an uufoundcd claim /
upon the labor and service Of the alledged i
fugitive slave, the person demanded as
I fu frnr, 1uStIca ottuht mt ~ no n
livered over, and yet if the requisition be |
in due form of law and accompanied by +
the proper evidence, that the person is /
charged with the offence, the right Of trial I
of the fact is not afforded to him here, but /
he is apprehended, deprived of his liberty, +
and transported to another aud perhaps a /
distant State for trial Could this be 1
done except by virtue of provision of .