Mineral Point tribune. [volume] (Mineral Point, Wis.) 1854-1858, 1854-06-15
Liberation of Mr. Booth.

We noticed some time since, that Mr.. Booth, of
the Free Democrat, who has been held TO bail on
charge of aiding in the rescue of Glover, had
been delivered up to the officers for the purpose
of testing the legality of his arrest, and the CON
stitutionaliy of the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850
| After careful examination of the case Judge
Smith, of the Supreme Court, has decided to dis
charge Mr. Booth We copy the following from
| the Milwaukee Sentinel which gives the leading
points in the opinion of Judge Smith, which is
quite too voumnous for our columns.
The following are the principal points raised by
defendants counsel, Messrs Paine & Watkins;
list. Congress has no constitutional power to
legislate for The reception of fgtves from labor,
al all, but the clause IN the Constitution, relating
/ to that subject, Is a article OF compact be-
tween the states; depending fer its observance en-
tirely on their integrity and good faith
I'd. Admitting that Congress has the power TO
! egisate still the law is unconstitutional, because
/ il provides that any person claimed fugitive,
snay be reduced 10 a state OF slavery without a
trial by jury.
3D. 1t is unconstitutional because it rests the
Judicial power OF the United States in Court Com
mssioners, who dependent officers, removable
al the pleasure of the Court and not receiving
fixed compensation, contrary TO the provision OF
/ the constitution, that The Judicial power OF the
United States shall be vested in Supreme Court
and IN such inferior courts as Congress may from
time 10 time ordain and establish. The Judges
/ both of the Supreme and iuieriCf Courts, shall
hold their Offices during good behavior and shall
| at stated times, receive Tor their services
pensation, which shall not be diminished during
! their continuation Office" Sec l, Art. 3, Con-
JUS.
Mr. Sharpsein replied by citing number of
authorities, sustaining the consttutionalIty of the
cd tho
on Wednesday list, and Judge Smith Yesterday
morning gave the decision which appears in
columns to-day, discharging the defendant from
the custody of the Marshal.
! The following is brief synopsis of the decis-
| ion, which trust will prevent no one from
reading the original 1t Is certainly very able
one founded on reason and justice, and believe,
/ good law. Such we confident, will be the
opinions expressed in relation TO it by all who do
not conceive 1t necessary, without examination, to
uphold every act of the Federal Government for
the AID and comfort of Slavery. We commend ii
1 to the careful pcrusal of readers.
His Honor first recites the form of the aaiiiilus
from the Commissioner by which the defendant
was held III custody, giving the fact of his surren-
der by his bail, &c. In the application for a writ
OF habeas corpus the petitioner alleges that he Is
illegally held, because lst, the Act OF $50 is void;
/ ID. Congress has authority to punish the act
/ of which be is charged; Sd, the Act Of 1850 in
violation OF the ordinance Of 1877, in Wisconsin,:
9Th, that the warrant is detective in describing Clio
yer as property instead OF -'person held to
service &c
/ The Judge thinks the petitioner to blame in not
having presented his petition before the bench OF
Justices of Supreme Court which he had two OPP
portunItes of doing. As the petition was made
10 him, however, 10y citizen OF the state. he had
no alternative but TO grant hearing.
! He holds that no &. S. Commissioner has
| right to itnprison a citizen OF the state by any
process which bars the State authorities from in
1 curing INTO his proceedings. That every citizen
has right to try every enactment of the egisIa
tive power by the fundamental law of the land,
and to resist unconstitutional enactments, though
I he does the latter at his peril
! After examining at length the law Of the u. 5.
and the writ, his Honor concludes that the latter
Is clearly defective and for that reason alone the
petitioner is entitled 10 his discharge.
! He then proceeds to examination of the
question of the constitutionality Of the Act of
/ $50, discussing the origin and history Of legis-
iatIon on the subject OF persons held To labor
service. He holds that this article merely
compact by the contracting parties TO the Consti-
tuition, By which the free states were to be bound
/ To provide legislation, under due course of law,
and after examination of facts, for the return OF
such persons but that power was conferred
! upon Congress to legIsate upon the matter, and
that it is the dpty OF the States to provide such
| legislation That the fact that Congress has no
power to punish State officers for refusing TO
provide such legislation, is proof that the mat
/ ter remains in form of compact. That it is
clear that Congress cannot consttuIionay act up
on this subject; while it is also clear that the
States cannot pass laws dischargng lugitiyes from
service All such laws must be void.
That the constitution coutemplates an exami-
nation into tie clam of Ire claimant Of the fugi
tive, TO be made where he Is by Prescriptions free,
/ while the Act of 1880 makes the decision
rant OF Judge or Commissioners Judgment in
/ fact, without trial or examination. That, in or
der to ascertain 10 whom such service or labor Is
duc, examination aGJ enquiry must be made
If service or labor IS due, the fugitive must be
given up; bat the Jact must be ascertaned
There is an issue of fact to be tried
The suit 10 try this fact, Is not suit in equity
or admiralty, and must be Al common law ; hence
a trial By Jury Is demanded properly.
The Act of Is5Dis unconstitutional in that it
violates the principles which forbids that persons
shall be deprived of liberty without due process
OF law The summary proceedings under this
act of 1880 clearly violate this provision. Up
on this point His Honor Is Justly emphatic.
/ He refers at length TO the varying sentiments
of the Court in the case of Prigg Is Pennsylvania
and thinks that, in view of the doubts thrown
around that case by the L. s. Judges themselves,
they ought to review their decision. He concludes
by suggesting that the strict performance of their
duties by the States and the federal Government,
and their confinement within their own limits, are
declares that IN his examination of this case he
has the consciousness OF having done his duty.
and his full duty; and though he may stand
alone, he hopes he may stand approved Of his God
as he does Of his own conscience
The following is tie form of the order of dis
charge:
Ia The matter Of the Petition Of SHERMAN NJ.
BOOTH for IIrt Of Hajeas Corpus. aud TO Be
discharged from Imprisonment.
This matter having been heard upon the peti-
ton ard return 10 the writ issued herein. and the
return of the respondent Stephen '. Il Alderman
thereto, and having been argued by counsel and
there appearing no sufficient cause or warrant for
the detention of the said sherman NJ. Booth and
no sufficient reason being shown why he should be
restrained OF his liberty by reason OF the Premises
or OF ANYTHING contained IN the return the said
writ of Habeas Corpus. or for any other cause: il
IS therefore hereby ordered. that the said Sherman
VI. Booth be. and he is hereby discharged from the
SAID imprisonment whereof he has complained,
and that he go hence. and at large, without dav
ID SMITH 1ysariyfr JsSfirr