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

true thaI, IN the case OF a fugitive from
justice he is given into the custody of the
officers of justice with the bencficcnt pre-
sumption of the law in favor of his inno-
cehce until he shall have been duly con.
yicted, while in the case of the fugitive
from labor he is placed under the control
OF his claimant, to be carried back to the
State from which he is charged to have
lied, with no presumption in favor Of his
freedom, but this is, | think, more an ar
gument against the policy aud justice aud
humanity Of the law than against its Con
shtutIonailty. case might arise where
by false swearing and conspiracy. a free
man by the machinery of this law might
be snatched from his liberty and reduced
to the condition of slavery, until bv a
suitable proceeding he asserted and oh
tanned his freedom, but SO also by similar
means an innocent man may be carried
away, charged with crime and placed un-
der the necessity of vindicating his limo
cence in distant State
Upon the provisions of the Constitution
fugitives of both kinds. Judge
Story, IN his Commentaries on tie C0ll-
Statttt101, Up 677, sec t606.) says, 1t IS
obvious that these provisions for the ar
rest and removal of fugitives of both
classes, contemplate summary ministerial
proceedings, and not the ordinary course
of judicial Investigations, to ascertain
whether the complaint be well founded or
the claim of ownership be established be-
yond all legal controversy In cases of
suspected crimes the guilt or innocence
of the party is to be made out at his trial.
and not upon the preliminary inquiry
whether be shall be delivered up Al
that would seem In such cases to be ne
cessary Is that shere should be 23rln7a
tac1e evidence before the executive au-
thority to satisfy its Judgment that there
is probable cause to believe the party
guilty, such as upon an ordinary warrant
would justify his commitment for trial
And In the cases of fugitive slaves there
would seem to be the same necessity Of
requiring only prinaa facae proofs of own
ershIp, without putting the party to a
formal assertion of his rights by a suit at
law. Congress appears to have acted
upon this opinion, and accordingly in the
Statute upon this subject, have authorized
summary proceedings before a magistrate
upon which he may grant a warrant for
removal"
In SergeantS Constitutional Lar(chap-
ter 33, page 398) it is said From the
whole scope and tenor of the Constitution
and act of Congress, it sppears that this
fugitive is to be delivered up on a sum
mary proceeding without the delay of
formal trial IN a court of common law"
Assuming that the trainers of the Con-
Il L l.
slaves only, and that their object was to
secure the delivering up Of such fugitivcs
on cIalm of the owner or person to whom
the labor is due, it would seem obvious
that if a trial by jury may be insisted
upon the determination of the question
might be protracted in various ways so as
to defeat the very object Of the Constitu-
tional provision
As | have before remarked, this as well
as the preceding point which | have ad-
verted to- has occupied my serious attcn-
ton, because they involve vital and i'm
portant principles of no ordinary interest
to the people of this Union That the !!
priceless benefits of freedom should be I
surrounded by every safeguard and pro /
tccted from encroachment or invasion I
every man worthy to enjoy its blessings
must admit and in every relation of life (
we ought to contribute. not only to the (
preservation but to the exteusien of those /
blessings, but | am fully sensible that the /
duty of a judicial officer is to expound I
the law. not to make it, and to observe /
the distinction between the strict perform I
luee of what be may deem an imperative |
)ffiea. duty and the assertion of bis rights /
md privileges as a citizen in the advocacy f.
1f measures which be may consider essen (
-ial to the welfare or happiness Of his
country and his fellow man
There is one other point in this case.
md in my Judgment the only point es.
3ential to the disposition of tho case. and +
t Is that which relates to the validity Of
he commitment or process by virtue of
which the petitioner was detained BY the
United States Marshal 1t sets forth that
1t certain time and place. in this State /
he petitioner (Booth) unlawfully aided /
md assisted one Glover, held to service I
Nc., in the State of Missouri under the (
avs thereof, being the property of one
tarland. and having escaped from such
service into this State. to escape from tie
awful custody Of the Deputy Marshal of
he United States for the District Of Wis
cousin, Who had then aud there taken said
Jl0yer into his custody by virtue of
warrant issued by the Judge of the Uni
ed States for the said District, pursuant
% the act of Congress Of Sept l8. 1850
1t does not appear from this process
hat Glover was committed to the custody
If Mr. Cotton, the Deputy Marshal upon
.laim or claimant of any person whatever,
md for anything that appears this same
slower may have been committed By the
District Judge for some offence against
he United States, but the facts set forth
II the process would not in my judgment
constitute an offence within the z2ud sec
ion of the act Of Congress of 1899. The
'th section ct the act Of Septeub Der 18th.
$50 makes it an offence to aid or assist
person who has, upon proceeding under
bat act, been placed in the custody of a
'e-son legally authorized to detain him
,ut the process in this case does not show
hat Glover was so detained Ha NAV