Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1855-02-17
FURTHER OF THE BOOTH CASE.

rounds on which the Supreme Court OF Wisconsin,
ischargcd Booth and Ryrecraft from the sentence
f the Federal court. Earnestly have we hoped that
he decision was made, not on some incidental ques-
ion or some i%nformality of proceedings but that is
,ue had been m~anfully joined with the Federal'Gov-
resisting the authority of the act of 1850,
IN the ground Of its unconstitutionality and inner
mt injustice. Resistance to the usurpati5n on
radical ground would indicate q thoroughness
IF purpose to defend the rights of citizens and
COMPEL respect for the laws and constitution Of
The State favorable to liberty.
We have not yet seen the opinion of the Court on
the trial itself, We see it stated, that Judge Smith,
formerly gave the opinion that the fugitive
act was unconstitutional, affirmed that the writ
Of habeas corpus was n right which Congress could
not abridge or suspend. Judge Wilton concured
with Judge Smith, and Chief Justice Crawford de-
clared that the prisoners had committed no offence
according to the record, over which the Federal
Court had any jurisdiction.
The journal published at Madison, says, that
on announcing the decision to grant the writ, Chief
Justice Wilton remarked
"That they had decided to grant the prayer of
the petitioners, and that the grounds for his decis-
ion would be given in his opinion after the trial.
Justice Crawford, who dissented from the decision
declaring the Flu gitive Slave Act unconstitutior al,
pronounced last summer, said that assuming that
Act to be constitutional, the petitioners were cnti-
tied to a writ Of labeas Corpus, since no crime
was alleged in the indictment under which they
were convicted. Justice Smith took a still more
decided stand and declared the Fugitive Slave Act
unconstitutional and therefore void, and that
no indictment could lay under it.
Thus it seems that the Supreme Court does not
fnltor arl thut Yn frp Hplpr IN man ,nf1 ppp,n tN
the Free State of Wisconsin and expect to reclaim
his fugitive human chattels under the Act of 1850.
When an representation of high-bOrn southern arts
tocracy comes along, and tells us that such a man
is his propriety, that he has neglected to bring his
bloodhounds with him, or do not think it essential
since the act referred to, and that we must supply
the deficiency by hunting the fugitive ourselves,
we can reply, as thy servant q dog to do this
thing?" and in fact can plumply refuse without
ourselves liable to either fine or impris-
This is a great privileges in "the land of
the free and the home of the brave" 1t is not en-
joyed in many states; and for it we are indebted
to a fearless independent, heightened Supreme
Bench. All honor to our Supreme Court. Its
course will receive not only the warm appreciation
of the people of this State, but of every liberty
loving citizen of the nation.
AS regards the costs of the Suits to Messrs.
Booth and Ryecraft, even if Judge Miller shall
not fno means to collect the fines and costs, still
there remains q heavy bill to pay, which the ADO
litiOnists of the country ought to meet promptly.
On this point Mr.. Booth says:
The question Is so frequently asked, how
much will you have to pay, if the fine is remit
ted by the action of the Supreme Court, that we
answer, our whole expenses, if our counsel
are properly paid for their services, will be One
Thousand Dollars. We have bad six trials-one
before Judge Smith, two before Judge Miller, Zone
before and one after our convictionl and two be-
fore our Supreme Court, besides Clerks fees and
copying of records. And in addition to all these,
we have spent three months time.
What Mr.. Ryecrafts expenses have been we
know not, but they must be, we presume, half
as much more. And he has another suit, for the
same %otfense, to be tried in the Circuit Court, and
we another in Judge Miller's Court, and q civil
action, for the value of the slave, the judgement
for which we are again convicted, is One Thou
sand Dollars and costs.
Mr.. Sloan's case toe ought not to be forgotten
by the Abolitionists of Ohio. Cent buttons should
be raised in every anti-slavery neighborhood and
divided between these prosecuted representatives Of
the anti-slavery sentiment of the country. The
contributions need not belarge, but they should
he general. -
From the ~Pittsburg Dispatch.
THE WISCONSIN DEcIsIoN.-We have received
tllC -lllh I'tI NFhSt VI nv
days getting herewith a notice Of the recent de
cision Of the Supreme Court of that State, dischar
ging the editor Of that paper, and another person
from Imprisonment under Il sentence of the UniteC
States Court, on an indictment for violating TIT
Fugitive Slave Act of 1850. The Judges deliver
ed separate opinions. Justice Crawford, while ad
herring to his opinions of last summer, in favor 0
the co lstitutionality of the Fugitive Act of 1850
gave an able opinion, affirming the insutiiciency o
the indictment to warrant an Imprisonment, be
cause it charged them with no offence known tt
the laws of any State, or of the United States
that, us the indictment did not aver that Joshui
Glover acds a fugitive slave, it was the same as i
it was alleged that they had aided in the rescue o
Joshua Glover, a free citizen of Wisconsin, ant
that the sentence of Judge Miller, under the in
dictment, was as truely Il nullity as if he had sen
+ fenced them arbitrarily, without conviction, wit
out trial, and without even notice that they wer
charged with an offence. And in this opinion G
Justice Crawford, all The members Of The Court co,
Cured.
Chief Justice Wilton affirmed his former opir
ion, that the Act was unconstitutional, because
denied the writ Of Uabeas Corpus and the right {
trial by jury. lie also took the ground that a La
might be unconstitutional in soma part, and COZ
stitutlonal in other parts, so that a conviction migE
legally taxi place under it, but whether this wa
such a case he would not inquire. 1t was sul
cient to rest the discharge on the grounds afirme
by Justice Crawford
Justice OHiltH HhNea lOHp anu very uDIe opllloI
[ affirming all he had said in his first opinion, deny
-, ing the power of Congress tic legislate on the sui
iect, reviewing the whole question of State sove
J eighty and State Rights, affirming the power of tn
n State Courts to enforce the writ of lIabeas Corpu
O upon United States Officers, and to inquire int
+ the legality of the proceedings of the FEEDERS
Courts as freely as into the proceedings of an
Court. lie denied the appellate jurisdiction
r the United States Supreme Court to review and I
a verse the decision of the Supreme Court of a Stat
p for if the United States Supreme Court may ann
: the decision of a State Supreme Court, State so
o ~ereignty is a sham, and our citizens have 10 prote
ton against the encroachments of the Federal Go
ernment-no barrier against Federal centralizatiC
. and consolidation.
The prisoners were ordered to be d~ischarg'
{ from custody. OF course, all the other indie
II ments, (six in number if drawn in the same ma
ner, as we presume they are, come under the d
solving touch of this decision of the SupTen
Court. Booth says the United States District A
" torney declares his readiness to back up Jud
&c Miller in his sentence, and swears that we will y
VI have to serve out our time, and that if he W