Carroll free press. [volume] (Carrollton [Ohio]) 1834-1861, 1855-04-05

tae order OF FenoeTy, and remained there un
Ill Monday morning, the R6th, when on appli-
cation o. her friends, writ Of habeas corpus
was allowed BY Judge Parker, Of the Court of
Common Pleas, rstumsble forthwith. 10 ODE.
dienee TO which she was brought into Court
Mr. Denp'sOn not being present, his attorney
requested that the case might be adjourned
until ihs next morning, which was done Mr..
Chase, on behalf Of the girl, requested that she
be not sent back to jail, so lodging was OBJ
Eained for her at the Woodruff House. The
case was heard by Judge Parker. ard able ar.
gumsnts we're made By Mr.. Chase aud Mr.
Walker.
On Thursday morning. Judge Parker reu.
dered bis decision declaring the warrant de.
feetiye, aud discharging the girl. An order
was granted directing the release Of the girl
from the custody Of the U. s. Marshal, and res.
tOling her to Mr. Van sIyke, Der Guardian.
i In the meantime, Rev DennisOn, fled A neg
affidavit ksfore Commissioner Penderv, and a
new warrant was Issued. With this warrant
Robinson re-arrssted her after she had been
restored to Van Slyke at the Woodruff House.
J Mr.. Robinson appeared on the balcony of the
house and said
Fellow Citizens In the name and by the
authority Of the United States, /, as United
States Marshal Of the Southern district of Ohio,
command each good citizen to keep the peace
: and insure my protection.
! The girl was taken before Commissioner
Pendery and the case was argued at length. -
He took the case under advisenent until Tues.
day following (lsst Tuesdpy
On Friday last Judge Walker appeared in
Judge Parker's Court, and asked that an at
taehment be lssred for the bodies Of II, II.
Robinson The Marshal and Rev Deuuison for
contemPt Of the order Of Court in sei-
zng .de girl when she was placed in the hands
81 her guardian by order ofsaid Court Ketch-
. um, d Chambers and Wolff of Louisville an.
: peared for defendants The attorney for Mr..
> Van Syke, then made application for another
writ OF Habeas Corpus, and the court anpoun-
ced that under the "rule"the trial fer contempt
would commence on Saturday morning.
Senator Pugh appeared for the u. S. Mar
shal-denouncDg the granting Of the writ Of
D babeas corpus, and declared that no contempt
had been co mmtted that Rosetta had been
set at liberty by the Court and delivered to
her uardian that there its authority ended,
: u moved the Court to quash the rule before is
! sued against him in this instance, which motion
was overruled by the Court. So on Satur day
the responses Of the U S. Marshal Robinson
and Rev Mr.. Deunison were read The first
motion was tc arrest these two persons for con-
; tempt, tho second for new writ of habeas cor.
D pus. Chase and Walker addressed the Court.
/. The case was taken under advisement until
Monday last. What is the result in either case
We have not learned.
The case of this girl, Rosetta, presents sew
I eral points worthy attention, which are clearly
Q set forth in the following, which We clip from
( the o. S Journal:
g The seizure of the girl by the Marshal on
the warrant of the U s Commissioners after
> such,wsrrant was declared by competent
n tribunal defective, brings up the question oi
n jurisdiction between the u States aud the State
|. of Ohio And what is volved in this issue:
Plainly this: whether the Laws aud Courts,
q and the Ministers of the Law OF the State oil
u Ohio, have any independent power within her
o own borders or, whether she holds her exls
r. tenCe in suhserviency to the laws Of Congress
!. and the officers created under them, without
righttO to question their acts, or 20 interfere fol
=" the protection of her own cilizens.
Let it be borne in mind, the question is MOI
! whether the Laws, or the Courts of the U
q States acting under constitutional law, have
any power in Ohio; But, whether the Laws
and Courts Of Ohio, not contravening the con,
stitution Of the U. States, have any power or
, vitality within her own borders, as against Of
ficers of the United States.
The writ Of Habeas Corpus is the Citizens
Writ Of Right, and stands next to the 0ousti.
: tution in sacredness. There can be no ques.
: ton but that this wra was rightfully issued in
r the case of Rosetta. The warrant issued
0 by the U. s, Commissioner, an officer possess.
= ing no power to sit in judgment on the decis
ions Of any court deriving his authority solely
under the act called the fugitive law--was. by
! a competent tribunal, pronounced defective -
! The prisoner is released What follows9 This
defective warrant, no better after this decision
than blank pece Of paper, is, in the hands OF
the u. s. Marshal, held over anI above the
> decision OF the state COurt--Setting at defiance
.. State authority, and overriding the writ of ha
beas corpus by violence
. The question whether the girl was or was
not a Slave. does not come up The warrant
under which she was arrested did not comply
with the requirements of the fugitive law and.
outside of this law, neither the Commissioner or
the Marshal had any power in the premises.
Now, the point we wish to bring to the con
slderAtion of the People of Ohio is this: Wheth.
er they can, or will. submit to have the decis-
ions OF their State Courts trodden under foot by
u Uffcers Of the United States, sitting in sjudg-
ment in their own cases. We make no appeal
= to passion. We address ourselves to the sober
= judgment and common sense of the People
II this may be done in one case, 1t may be done
;; in another. II the benefit of habess corpus be
denied to the lowest, it may be denied to the
; highest 1.-THE power and dignity ofthe State
4 Of Ohio may be set at defiance by u 8.
Marshal, what is to restrain any and all of the
D minions of the Federal Government in our
: midst from denying any authority but that Of
the Federal Courts? These questions are fair
Is ones, and must be answered.
4 A law granting this kind Of immunity was