Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1857-07-04
AFTERNOON SESSION.
MIR. NALANDINGHAM'S ARGUMENT.

MIR, NALANDlNGHAM'S ARGUMENT.
Mr.. N~allandigham said that. first, admitting
the constitutionality Of tho law under which the
writ for the arrest Of the Marshal was issued, and
the right Of the Probate Judge Of Champaign
county to issue it he should insist that the Mar
shals had u right to resist its execution.
The only question was did they use any excess
Of force more than roaming the prisoners in their
custody required. IL they had, they could not
claim the protection of the U. 5. The testimony
on this point had been examined by those who
had pececded him, and lie could only say that 20
him the evidence showed they had used no excess
of resistance. The resistance they might use, If
requisite, extended to taking life. lie cited the
case Of CT pd1te jenkins, when there was not only
shooting but killing, and yet Judges Grier and
Kane had both dismissed the case, deciding that
no more force was used than the exigencies of the
case required.
There was evidently n conspiracy in this case
1t had been ascertained that II telegraph had been
sent the night before from Dayton to Urbonna,
stating that the officers were coming also, that
thirty armed men had guarded the house where
these men were found the night before, and that
three of them were found armed whom arrested.
There was no proof that the Marshal'S were
drunk there had been no proof Of their having
drank more than once, and then at a public house
Besides, 1t was carly N the morning, when men
arc not supposed to be drunk.
1t had been said 10y the Attorney General in the
morning, that the return to.the writ issued by this
Court was complete, and that it could not be i'm
peached, MIR. V. cited many instances on record
where evidence outside u the return had been
admitted, and required, among others, the Rosetta
and Gaines cases. lie supposed a case where a
member Of Congress might be arrested for debt.
The return would be complete, and if no evidence
behind it was admitted, the member might be
detained from his seat. In such n case, evidence
that he was II member would be admitted.
1t had also been said that the dismissal of
these persons would be a conflict with the State,
and that we nigh 1t as well release a prisoner from
the Penitentiury. In case of crime against So
ciety, the State Courts had jurisdiction and there
was no chance for collision. In :he execution of
process from the U. S. Courts, no act, even shoot
ing or killing, il no more was done than was nee
essary to execute the process, was a crime against
the laws Of the State.
The great question in the case wa, is an officer
of the United States bound to obey a writ Of the
State Of Ohio? lie cited many cases on this point
and held it vas not settled, but that the weight of
decisions declared they were not. 1t might be the
duty o. the State authority to issue, but not the
duty of the Marshals to obey. If the jurisdiction
of the State terminates now as the facts appear
it certainly does not exist when the facts are al
ready known. The moment the Sheriff ~acertain,
the facts, he should return the writ.
1t had been decided in the cases of Rosetta anC
Gaines that tue Marshal had no right to obey M
E order Of a State Court then certainly the State
Court had no right to issue an order. The u. 5
Marshal had no more right to obey a writ Of habea
corpus issued from a State Court, than an attach
ment or any other process. The United States
had no right to interfere with United States pro
cess.
Mr.. V. next INJURED what the writ issued by
the Probate Judge OF Cham paign county in thiJ
case was. 1t was not a genuine writ Of habea
corpus. That was never issued to any one bu
the one having the party in custody. This wa,
issued to a Sheriff of the county. lie here
referred to the legislature of Ohio, and showed
3 that in l847, and act was passed. by which tht
Sheriff was authorized to serve wrts of habeai
: corpus, where private persons held persons 10 Gus
tody, taking the prisoner, and summoning thu
J private person to appear and show his authority
In 1856 another law was passed, authorizing tn,
Sheriff to serve these writs in cases where 1t wa
believed the person holding the party in custod,
) would not obey the writ Of the Court. This &C
he commended. vas an anomaly IN legisiahon. wa
intended to produce o collision between the Stat
; and the U. s. authorities, violated the Constitution
p and was contrary to all a~naiogies recognized b,
all the Courts. In levying on property all Court
had held that tkc officer who first LEVIED, State or U
/, S. held possession. Especially was this respected
when either party held exclusive authority. 4
= civil process from the State was always respected
by the United States. If the law was exclusive
the Court authorized, the officer qualified. and tn,
writ competent, the power was complete,
The United States had exclusive authority il
p the case of fugitives from labor. The Constitu
ton expressly provided that no law or regulation
of the State to which they had fed should pre-
vent their being delivered up. Our State law wa
designed to prevent this result. Here was a di
rect conflict. The Marshal had a process he wa
i. bound under a heavy penalty to serve. Til
q Sheriff had his process, which he was bound t
:. serve. No process of the State can interior
against the process Of the United States in a cas-
where the latter has sole authority, Grave re
I suits were pending on this case. Never befor
! had n case Of such magnitude been presented
y The Constitution Of the United States was bind
ing on all. If Ohio could uuli5y the portion relf
d ting to tie return Of iugitives, South Carolin
might nulify that relating to the slave trade, an
n where would be the gain to the cause of hu
5 manity.
9 Mr.. V. made a most eloquent close to his abb
+ speech, all of which was listened to with deep al
u tention.
AT the close Judge Leavitt took the papers i
= the case, and said it might be some time before b
I could render his decision, but as soon as he wa
ready he would notify the attorneys.