Carroll free press. [volume] (Carrollton [Ohio]) 1834-1861, 1858-01-14

clam.
The President Of the United S,Aiss and
tbe Secptary Of the Federal T,eisury
hSye recommended TO Congress the enncI.
ment Of a Bankrupt Law, applicable only
TO bsuks and lzilrnads oumpan'es. Such
law would draw within Federal juris'lie
ton aud disposition. interests Il vast eAlsnl.
and intimately CONNECTED with the C n
Gems Uf nearly al our eiuzens. IL Is Ia
dispensh,le 10 the sovereignty Of toe State
that she relAln the cOutrol OF these eOipl-
raliuus in her own Legislature aud lie.
own COaft& Ii the General Assembly
eCncurs with me in this ePluion,l trust It's
sentiments will he made known IN some
appropriate mole.
A disposition ha been manifested, with
in the last few yeArs. 10y solne OF the oth-
cisls Of the Federal Government. exerH
sing their functions within the limits Of
Obiu, To di,,egaId tie authority, and To
eneroaeh upon the rights OF the State, TO
an extent aud in manner which de-
mands your notice.
la February. 1856, several persons
were seized in Hamilton county as iugi
tive slaves. Que Of these persons, Mar
garel Garner,in tie flerzy OF the moment
nnpelled, rs II seems, 10y the dIead Of see
ing her children dragged, with herself,
back 10 slavery, attempted TO rlay them
ON ths spot, aud actually succeeded in
killing ons. For this act, she aud her
cJnpa 'ns, were indicted by the grand
jury fer the crime of murder, and were
taken int1 Gu t'dy upon n writ regularly
lssUrd from the court Of common pleas.
While thus imprisoned under the legal
process Of State Court, for the highest
crlme knnSn to cur cude, writ Of habeas
corpus was issued L.. Judge of the Dis
turI Court Of the United States, requiring
their production beloDe hun. I e wnl
was obrye by tie sheriff, aud, contrary
To all expectations, and III disregard, as |
think, Of principle sud authority, the
prisoners we,e taken Gcm hls custody hv
u,der Vi the Juig and, without allowing
any opportunity for the interposltlon OF
the State authorizes, delivered D er to the
Marshal Of the United States, by whom
they we've Immediately transported beyond
our hunts. The alleged ground for this
action aud order was that the indicted par-
lies had been seIzad rs fugitive slaves up
on Federal Commissioners warrant, be-
fOle the indictment and arrest. aud that
the right to thelr custody, thus acquired,
was superior to that Of the Sheriff, Unler
the process Of The State. This doctrme
must necessarily give practical IMMUNITY
to murder whenever the murderer may be
seized 10y a Federal official as fugitive
from service before arrest for the crime
under State authority. lmpurng nc
wrong intention to the Judge, am con
strained to add that hiS proceeding seems
to me an abuse, rather than an exercise, oi
judicial power,
A mllar case occurred more recently
in the county of Champaign. Several
deputies Of the Federal Mtrshal, having
arrested certmn cllizeus of this State fur
some alleged offence against the Fugitive
Slave ACT, wit of habess corpus WAS is
sas by the Prob de Judge Of th-t couaty,
requiring the arrcsi01 pSIiles to e brought
beO:e hun for inquiry into the grounds Ui
; detention. The Sheriff Of Clark county,
: while attempting to execute tbs writ, was
assaulted by these petty Off ;ials aud seri-
ously iujuIeI, while his deputy was fired
up N. though happily without effect. A
warrant WAS issued hy u Justice Of the
Peace for the apprehension Of the peIpe-
; tratOts of these uilenses. This warraIt I
was duly executed and the prisoners COM
mittel to jill under the custody Of ,herili
Of Clark county. A writ OF hsbea' corpus
was then issued by the same District Judge
who hal interpo,ed IN the case of Mar
garet Garner. requiring the Sheriff Of CLARK
county produce his prisoners before him
ut the city Of Cincinnati, This writ WAS
also obe,ed, and the prisoners were dis
charged from custody by the order Of the
Judge. on the grounl th,t heing Federal
officers. anl charged with the execution
of Federal writ, they hal n right to over
Cpn Q. hy any necessary vioIenc,, all at.
tempts made under the process OF State
3our, to delain them or their prisoners
even for inquiry iCto the legality of the
custody in which those prisoners were
neld.
This principle cannot be sound 1t
subverts etfectuallv the sovereignty of the
Estate. 1t asserts the right of any DIS.
trct Judge of the United States to arrest
he execution of State process, and to ndi.
Ify the functions o. State cuur 8 and iulies,
whenever in his opinion person chaIged
with crime under State authority. has &C
ted in the mater forming the lasis of the
charge, in pursuance Of any Federal law
or warrant. No act of Congress, in my
judgment, sanctions this principle. Such
an act, inleei, would be Gle rrv uncon>ti.
tutioual, because in plan violation Of the
express provision which reqniies that the
trial of al crimes shall lie hy jury.
1t is deeply to he regretted that coli
sons of this kind shouhi occur. Tie nu
, tholities Of Ohio have never fued ir du,
consideration for the Constitutional Tight
of Federal Court, nor vii! they tau. tail
Brt hey cannot admit. ~itnout dishonnr
that State process is entiEcl (, less respe
than Federal, nor can tey ever conced,
, 10 Feleral wr Is or Fe leraI oificlalS def
ereGce which Is not cOncelel T. those
tie sta.
4; The tue course is one Of mutual respe:
t and mutual Difference, Whenever, in any