Fremont journal. [volume] (Fremont, Sandusky County [Ohio]) 1853-1866, 1858-01-08

tody IN which these prisoners were neld.
This principle cannot be sound. 1t sub
vcrts eflectually the sovereignty of the State.
/ asserts the right of any District Judge of
the United States 10 arrest the execution Of
process, and to uullify the functions Of
State Courts and jurics, whenever in his
opinion person charged with crime under
State authority, has acted in tho matter
forming the basis Of tho charge, in pursu-
ancc of any federal law or warrant. No !
act of Congress in my judgement sanctions
this principle. Such an act, indeed, would /
be clearly unconstitutional, because in plain /
violation of the express provision which re-
quires that the trial of all crimes shall be by !
Jury.
IL is deeply TO be regretted that collisions
of this kind should occur. Tho authorities
of Ohio have never failed in duo considera-
tions for the constitutional rights Of Federal
Courts, nor will they thus fail But they
cannot admit without dshonor, that State
process is entitled TO less respect than Fed
eral, nor can they ever concedc to Federal
writs or Federal officials Difference which
is not conceded to those Of the State
Tho true course is one of mutual respect
and mutual Difference. Wheneyerin any in
quiry upon habeas corpus, by any court,
State or Federal, it may be ascertained that
the applicant for the writ is detained under
valid process in pursuance of constitution
al law, he should be romanded at once to
the custody from which he may have been
taken, for trial in due course. No investga-
ton should take place into the guilt or n-
nocence Of the party charged, or, what is
substantially the same thing, whether the
facts were justified by the authority under
which the applicant was acting at the time.
/ Inquiries Of this character are for iuries up
on regular trial and in open court; not for
a Judge at Chambers. If made upon one
side upon habeas corpus, they must also be
made upon tho other. If Federal Courts
are to protect Federal officials from prosecu-
ton by State courts for alleged violation Of
State law, State courts, in their turn must
protect State officers from prosecution in
Federal courts under similar circumstances
Hence dangerous conflicts must arise, and
imminent peril both to liberty and union.
II If such conflicts must come, to the ex-
tent Of the power vested in me, | shall
port the authority of her courts. | prefer
to hope that they may be averted by the
, abandonment on the part of the Federal
authorities of the indefensible positions they
have assumed.
The same disposition to extend the range
of Federal power in disparagement of State
sovereignty and popular rights has been
conspicuously manifest in the action of the
Federal Government in regard to the Ter
|. ritory Of Kansas. From the day when
that Territory was deprived of the safe
t guard of the Missouri prohibition by the
passage of the Kansas-Nebras act, the
whole action of the Federal government
, seems to have been directed to the ostab-
t lishment of slavery within its limits. In.
, stead of committing, in good faith, to the
, people of the Territory, the formation and
, regulation of their own institutions, all the
1 Influence of the national administration, has
{ been exerted for the subjugation of the
, people to the will of tho propagandists oI
slavery. The whole practical effect of tho
r KansasNcbraska act has been the substitu
f tion of Presidential intervention for slavery
a instead of Congressional intervention
Q against slavery.
Without resistance or rebuke from thu
: National Administration, the actual resi-
5 dents of Kansas were driven from the poll
r at the first territorial election, and q preton
: ded legislature was imposed on an unwilling
I people by the fraud and force of invader,
| from an adjoining State. The people har
rassed and outraged beyond endurance by
the tyranny of the usurping Legislature aut
= its instruments, who were countcnanced anc
aided by Federal office-holders, sought re
lief in State organization. Through
= convention assembled at Topeka, the,
I framed State constitution, and after it,
0 ratification by by tho popular vote, sought
j. admission under it into the Union. Thei
8 prayer for such admission, though granted
f by the House of Representatives refectine
! the will of the people, was donied by tht
f Senate rejecting, in this, the will of thu
Slave Interest
| Every federal officer in the territory WHIT
t manifested any sympathy with the people
S was from time TO time removed, and bodie
+ of troops were sent to compel submission t.
? usurping power.
8 A few months since, under an act whicI
i practically disfranchised a vast majority @
t the citizens, pretended election was he'll
: for members of convention TO frame anoth
r er constitution This convention was con
: stituted, as was intended, exclusively of the
, partizans of slavery 1t framed, of course
f slave state constitution and provided TO
: its transmission to Congress without previ
= Gus submission to the people for ratification
: 1t proposed, indeed, to submit to popula
D Judgement the question of slavery or no sla
/ very, but so framed tho terms of submis
!. sion that no matter how the people nigh
r vote, slavery would in any event, exist il
{ the new state if admitted into the Uniol
under the Constitution
3 Happily subsequent to the election o
. the Constitutional Convention, the perioc
: for the second election of Territorial Leg
t islature arrived, and at the election ther
= held, the actual residents of the Territory
| succeeded in electing majority of its mem
bers in both branches The people mocked
and insuted by the proceedings Just nara,
ted, now invoked from the Secretary of the
| Territory, acting as Governor, the convoca
, ton of this body. For compliance with thi.
: just demand, the Secretary was removed
from office. For expressing himselfin op.
! position 10 the admission of the State into
lNA IfV.ar Al.