, 1860-03-08

tion was in the handwriting Of the Marshal, al
| though Albright swears positively that it VA
| written as it now exists when the warrant va
placed in his hands, There can be no doub'
however, If Albrights testimony is true, th2
the Marshal placed the warrant in his hands
/ with directions to execute it, which, however
could not be done then, because the writ o
hajtas corpus operated upon the slave. The,
left the Mar8haI Mt Decatur, and the rest, accom-
panied by Mr. Phillips, continued on to In Sail
and Ottawa, ut which last place they arrived it
the evening of the 10Th OF October. At La Salt
the vicinity Of the cars, in consequence as is al
legged, Of negro having been shortly before KID
mapped from that county. which had producet
good deal Of feeling there and at Ottawa
Jonesboro', Springfield aud Decatur arc IN ths
Southern district Of Illinois, and Ottawa is il
Goth of October, before auy action was taket
upon the writ Of AaJeas eorpus by Judge Caton
he administered to Albright the oath required
Of Deputy Narshals.
And having adger!ed to all the mate
riul facts which bear upon the question,
Of law in the case arising upon the war
rant, and the authority Of Albright to execute
place to state the opinion Of the Court on these
questions. Tho warrant issued By the Com,
missioner contained the whole Of the affidavit.
made by Mr. Phillips, which set forth oil tlla
tacts which were necessary to authorize it to
issue. 1twas addressed to the Marshal of tue
Southern District, aud commanded him to bring
the slavc before the Commissioner Immediately,
If found in Au Dutrict. It was placed in the
hands Of Albright at Decatur, under the circum-
stances already stated. Two objections have
been taken to the validity Of this warrant. The
first is that it has no seal, and it has been in
sisted that the term warrant implies q
seal. There is no act Of Congress
l., har
even II it were uu irregulari.y. which doubt,
it would not render the warrant imperative and
void. I gave my reosoas fully upon this point
when the objection vas made, and need not
repeat them. Another objection is, that rs the
warrant directs the Marshal to seize the negro
if found in bis District, be could not follow BIN
from one District to another, but that the
moment the officer reached the line Of the
Northern District be must stop. ! have also
given heretofore the reasons why I think the
language Of the act is imperative, and the words
!" il found in your District" must be rejected us
Limitation which the Commissioner lad no
authority to impose. 1t is also objected, admit
ting the warrant run throughout the State,
that inasmucll as the offence was committed 10
the Northern District, the warrant should have
been in the hands, Of tie Aarshal Of the Northern
District or one Of his Deputies. This question
depends upon the true construction Of the 5th
section Of the act OF 1850. That section declares
it shall be the duty Of all Marshafs and Deputy
Marshals to execute every warrant directed to
them under the provisions Of the act. 1t i'm
poses penalty il they should refuse TO receive
it, or should fail to use due diligence in execu.
ting it. If the fugitive is arrested aud should
escape, the Marshal is liable on his bond for the
full value Of his service OF labor. The Comuis-
sioners are authorized to appoint within their
counties suitable petsons to execute tue wat-
rant, and the persons 50 appointed can call on
the posse to assist them and then fo.lows the
final clause Of the section, "and said warrants
shall run and Be executed Iy s7id tF>ers anywhere
in the State within which they ure issued"
Now, my understanding Of this clause is, that
when the case contemplated By the statute has
happened-that is, person held to service
another, and the one to whom the service is
due, pursues and rec'aims him by warrant,
and the warrant is issued and placed in the
hands Of the otIicer that then this clause spsaks
to the officer who has the warrant in tone Of
command which he should. obey-ihe warrant
which you have sdan run anywhere in the State,
1t is admitted that (barily Marshal and bis
deputies are confined in the discharge of their
duties within the limits Of their District, because
generally their authority is not extended beyond
their District; bct in many instances Congress
has authorized them to net out Of their District
when State is divided luto two Districts. The
The object was to arrest fugitires who were cs-
Gaping. and it seems 10 me that the plain intent
Of the act is that Wien tee warrant issued and
placed in the hands Of the officer he shall follow
the fugitive any where in the State. It would
seem also that Congress had specially in view by
more thsn one District, because when there was
but one District in State the warrant Of d Com
missioner would of course run and be executed
throughout the State. This case furnishes q
strong illustration in support Of the construc-
tion given to this Law By the Court. When The
warrant was placed.in the hands Of the Marshal
to exc:nte, be found the object Of the wa rant
in the Southern District it is true, but in transa
tu to tho Northern in tile custody Of the law,
his warrant could not operate upon the fugitive
till the writ OF A16eas corpus had ceased to hold
him. 1t the same time think the officer Ind
the right to follow him anywhere in the State.
to se,ze him tho moment the Aa6&ds corpus had
spent its force, precisely as though he had been
literally in the act Of fleeing from an officer with
awarTant.
Another objection grows out Of the authority
of the officer from the Marshal. The allegation
iii ti,a indictment in relation to this is: ''lsnac
Il. Albright then a. there being duly appoint
ed Deputy United States a........ "-. tor tile
Southern District Of Illinois to execute tue said
warrant" In tue written dcpatation By the
Marshal on the warrant, the middle letter Of the
distinct, but it seems. on Inspection, almost i'm.
possible to decpher the initial letter Of the first
name. Dy some it has been rend rs 4, \. Al
bright, By others as II. n. Albright. l do not
consider this material. There IS no doubt, if
the statement Of Albright Himself can be relied
on, that the writ was givca to him to execute,
with written dcputaiion containing name
intended to be his, inserted rs the per.on spe-
cially deputed to execute The warrant. Under
sucli circumstances the Marshal himself could
not question Albrfght's authority to act, but
would be responsible for anything done By Al
bright within the scope Of Ills authority. The
act Of Congress- requires that the deputy
upon the duties Of his appointment, before the
District Judge or some officer Of the District.
II, in s.rictness, the oath administered by Judge
Caton was not by the officer whom the
law required, which il is not absolutely ueccs-
sarY to decide, yet all these facts show that AL
bright was not an intruder or usurper into tho
office of deputy, but that he was acting by color
OF authority from the Marshal, and il there were
auy informally or irregularity in The manner
of the appointment it csnnot affect tie merits Of
this case. and the defendant cannot take adyAn-
tage of it. Il is sufficient that Albright was au
officer de .faefo, acting under this color Of ap-
pointmcnt from. the Marshal. This view Of the
case acquires additional force from tic fact that
Mr. phil:ips was rcclaiming his slare BY means
Of the warrant, and that Albri Int acted through
out as his assistant in the reclamation, he hav-
ing accompanied Albright and the negro, and
been with them up to the tic,e Of the rescue,
aud himself giving instructions, as the owner Of
the slave, to Albright rs to his custody.
As already stated there appeared to be con-
siderable excitement at Ottawa connected with
the seizure Of negroes and the arrival Of this
party there under such circumstances caused a
meeting to be held by some Of the citizens on
the evening Of the 1sth Of October, at which
the defendant was present and Of which one o1
the defendants witnesses staees the defend
ant was chairman. a committee was appointed
by tho meeting to ascertain by what authority
| the negro was held in custody, consisting O.
| members Of the Bar, aud there seems to be ut
| doubt TINT this committee were appElsed of tht
| fact that Albright had the warrant and that i
was communicated to the meeting accompanied
perhaps with the expression Of an opinion from
professional gentlemen who had examined it
Roots, at whose instance the writ Of Iabeas 60,
pus was issued and who IVES present At thi
meeting and stated the circumstances Of th
case, 10 having accompanied the party Il
! Ottawa, informs us Tint it was agreed upo'
aud understood q: the meeting that if til
there would he such q clappiug Of hands an
| applause that be could not be seized again
There were also sereral speeches made at III
r,cetiuC according, to Mr.. Roots statement
up,n tie unlaWfulness Of holding men a
property.
The next morning, the Goth Of October,
| hearing was had rpon the Aa1eas corpus befo1
| Judge Cation, in one Of the rooms in the Con,
| House. There we're present. besides the Judc,
Albright and the negro-Phillips claiming TO
the owner, and his counsel, and counsel On ii
other side. who not only insisted on the di
charge Of the slave under the writ of habtas 90
pns, but his release absolutely or the ground
The alleged il'egality Of tue warrant and autho
itv Of the olIicer-a large number of person
l. 30 that the room was full, nod before tee hca
| ing was finished. even crowded. Judge Cate
held that the negro was Illegally detained in en-
| tody under the authority Of the County Jud,