Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1860-03-31

What constitutes q man on accessory is a ques-
ton Of Law, and not always easy Of solution. Mr..
Bosg's opinin:Ju. then, is not authority. He
should hArt tbown they were committed in Mis-.
souri, 70 enable the court to ties. them by the laws
Of Missouri to see il they amounted to a crime.
Again, the ari4avit is fatally defective nthis. tho
Bogss srears to his belief"
Lot us apply these rules to the affidavit under
eonO,dera,iOn. Andrew lIante, sdoes not swear
p~ositirely that Coppic was ever in Virginia. lie
says certain persons other than Coppic commit
ted certain crimes at q certain place In that State,
and that Coppic aided and abetted' them, lcay-
ing to be inferred that he was with them in Vir'
SiaiS. But he might Savo furnished arms from
Ohio, or ammunition froms PoDnsylsauis, or aid
and co!hfor. from Maryland. thus aiding and
abetting' the crime committed in Virginia, With
out being there in person, and yet not be liable to
be tried in Virginia for so doin,. Mr.. Huoter
says Coppic is "a fugitive from Justice escaping in
the State Of Iowa. From what Statef Frem
Virginia, or Maryland, or Pennsylvania, or Ohio ?
1t may be inferred his escapo was from Virginia,
but il is not positively so stated; nor is there
on either point that certainty that would
justify a magistrate ia committing On accus
ed party. Again, Mr.. Hunter, having The evi.
dence and information in his possession, should
have incorporated it in his aft iavit.' He swears to
a legal conclusion when he says Coppic aided ard
atested.' What constitutes aid ng and a~betting'is a
question of Law, and not always Of easy solution
Mr.. Hunters opinion is not authority. He should
have worn to the facts. The affidavit is fatally
defective in this, that Hunter swears to his belief.
Tho whole case is this A paper was presented
to me purporting TO be an affidavit made under a
law Of Congress, but ncs made before an officer
recognized by that law; or, if the law Of 1856 ap.
plies TO this class Of cases, lacking, to its authen.
ITCHY, an essential requisite pre- scribed by that
law. That paper was made the basis of demand
that ] should arrest and surrender for trial for
crime in q distant State a citizen of this State,
while il contained only the statement of a person
wholly unknown to me that be believed the citi.
zen was guilty Of a crime, which crimo, if com.
mitted at all, might. for aught appearing in the
paper, have been committed in any other State as
well as Virginia. 1 refused the demand made up.
on me. and now after a moro full an careful con.
sideration Of the matter than I then gave 1t, I tt,
content Nith tie decision then mada
My action 10 this matter is not without preco.
dent in our State. My immediate predecessor re.
fused n warrant for o citizen Of this State upon a
requisition from the State Of Indiana, upon the
ground that the affidavit upon which the reouis;.
tion was based, although sufficient in substance,
was made before a notary pGjiic. The Governor
OF lndianadid not, as I am advised, ccasider this
refusal as evidence that the people or authoririe.
Of Iowa were unwilling to perform their c~onstitu.
tional obligations, or q matter Of sufficient ;mpor-
lance to be the subject of a special message to the
General Assembly Of that State.
The Governor of Virginia com plains tina. I did
not Cause Coppic to be arrested and held until
another requisition in proper form could have
been sent to me. The laws of the State provide
the manner in which such provisional arrests shall
be made. (See section 8. 284. and The remaining
sections OF tina: ~chapter.) called the attention
ofthe agent of Virginia especially to this law,
real it to him, and placed it in his hand, and re-
duested him TO advise with COUNSEL in relation
thereto and act upon that advice. For some rea-
son. doubtless satisfactory to himself but wholly
Unknown to me, he did net, &c far es / have learn.
ed act under the provisions of that law. If the
Governor of Virginia has cause for complaint
agairst any person on this point, It is against his
own ngent and not against me.
The Governor also complains that tie FIRST of
my letters to him was published in The paaers of
that State before it had reached him. This is
probably true. During the afternoon of the day
on which the requisition was presented to me, and
after that fact bo,ame public, many inquiries were
made of me touching the matter, and great desire
expressed 10 know my reasons for refusing the
T. .a,lI I.r 49,
in me 10 have affected secrecy 10 regard 10 the
matter, when the agent of Virginia had himself
made it public, and | answered inquiries by stat.
ing the facts. and for my reasons referred to nv
letter, q copy Of which | had kept. Some gentle
men who read the letter suggested that as the
matter would probably excite some public inter
ss:, il would DO well to publish the letter, and not
being able to see how, under the circumstances,
any possible injury could result from it's publica-
sion, ! allowed copies 20 be taken for that purpose.
It is to me a matter Of profound regret that the
Governor Of Virginia did not in his special mes.
sage content himself with an examination of the
legality OF the document sent by him to me, md
ofmy ofheial action thereon, without tempting to
convert a question Of Cficial power and duty into
n 4ueetion of personal motives. But, not satisfy
ing himself apparently that he had good CAUSE Of
complaint against me upon the Law or the facts of
the case, he repeats some heresay. some suspic.
ions Of his OWL, or Of his agents, some broken ex.
tracts from my inaugural address, and from oil
these attempts to justify his insinuatious of my
sympathy with the crimss lately committed in
Virginia, and of my desire, perhaps efforts, for the
escape of this alleged fugitive. repel oil such
Suggestions, coming from him or from others, with
The scorn they deserve, and l would not dignity
them by any holicc were i. not for this considera-
tio1. ~Right-minded men in other States may
we'll suppose that the Chief Magistrate of Virginia
could not make charges SO grossly %Violative of the
courtesy due BY him to the Chief Magistrate of a
sislsr SInte, unless he knew the charges to Be sus-
tanned by the facts, and might constrde my 81.
lanca inld an adnissinn of their trnth