Holmes County farmer. [volume] (Millersburg, Ohio) 1857-1926, 1861-01-10


bad usage, until the Quarter Master Gen
eral restored them TO sorvicoablo oondi
ton. The same proportion Of loss and
depreciation runs through the whole lis
of arms received from the United States
the original cost Of which was 5000, 203
While the present system of the issue
and care of the public arms prevents q
similar result Tor the future, il is for the
General Assembly is determine wheth
er the supply now owned by the State is
adequate to her wants. Other States, un.
der similar circumstances, have supplied
the loss and waste by purchase.
The annual quota received from the
General Government diminishes with the
accession of each new State and Terrific
ry. 1t is ut present, less than one thou
sand muskets in value and when other
arms or necessary accessories to keep
othor arms in serviceable order are sub
stituted the number of muskets is dimin-
ished to the extent Of the substitution
1t is obvious, therefore, we cannot look
to the General Government for a suf1i-
cient supply Of arms for an effective State
military organization.
Your attention is also invited to the
duties ofthe Quarter Master General, and
in this connection to the phrascology OF
the last general appropriation bill, by
which he has been prevented from draw
ing the compensation due his services as
armorer. The salareries of both tho Adj
jutant and Quarter Master General arc
merely nominal. This ought not to be.
Their duties are arduous and of great re-
sponsibility. q
During the recess Of the General AS
sembly, the State Arsenel has been com
pleted to the extent provided by law un.
der the immediate supervision of the the
Quarter Mater General. 1t is a substan-
tial edifce. Estimates for it compile
ton to meet all the purposes contcmpla-
ted by lis erection, will be furnished by
the Adjutant General.
have thus called your attention to
such topics in connection with the State
Militia as require the application of mo-
ney. The aggregate it is remembered
that it will bring to the practical test the
experiment on the part Of Ohio, as a
State, seriously and effectively to give
animation and strength to thorough and
well balanced militia system.
During the legislative recess the power
of the Executive of the State to surren-
der fugitves from Justice has frequently
been invoked, and though as rule this
class of cases does not require special
public notice, yet in two instances the
applications involved matters of tho gra-
vest moment. The reclamation in ono
case was founded on q charge that the fu
gtive had stolen certain slaves, with the
intent to defraud the imputed owner and
in the other case, the demand was predict
ed on an indictment charging the accused
with aiding a " female slave" to escape
from her owner and possessor," These
cases did not, in my Judgment, fall with
in the scope of the authority conferred on
me in this behalf, and my conclusion,
with the reasons therefor, was duly made
known to the Executives by whom the re-
spective demands had been made. Each
replied, controverting the rightfulness of
my conclusion.
The legislative power vested in the
General Assembly comprehends an au
thority to provide for the surrender Of fu-
gitives from Justice in cases not covered
by the Federal Constitution, and this con-
sideration, added to the Importance of the
subject itself, seems to render it proper
that the reasons which, in these instances,
controlled my action, should be laid be-
fore you.
The persons demanded by these re-
claimations were then soiourners within
this State, owing to it allegiance, and en-
titled to the correlativo right of protec-
ton. Its Constitution and laws secured
to them. while dwelling here, the same
measures Of personal freedom and person.
al security, which belonged to its own
citizens. Speaking the language of the
" great charter of English liberties" the
State had declared that no one within its
limits " should be deprived Of life, liberty
or property, without due process oflaw."
The same principle has, in some form,
been asserted by every other State, and
finds conspicuous place in the Consti-
tuition of the United States.
Upon the requisitions being made, it
was my first duty to enquire whether the
cases were such as called for the exercise
of the power thus invoked. 1t was read
lily ascertained that all my authority, in
this behalf, came from the familiar provi-
sion in the Federal Constitution relating
to the surrender of fugitives from justice.
lnaSmuch as this provision operates in
restraint of liberty, it must be rigidly
and every case not fairly in
cluded must bo held as beyond its scope,
and every doubt must be resolved against
its application. Rigorous as this rule
seems its existence and wisdom are alike
beyond question. 1t is the same rule in
favor of liberty from which we have drawn
our systems of criminal jurisprudence,
and the same rule which is to-day in the
States applied to criminal proceedings in
every stage of their progress. Adopted
to protect the citizen against the exercise
Of arbitrary power, the experience of many
ages has proved its value, and still retains
its place among the chief safeguards OF
personal security. 1t has become a fixed
principle of law, and yet independent OF
its clear dictates, am satisfied that upon
no recognized rule of construction can the
provision be made to cover
the cases in question.
These reclamation presenteds substan-
!; ;al Iv tho CANA onostion anI vora thara- |