Year: 1861

DY Wnlcn ne mas Deen pFSfsuIeu 1Fom
drawing the compensation due his SER
vices as armorer. The salaries Of both
the Adjutant and Quarter Master Gen
eral are merely nominal, This ought
not to be- Their duties are arduous and
of great responsibility.


During the recess of the General As
sembly the State Arsenal has been com
pleted to the extent provided by law,
under the immediate supervision of the
Quarter Master General. It is a sub
stantial edifce Estimates for its com
pletion to meet all the purposes contem-
plated by its erection will be furnished
by the Adjutant-General.


I have thus called your attention to
such topics in connection with the State
Militia as require the application of
money. The aggregate is sufficiently
|Reaseaabls~-Ehsnsit is--rsmembered 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.


THE RENDITION CASES. -


During the Legislative recess the pow
er of the Executive of the State to sur
render fugitives from justice has fire.
quently been invoked, and though as a
rule this class of cases does not require
special public notice, yet in two Instances
the applications involved matters of the
gravest moment. The reclamation in
one case was founded on charge that
the fugitive had stolen certain slaves,
with intent to defraud the imputed
owner; and in the other case, the de-
mand was predicated on an Indictment,
charging the accused with aiding a fe-
male slave to escape from " her owner
and pssoessor. The cases did not, in
my judgment, fall within the scope of
the auth GRITTY conferred upon me in this
behalf, and my conclusion, with the
reasons therefor, was duly made known
to the Executives by whom the respec-
tive demands had been made Each re-
Piled, eontroyerting the rightfulness Of
my conclusion.


The legislative power vested in the
General Assembly comprehends an au-
thority to provide for the surrender Of
fugitives from justice in cases not COW
cred by the Federal Constitution, and
this consideration, added to the import
ance of the subject itself, seems to rem
der it proper that the reasons which, in
these instances, controlled my actions,
should be laid before you.


The persons demanded by these recla-
nations were then sol journers within this
State, owing to it allegiance, and entitled
to the correlative right of protection -
Its constitution and laws secured to them
while dwelling here, the same measure
Of personal freedom and personal secu-
rity 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 lin
its & should be deprived of life, liberty,
or property, without due process CT law. =
The same principel has, i'll some form,
been asserted by every other State, and
finds conspicuous place in the Constitu-
ton of the United States.


Upon the acquisitions being made.
it was my first duty to inquire whether
the cases were such as called for the ex-
ercise of the power thus invoked. 1t
was readily ascertained that all my au-
thority, in this behalf, came from the
familiar provision Of the Federal Consti-
tuition relating to the surrender Of fugi-
tives from justice. Inasmuch as this
provision operates in restraint of liberty
it must be rigidly construed, and every
case not fairly included must be held as
beyond its scope, and every doubt must
be resolved against its application
Rigorous .s this rule seems, its existence
and wisdom are alike beyond question.
1t is the same rule in favor Of liberty
which has obtained for centuries in that
country from which We have drawn our
systems Of criminal jurisprudence, and
the same rule which is to day in all the
States applied to criminal proceedings
in every stage of their progress. Adopt
ed to protect the citizen against the ex-
ercise of arbitrary power, the experience
of many ages has proved its value, and
it still retains its place among the chief
safeguards Of personal security. 1t has
become fixed principle OF law, and yet,
independent Of its clear dictates, | am
satisfied that upon no recognized rule OF
construction can the constitutional pro-
vision be made to cover the cases in
question.


These reclamations presented substan-
TALLY the same question, and were,
therefore, to be determined by the ap-
plication of the same general principles.
Each Of them charged the accused with
the commission of an act by which "an
owner and master had been deprived
Of his alleged q slave" The question
was thus presented, whether an act of
this nature can be considered as either
" treason, felony, or other crime, in the
senseoin which these phrases are used by
the Constitution. Manifestly, it is not
treason, and manifestly, it is not felony,
according to the import Of that word
when the Constitution was adopted.


Does other crime" include every of
tense declared to be such by the laws of
a State? If SO, my duty to surrender
was placed beyond question. But this
conceive would be most mischievous
and iupracticable Interpretation. For,
if by ''other crime is meant any act
made criminal by the law of State,
then the Executive of each State is under
constitutional obligation to remand its
citizens to another, for any act which
the Legislature of any State may desig-
nate as crime. In this sense the word
crime" has no other meaning than that
which Legislature, Ia its discretion,
may give it; and the constitutional OBJ
legation of the Executive of each State
would be created by the caprice, and the
liberty Of the citizen would be deprived,
upon the legislation of the others. Such
a construction OF the constitutional pro-
vision could not be tolerated for it would