Anti-Slavery Bugle from Lisbon, Ohio • Page 1

I I'. mahius ii.nonixsox, editor. "NO UNION WITH SLAVEHOLDERS." AXX'l'EAIlSOX, PUBLISH IX a AG EXT. VOL. 12.

NO. IS. SALKM, COLUMBIANA COUNTY, OHIO, SATURDAY, JULY IS, 1S57. WHOLE NO. 014.

The Anti-Slavery Bugle. PRO SLAVERY. From the Cincinnati Enquirer. THE STATE OF OHIO vs. THE UNITED STATES.

AtlorneyUenoralWalcott made a very creditable effoit, yesterday, bofoie Judgo Leavitt in the caso oftlie IJoited States Deputy Marshals, applying for A habeas rorjms against tho Sheriff of Clarke county, which claims the right to hold thin in custody cn warrants for assault and battery, and for lor assault with intent to kill, issued by a StBtg; magistrate. His speech was creditable in its tono, innihi nnrt nhilitv. The reply of Mr. Valhin- dinHham hml Pot been ninuc non tnis article was in Written, nna wo are tnoreioro not prepared io express an opinion of the manner in which that rery able gentleman meets ho poEttions of the Attorney uenerai. ior is necessary, ns mi not intend to discuss tho mere legal points involv-in tl.U nuestion.

Newspapers have quite dif- ferent functions and duties from lawyers. no part of their business to argue nico points of law, niero tconnaiuics, nnu iiiournry ruicn mm distinctions, such as govern and nanow tho views I of lawyers. Their province is wider holder one. 'l'hey have to consider questions in thnir Urgcst bearings, as thoy may appear to and allect the interests and views of tho people ns they may be controlled by those ideas of right and wrong which pervade the mass, not only in legal but in legislative, not oniy in juuicim out in po litioal aspects. lhey nro not hound by those i toclinicnlities which render too legal protcsion so little trustworthy with the people on questions of moral or political duty.

It is the pride nnd boast of our vocation that the honest und manly journalist may view nil (jucstions from the very lofti est point of intellectual freedom a.id above all those influences and biases that uiolo or less dis- trant tho mind and consciences of those profession-, nt nhniiiiiitapj lin fl A Klinekelnd nnd contracted by the arbitrary rules of their particular science monopoly, nnd who are oftener, nnd with -itratcd creator power, found enlisted on tho side ol error I and wrong, than on that of truth and justice. In this spirit wo approach the argument of tho Attorney General, nnd discover in it nothing but an ingenious apology for trer.son and conspiracy against the United Statos. We rcstato tho caso, that our readers may not bo bewildered by the sophistries of lawyers. Warrants nre issued by tho United States Commissioner against Messrs. Taylor, Hyde and Gut-tridge, for harboring a certain fugitive from service, and aiding and abetting him in resisting the process of tho United States Court.

These warrants are placed in tho hand of thirteen deputy Marshals. Tho accused, are arrested, and, while on their way the Court to wh.vh the warrants are returnable, the Marshals nre set upon by two persons, one of whom is Sheriff of Clark County and nnother his assistnnt, who (it afterward appeared) bad in view the service of a wiit of habeas corpus issued ngainst the said Marshals. A conflict ensues tho Sheriff is repelled by force. Ho thon makes complaint For assault nnd battery, and the Marshals are arrested and held on this charge, their prisoners arc taken from them npon protended writ of habeas corpus, which is tried by the Judge of a State Court, and tho said persons, thus taken from the Marshals, nro released, while the Marshals aro detained in prison. Tho case now before Judge Leavitt is nn application for a writ of habeas coijius for the release of said Marshals from tho custody of the Sheriff of Clark.

It is resisted by the Attorney General nnd an elaborate argument is presented in support of 8ucli opposition, which is based chiefly upon the ground that tho State of Ohio, has exclusive iiirimliciinn of ofl'onses committed on the persons of its citizens that tho offences of assault nnd battery, and with intent to kill, are charged against theso parties held in custody, the Deputy Marshals; that such charges aro only cognizable nnd triahlo by tho State Courts, and that to take from their jurisdiction such caso is virtually to override the sovereignty and trample upon tho Constitution of Ohio that such doctrine would place the Deputy Marshals above all law and responsibility for their nets, though they might exceed their legal power and violate tho gravest provisions oi tho criminal law. This is substantially, the ponition of the Attorney General, ami, in tho condition of our legislation, it presents one of the gravest nnd most vital niiPHtions that ever aroso in the country. The Legislature of Ohio has passed a law, the object of which was to give to tho State Courts the right to issue a Jtdbeas corpus ogainst nil Marshals or other persons having uny citizens in custody by virtue of am process. Tho sheriffs of counties have repeatedly attempted to execute this law and in the recent caso tliero were no loss than three Sheriffs in pursuit of the Marshals. The prosout Governor has, doubtless, issued an order or intimated his expectation that the Judges nnd Sheriffs throughout the State shall give effect to this law, which was drafted by himself, and passed by a compliant Legislature.

On the otherhand, the deputy Marshals are or- dored by the decisions of the United States courts to resists and disregard all such process. When the sheriff, therefore, comos with his writ the Marshal resists, a conflict ensues, and the sheriff proceeds to the nearest State magistrate, makes complaint of assault and battery, and a warrant tUe Attorney General says, is good tho Marshal rnust leave hia prisoners in the road, nnd go to 'jail and wait until hois tried. Meantime his writs aro torn up and bis prisonors at large. It was well said, that this was not the bold nnd manly nuliBcntion doctrine of South Carolina, which made a direct issue with the Fedoral Government, on the ground that its law was illegal and unconstitutional but it is nn indirect, evasive, sneaking modo of rendoring tho Federal law null and void, by process under color of State sovereignty and State law. It is idle to talk about executing this or any oth-.

er Federal law, which may be distasteful to any portion of tho people, undor this view of Stato sov-fiignty Practically.it is the most thorough nnd complete nulitication that ever was seriously promulgated. Tho citizens of any interior county uay conolude that robbing the United Statos mail miirht not to bo punished, and writs of habeas cor pus may be sued out, under tho act of 1850, ngainst urn, ITnitnd States Marshal havitie a prisoner iu hia cnatnriv nhnrired with that hizh crituo. If ho TaaiHt annli writs, as is certainly his duty, under the decisions of tho United States Supremo Court even as expounded by Judgo ho may then be taken up for assault and battery, commit- tod to prison, nnd while so confined, his prisoner turned loose. Thus is the United States Judic a louse. anus is tne i.iine'4 uiaiwuuuiu- larv emasculated ot all its power, nua uuoriy prostrated boforo a littlo county court, represent ed by a constable or bum-bailifl In such a state of our law tho Attorney General was fully justified iu assorting that unless the one sovoroigiity yielded to the other, tliero would be a conflict of force, of nrms, of internecine etrifo Indeed, wo rather admired his frank boldness In declaring that tho Stato of Ohio would not yield in this issuo that, even if the marshals wero reloascd on tho writ; they would bo rearrested, and tho caso pushed to the furthest extreme.

Lamenlablo ns such a result ought to bo regarded by every patriot nnd good citizen, wc think, rithnr ureal perils, it should be looked boldly jn the face and btouht to speedy dtleiniiniilion. M'0 fl poMible, whether Govcr- nor Chase and his myrmidons can release the peo- pin of Ohio fruin their loyalty to the Constitution and Union Let him unfurl Inn hhick flag, and with hia battle cries of "Higher Law," "Abolition" nnd Negro Rights," rally his funntics nnd demagogues of evr-ry shado, find advance against that bulwutk which ban survived so many perils and shocks, and ovor which the stars and stripes still and long will wave in triumph ntid fclory. From the Belleville (Ill) Advocate. NORTHERN AGGRESSION AND SOUTHERN NORTHERN AGGRESSION AND SOUTHERN FORBEARANCE. was consceraica io reeujoi oy Compromise.

Hogns Democracy has discovered into any Territory has been pretty clearly domon-and by the history of Kansas. Tho clmiccs The Independence of the United States was acknowlndged by Great Britain in 17H3. Tho'area of the country at that dav. in Fdnnre miles, was inmejrar 1 I l.i .1. Aunii mill, una nl Hrtl.

ruaseu oi irniuT, nn m.n... hirs were paid. I lie area nt tins puruiaso im I8DU.57U miles ilirco slave otaies, Louisiana, souri. and Arkansas, have been formed out of this lemtory, anil admitted into tne i nion. A'' the pnrcliafo norm ot tne paraiiet oo iiun una uinM now tliero is no hope that a Mngie iico cmte win UB uuuu purchased ot 1' ranee.

In Spain ceded 1 lor- ma to tne unitou ntaies. iv tuis ccssiuo, mo area of Slavery was enlarged t.o wuu square nines. hn Tpta irrnh fnne is now understood uv all. While- the North was busy making money, n. Il.li! I lift Pllllltlt MtU (rilt up a war with and, niter boiuu ugnting, uu- cnircu ineir luuupcimvuuu) "mi admission into the Union, nnd too area oi slavery was still furl her enlarged by 318,000 square nulos.

Xnxt fallowed the Oregon trentv. by which wo ac quired square miles. Tho passage of the Kansas-Nebraska bill virtually opened all tho territory of the United States to Slavery. Oregon has beon principally settled by emigrants from Western Missouri. heir nuimy to loroo slavery are now in tavor ot uregon noing nunmicu us slave Stato.

Next in order conies the treaty with by which wo gained sqttaro miles of Territory. The accidental discovery of gold in California caused such a rush of emigration from the frco States nnd Europe, that Slavery was for the first and only time driven to the wall. Siuco ithopeacoof by purchase cession, filibuster ing, and war, wo have added to uie national no-main 2,1 Ifvfti square ncost of 000. What havo the free Stntcs gained from the territory thus gained? The admission of ono free State, California, with two Senators and two Representatives. What have tho slavo States gained? Louisiana, Missouri, Arkansas, Florida.and Texas, and eight Senators and fourteen Representatives.

This is a remarkable instance of Northern ng-grsssion The census of 1850 civr-s the number of tvhitis in the free States at 13.330.CfjO, while the number of whites in the slave States is placed at giving the free States a littlo more than twice the slavo States. The United Slates Treasury Reports show that littlo more than three-fourths of the ca6h paid into tho Treasury is drawn from the free States. "The free States, then, have paid for the territory acquired since the pence of 1783, and their show for the outlay of this vast capital, is tho Stato of California, with two Senators and two Representatives! To sum up, we, the people of the free Stntes, furnish more thrco-foiirths of the money to foot the bills for territory which is prostituted to Slavery. We pay our own postage bills, and one-half of the postage hills of tho Smith. Kvery man, woman, or child, living north of Mason and Dixon's line, pays four and one-half cents postage on each letter, while every letter mailed snuui oi nou cent and cue-half'.

Wo pay for tho support ut (lie younger sons of the Southern aristocracy in numbers that would be hard to estimate. Whenever a Southern gentleman has more sons at home than his negroes are able to support, by somo means or other they arc enabled to thrust their bunds into the national Treasury, by appointment in the Army nnd Vnvv. Th Culifurnia mmuintmcnts liy 1 1 1 a nr esent Administration aro in point. Tei young sprigs, every one of them from the South, havo just boon appointed to conifortablo places in the free State of California We can, at a moment's warning, furnish any nuinlier of highly-ro-spectablo citizens, lovers of "the Union, the Constitution, and tho Bible," willing to capture and return all fugitives from tho South. After doing all this, and much more, how vory reasonable is all the outcry which hear about Northern aggression upon the South! How forbearing, how long-suffering, how mock, patient and Christianlike, is the South, in the endurance of nil this fearful oppression from the North From the South Side Democrat.

FREE NEGROES. MECKLENBURG June 18, 1857. Something should be done by our noxt legislature to better tho condition of this tinfortunuto class, as well as to reliove ourselves of their pres ence. Jivory any furnishes us witn nuuiuonai ma terials of proof to convince us that the lreo negro and the slavo should not exist in tho same commu nity. The presence of the free black in our midst breeds corruption, and it, is necessary ior us io inao i tham nm lh i soonor Will we be cnr.uica to control me coo oi the slave.

The freo negro is tho medium through which the slave is enabled to procure nrdent spir itsthe medium through which tne siave is enaoicu to dispose of stolen goods tho medium through which tho Northern emissary is enabled to work miicbiel in lino, ho is an agent of corruption, powerful to no harm, and impotent to do good. The negro has but littlo industry, economy, foresight, or mind, and without control and direction in other words.in a state of freedom is incapable, by the cxpenenco of eveiy Southern community, of cither providing proporly for his wants, or im proving his social condition, Tho laws of Virginia give the freo negro but few privileges. His freedom is natural inferiority prevents him from being placed upon an equality with tho white n.an. Sol ('-preservation prompted our Legislature to pass laws preventing his education; his testimony is ignored in our courts of justice, in both civil nnd criminal cases, excopt in such cases ns tho black man is alone is not recognised ns citizen by the laws or the State, and is incapable of making himsolf worthy of citizenship. It is useless to discuss the point: Is tho negro cnpnblo of enjoying freedom Every day furnish -H es us with new lUtisiranotis, aim iv i Co-ns to onnn our eves to bo convinced mat ho is either born for barbarism or bondage, would be an net of charity for ns to dispose ot tncin by giving them masters to look nfter and minister 1..

ii.nir nntu. Ignorant deuriulcd. and poor, thoy livo out miserable existence; half clothed nnd haU-fed; living like (tog wiiiiout niumiir, about, making that his own which ho chances to find. It is a raco that neods tho guardianship of a supfirior; and under tho control of that superior' their labor conduces to the highest production 1 industry, as well as secures the rcatcst nmoiint ot happmc.a that could attend the blacks. itid attend tne biacKs.

All negroes brought to Anirio.a wciel.ioiiKht.iJ jr.lavcc ull lice in-pos ars tho i I I thodb slaves and boing incapable of proper self-preservation, should return into Slavory. I believe Slavery to be, ns I have heard it expressed, "a moral, political, and social good" a. blessing both to tho black and the whito man it clevatos the negro from tho most degraded condition, makes him usoful to fiimself and useful to others improve, his morals, and gives him an opportunity of, arriving at the highest state of mental nnd moral improvement that his imhecolity will permit Iu view of this, I am in bopcH our Legislature will take action upon the subject, tind provide every -t fr? DeK 1090 cluMC0 ,0 with a suitable master. I am aware that there are persons iu.il woiini ui.ijcui, iu una moans of disnosinu of them: and others, who do not conceive of any suitable plan by which it could oarnod into effect. To them I wi.l say, there is a practical and humane system by hich it could bo ffTootod Givo everv such negro a reasonable time to leavo tllfl iStut(J lf is liH to reilluini let him be nt under valuation, permitting him to choose his aster, provided the amount required be paid for hi in.

valuation; that would go fur to procure for him the nmMpr prcrur. Lt the proceeds of ut tiiese sales co to defray tho expenses of tfioso wouJ bo (() lcavfl thfl Stftte nnd if lit be insufficient for that purpose, let the adequate If it should please the Legislature to pass such law, I hope they will not permit any such neero wi pot nit puch e(rro i i to bo sold out of tho State, or carried out of the Stnto solJ, should bo tho policy of every truo Virginian to keep as many slaves ns possiuio in too ntate. lf there is any odium attached to this system of ridding ourselves of the greatest nuisances in our fund, there is odium attached to Slavery itself for if Slavery is right, it is right for us to enslave thoso whose condition will bo improved thereby. C. A.

ANOTHER MAN UNITED STATES MARSHALS IN MECHANICSBURG CRY AND NO WOOL. ri The Dayton Gazette of Wednesday morning.Julv 1st, contained the annexed paragraph: 1 i i Akrest or rriF Citizens of MErnANicsnuRo, The preparations which have been for somo tiinei in progress, for etilor jinir tho Fugitive Slave Law 1 in Champaign county, were probably consummated yesterday. Some fifteen United States officers had been (lotailcd for the duty, nnd it was supposed that arrests in Mechaniosburu- and vicinity would i amount to from fiftv to ecventv-live. The Deputy U. S.

Marshal in this city know of tho arrongo men nnd it was intended to mako the arrests yesterday, and expressed a strong anxiety to learn the result. And hero we havo the result in tho Springfield Evening Nonpareil for Wednonday, 1st inst: Wo learn by a resident of Mechnnicsburg, that on Monday morning last as 2J o'clock, U. S. Deputy Marshals Churchill and Elliott, (who was recently stablfbd in Cincinnati, while attempting to nrrest a fugitive) assisted by a posee of eight, surrounded tho house of a Mr. I'angburn, where they supposed Mr.

Udney Jlyde, and Mr, Connely,) reporter for tho Cincinnati Commercial nnd Gazette) were, and of whom they claimed to be in pursuit. Churchill rapped lightly at the door, when I'angburn inquired who was there, to which Churchill replied in a low tono of voico "a I'angburn asked the was told that it would he given when the door was opened. I'angburn then opened the door, when Churchill stepped in with throe others, and informed him that they were II. S. Ollicera, and had come to search tho house.

At 1'angburn's request for their authority, they showed a search warrant, nnd were permitted to make their search unmolested. Churchill immediately went to a trap tl ior to the cellar, which was covered with a carpet, nr which few who were nc-q'lainted with tho hotiso oven, knew of, and said, "we wish to search this Tho search here, as well as in all other parts of the house, the exception of one room, which was locked, and tho key to which could not be found. El liott romarked that 'it tho door was not opened speedily, he woul force I'angburn replied that "if ho forced tho door, ho did it nt his poril.f and nt the same time, in loud voice, as if speaking to some on the inside, said "llydu, have your revolvers ready, and if they come in, give it to them At this Elliott stoped back and inquired if there was no other accesB to the room. Ho was told that there was a window in tho rear, but that was also fastened. Tho Marshals wont rqund, ac companied oy I aughurn, hut did not succeed in raisins it.

Churchill asked him what he would take to let him take out a light, remarking that there was one cracked already, and was told he might take ono out lor a quarter, whereupon bo proceeded to do it, when ho wis restrained till ho paid the quar ter. Elliott then stuck his pistol through it, and nn opening was made, they looked in. Seein nothing, I'angburn laughed, and said, "iNow vou wish you had your quarter, don't you 1" A littlo riled at tho way thoyhad beon made fools of nnd feol- ing pretty cheap, thoy concluded they had no more business witn Mr. nno lett. i hoy had aliord od amusement enough for Mr.

in eonneotion with the quartor, to repay him for his broken night's rest. subfcqucntly.wliich our informant did I Ul not learn, they searched tiussell Ilyue house rlann-i Fin.lina him. they asked him how lie would liko to go to not very favorably disposed. They told him they did not want him. Alter getting their breakfast, they returned to his house, for what purpose is not known.

The nnnarent familaritv of the Marshals with the construction of l'angbvirn's houso led the citizens of Meehanicsburg to suppose that a man who had been loafing about town for somo time, was a spy iu their service, and a nunibor of gentlomen waited upon him with nu inviiatiou to loavo. He did not roqire a second invitation. The arrival of the Marshuls by this timo becoming pretty well knftwn, and tho placo becoming pretty warm for them they considered discretion the better part of valor, and gathered up their trans, and like Reynard after the old white hen with yellow logs, "Without a fowl or even a sneaked out of MochanUburg as they cucuked in Vi nv wk ahe White. A Mahomodan Afghan priost thus explained to a large audience, who wondered bow it happoned thatKuropoans differ in color from themselves. "Iheir faith forbids the European women to suckle their children, nnd they supply tho mother's placo by an ewe.

This therefore," ho "preserves the natural whiteness of the skin; but they nre not the loss half boast, half man and that is the reason they can jalc(j not understand tho sublime religion ot our vener- The Slave Irvine Not Expected, to Live. Ti slavo Irvino, who was shot in the lusj fugitivo slavo arrest unso in Cincinnatti, and taken over by his master, Col. Withers, to Covington, was when III sy lipioios weiu i.ivoihoic, reuiovcu iu ayoiio 1 carcJ 1 conipolcht phy-kian, his life is I'lj" From the National Anti-Slavery Standard. THE CASE OF MARGARET DOUGLASS. To thi 1'Jitnrsnf the Anti-Slavery Standard.

The intermeddling impudence of Yankoe bluestockings, in going to the slave States, and there unlawfully teaching the slaves to rend the IsituV was effectually checked by tho proseoution, con viction ana punishment ot Margaret Douglass Thai enss, truly reported, would road as follows INDICTMENT on tllcir oat(l that Margaret Douglass, be-bo jng nn evil-disposed person, not having the fear of eyn. but moved nn(j jn.ticatcd by CbSIMoN WEALTH, OF YlRUINlA, 1 Til the Cimiit iMilllOI.K VOL If TV, ss. LOUrt. riie Grand Aurora empanncllcd and sworn to inquire the Devil, wickedly, maliciously, nnd feloniously, on the fourth day of July, iu the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and fifty-four, nt Norfolk, in said County, did teach a certain black girl named Kato to road the Riblo, to the great displeasure of Almighty God, to the pernicious ex- nmplo of others in like case offending, contrary to the form of tho statute in such caso made nnd provided, nnd ngainst the peace nnd dignity of the Couimoiiwealtfi ol irginia. Victor Vagabond Prosecuting Attorney On thi indictment Mrs.

Douglass was arraign ed as a necessary matter of form, tried, found guilty, of course, nnd Judgo Scalawag, before whom slio was tried, havini; consulted with Dr Adams, ordered the Sheriff to pluce Mrs. Douglass in the prisoner's-box, when ho addressed her ns follows "Margaret Douglass, Bland up. You nro guilty of ono of tho vilest crimes that evor disgraced so-cioty and the jury have found you so. You hove taught a slave girl to read in the Hihlc. No en lightened society can exist where such offences go unponished.

The Court, iu your case, do not feel for you one solitary ray of sympathy, nnd they will inflict on you tho utmost "penalty of the law. In any other civilized country you would have paid the forfeit of your vriines with your life, and the Court have only to recret that such is not tho law in this country. The sentence for your offence '9' one month ttie wun 7 ja.h nnd that you pay tho costs this prosecu tion- sheriff, remove the prisoner to Mil. On tho publication of tbe60 proceedings, the Doctors of Divinity preached each a sermon on the necessity of obeying tho laws; the New York Ob- server noticed with much pious gladness a revival of religion on Dr. Smith's plantation in Georgia, among his slaves; wbilo the Journal of Commerce commended this political preaching of the Doctors of Divinity because it favored slavery.

Let us do nothing to offend our Southern brethren. SI, Louis, May 24, 1857. JUDGE LEAVITT'S DECISION IN THE CASE OF THE UNITED STATES MARSHALS. Judge Leavitt has finally decided tho Clark CounHy rescue case in favor of the United States Marshals. We make such extracts from the De- oisirp as nre of general interest.

Xnor stating the caso in detail, tho Judge main tains tho right of the Federal Court to issue the writ of habeas corpus though the prisoner be held by stato authority. His authority is a Congress ional law passed in 1833, which ho fortifies by judicial precedent as follows There is high judicial authority for the exer ciso of the power in quostion by a judgo of the United states, under tho net nt JNI.S. In the cobo ex-pnrte, Robinson, 0 McLean, 3 io, known as the Rosetta case, the facts stated arc that a female slavo traveling in company with her master, in ho Stato of Ohio, was taken by a writ of habeas orims before a I'robnto Judgo, at Columbus, nnd adjudged by him to be free. She was afterwards arrested by the Marshal, as a fugitive, upon a warrant issued by a Commissioner and upon a habeas corpus issued by Judge Darker of tho Court of Common l'lcas of Hamilton county, tho alledg- cd fugitive was discharged Irom tho custody oi l.n tuna i.n 11 ii.mm. i i i Tin Ulllt i nai nnu innuv.v i ruiiiu vuiiiiiiirnitiiici and, wbilo in custody, and before the examination, by ttie Commissioner, Judge 1'arkor adiudgcd the1 Marshal guilty of a contempt fur re arresting the! female; and he was committed to jail under that judgment.

Judgo McLean, on the petition of the issued a writ ol habeas conwta returna bio bofore him and after full argument, on the facts stated, ordered the Marshal to bo discharged from imprisonment. The learned Judgo did not hesitate to issue tho habeas coryus, under the statute of 1833; and admitted evidence of the facts relating to the imprisonment of tho Marshal, nnd discharged him, on tho ground that bo was imprisoned for an act admitted to be done in obedience to law. Although in that caso there bad boon a judgment by a Court of Record, that the allodged fugitive was entitled to her discharge, this was not held to bo conclusive nnd the judgo asserted tho right of going behind the judgment and examining tho vliola proceeding. The result was, that tho imprisonment of the Marshal was declared to be illegal, rnd for nn net omitted, pursuant to a law of the United States. In bis opinion, the Judge says, "A senso of duty compels me to say, that the proceedings of tho honorablo Judge (Parker) were not only without authority of law, but ngainst law, nnd that tho proceedings aro void, and I am bound to treat them as a nulity." Another case, cited in nrsnment, ex varlc Jen- kins, Wallace, asserts tne power 01 a federal judgo t- issue tho writ of habeas in a.

1 cases wniiin tne language ui 111c ui and to discharge, uudcr all circumstances, where 11 the imprisonment is lor act done uy autiioi ity 01 the United States. The learned Judgo Grter, ot the Supreme Court of the United States, his opinion on that -caso, says, "1 he authority cooler- red on tho lttdgos ot the i nitod otatcs, uy tins of Concress. cives them all the pow press, cives mem an uie powers wmuu uny other Court could exercise, or cives them nono at all. If under such writ they may not dischargo their officer, whon imprisoned by any authority for an net done in pursuance ot a law ot the lilted States, it would be impossible to discover lor what useful purpose the net was passed. Is the prisoner to be brought bel'oro them only that they may acknowledge their utter impotcnoe to protect him?" The case here roferred to is very similar, in several of its aspects, to one bofore this Court.

In that case several deputy nmislnUs were resisted in their attempts to arrest a fugitivo. A complaint was made bofore a justice ol tho peace charging! the denutios with an assault aud battery on the fugitive: a warrant was issued by the justice and tho deputies were lodged in jail hey appueo for a writ of habcut corpus, and although it up poured on the hearing tiiey hud been committed un process, legal aud lighten its face, Judgo Grier rcoioved evidence that tho deputies wcro imprisoned for an act done in tho discharge their duty, aud without hesitancy, delivered thcin from the cqstody of tho jailor. meso ensos oslaoluli boyond doubt, that federal Judgo, ur Court, upon tho return of a habeas corpus issued pursuant to the actr of 1833, setting up nn imprisonment undor State process, regular on its faco, may receive evidence ns to the fact connected with such imprisonment end, County. If in this thev have done no more of a if it appears to have been for nn net done or omitted in the performance of olfioml duty, to order the discharge of the party. There is no reason to doubt tho correctness of this construction.

It does not imply Any invasion of tho Sovereignty of the State, whose process is thus treated. Nor Is it based on any assumption or claim, that a federal Court or Judge 1ms any jurisdiction to revise or bci nsiue, tne judgments ot tlio Uourts, or Magistrates of State. It is merely the exerciso cf power to enquiro into the cause of imprisonment nnd buc-u cause is within the contemplation of act to grant nn order for thetlischnrge of the imprisoned party. Neither dues it import, as suggested in the argument, that a federal or VOurt can protect nn officer of tho I'niteu States from punishment for a crime committed against the laws of too State, under pretence that he was doing his duty. it tho jurisdiction, to the extent indicated, does not exist, it is very clear the feoveremtity of ho United States is liublo every day to bo contemned trampled upon.

Upon any other view, it is in tho power of any ono corrupt enough mnke a false oath ngainst nn officer of the L'ni-ling having charge of offenders ngainst its laws to procure their release, nnd most effectually to obstruct nnd nulify the legislation of the Union for tho punishment of crime, It is easy to con-lers, ceivo, bow not only tne fugitive i-iavo i.aw, the Post Oflico Department, nnd laws punish inir tho innklnc of spurious coius of tho United States, may be defeated in their salutary opera-j tions, if the jurisdiction referred to. toes noi exist, It is now proper to enquire, whether from the facts before the Court, it sufficiently nppoars these Denutv Marshals were in the rightful nnd proper discharge of their duties, when the net charged upon them ns a crime ngninst the State of Ohio was committed. I shall endeavor to do this as briefly as possible. In the first place it may bo remarked, that these deputies were in the possession cf lawful process for the nrrest of the parties chnrged with violation of the laws of the United States. And it tnny bo remarked that it was pot optional with them whether they would servo tho process.

They nminr nr tV, support the Constitution of the United States, but 1 i 11 nm nnimnl tni-a luirn tit-iii'nsa which should como into their hands tor service, and were subject to punishment for not doing so. There is no question, from tho evidence, that the warrants referred to were legally served, that the prisoners were legally in tho custody of the deputy Maishald. Having the prisoners thus in lawful custody, they had an undoubted right to tiso nil the force necessary to retail! them in such custody. And in caso of an open, undisguised attempt to rescue them by force, they would bo justified in killing the assailants if that were necessary to retain the possession of their prisoners, and such killing cleuily would not bo a crime against the State of Ohio. But it is insisted that the Sheriff of Clarke county was in pssscssion of a valid nnd lecal writ of habeas corpus, hich he was attempting in good faith to serve, that ho was violently nnd illognlly resisted by the deguty Marshals in such attempt.

Un the other band, it urged that the habeas cor pus placed in the bands of Sheriff Layton was mere colorable, issued in fraud ol the law. nna was a part of -a consnirncv, by wVich to effect the rescue of the prisoners. This writ has been the subject of much comment by counsel, nnd authorities havo been cited to show that it was a nulity, and that tho Sheriff was under no obligation to servo it. Asa consequence, it is insisted the dep uty Marshals were not bound to respoct it. and could incur no liabity for resisting its execution.

I cannot take the time necessary to discuss or decide all tho points mado in tho argument, in reference to this writ. Tho transcript of the proceedings by the Judgo of probate of Chanipaigne county, who issued the writ nnd to whom it was returned, and by whoso orders the prisoners wore discharged, is belore me. he writ was obtained upon the application of one F. W. Greeiihotigh, who, against the truth of the case, took upon him-solf tho responsibility of swearing that the prisoners wero detained in custody by Churchill without legal authority.

It issued under the Ohio net of 18fiti, nnd is directed, not to the person having the prisoners in charge, but to Rny and all the Sheriffs of the State of Ohio, without any showing by afli- dait or otherwise that tho othi-er nr person linv inK 'he prisoners in custody will refuse or neglect Unu '11, id it ittfA-ri, ril Mm Vov.si-ns or the statute, I suppose invalidates the ulld a ShcriQ would have incurred no liability ardus.u to serve u. i uo no propose to inid anoinalous provisions of the st itute referred to It will suffice to say, that while it provides lur a writ, designated as writ ol' habeas corpus, tho writ has really nono of the qualities or characteristics of that great writ of right. Whatever may havo been the design of the statute, it eeenis admirably suited to effect the rcscuo of any prisoner in tho custody of an officer of tho United States. All that is needed for this purpose is an affidavit that such prisoner is illegally dotaincd custody, nnd by tho aid of this statu to it would he practicable, upon the oath of an unscrupulous affiant, to effect the dischargo of a prisoner in tho penitentiary, un der sentenoo of any court of the United States, It is also insisted, in argument, that, if tho deputies had the lawful custody of these prisoners, and wcro justified iu resisting uny attempt to tako them by a State oflicor, that such resistance was excessive, and that, by sucu excess, mey nave forfeited the protection 1833. and lire amenable to the before noticed, the only quest now to deal is, whether the act hull against tho Deputies was done in the proper lischargo ot their official duties, inis inquiry ncceesllri lettu.s to a notice of some of tho facts before the Court in connection with tho attempted rC5ll0 tiie Many ol the statements in tlj0 unidavita havo no reference to this trans- lu.tion, nnd need not bo specially noticed.

It is allowed viulenco of tlio Deputies in resisting the tlmt forrns ,1,,, 0f ti10 complaint ije10 tho Justice of the Fence of .,1 1 in ti.r.v aro within ttie provisions ot tho act ol Uotgress. There aro some considerations which are conclu sive of the nuestion indicated. In his oral evidence if not in his affidavit. Sheriff Layton admits he was notified when the writ of habeas cirpus was placed in his hands that tho- persons lining the custody ot the prisoners were Deputy Marshals, and held tho prisoners under tho authority ot tho United States. It is very clear upon the author ities before referred to, that with a knowledge of the fact, even if tho writ were valid, the power of tho Sheriff was ut an end, ntnt io was wrong 111 attempting tho service.

As nn officer, sworn to support the Constitution of tho United Stntes, be WUH under no obligation to serve it, and would havo incurred no liability in refusing to do so. His return ot ttie lact, that tne prisoners in eusto dy were held by tho paramount authority of the 1 n. ill 1 1. lined mates, wouni uavu novo a tompiL-vu jusiiu-cation for not serving tho writ. Ilo was fully awaro that the rit could not bo served without brincint: the authorities of the United States and the State of Ohio into direct cullisiou, and Ihnt the issue to be settled was purely ono of physical jiower.

I unnecessarily, and against the obligations of official duty, ho placed himself in a poti lion of peril, he may be supposed to have done with a lull knowledge of what the ooniequnnica might be, and ft determination lo tuoet thcin nt nn hataid 1, by the Act ol 1 law of Ohio. As with which I tm cli.iiLiod ns cri m- 'stood it, and hence be nnd his assistants deliberate ntely armed themslves, as a preparation for the-entirely conflict, which they saw was inevitable. In serv-to tho writ, their first obiectwns to do what the-ted writ required, namely, to take the prisoners from the custody of the Deputy Marshals. probably, on the active co-operation of the prison, they made this attempt. It is altogether im- so To understand the nature of this condict, should be remembered that the Deputy MariHali, by their official oaths, were under a positive and paramount obligation to retain their prisoners.andi to oppose all attempts to rescue them.

The prisoners were lawfully in their custody, nnd they would have been derelict in duty to have parted with that onitody nnlcss compelled to do so by an overpowering physical force. The Sheriff bad a writ which commanded him to take the prisoners from the custody of these officers of the United States. It wat not the usual nnd well known writ of habeas corpus, summoning the party, having the ulleged unlaw (ul custody of the persons named in, tho writ, to have thoiu before the officer issuing it, with the cause ot their detention, but a writ requiring them to bo taken, forcibly, if necessary, from those having the prior and lawful custody This was the only way of (erving the writ and ttie question, whether it could be served. simply a auction of power. So the Sheriff nndar.

iiim-ruu woeiuer viie oueriu, on coming up with the United Slates officers, announced Tiis offieia. character, or that he bad a writ requiring him to. take the prisoners. If such announcement were inude (which is doubtful from the weight of the, testimony,) it was an idle form, which, the Deputies wcro not bound to respect, and which oan, have no influence in the decision of this question. They would have been faithless to their duty if' they hud quietly surrendered their prisoners upon, such a It is apparent, from facts not in confroverojv that the Sheriff and his assistants well understood) how the writ was to be served.

They were apprised that a mero statement that they were officers of the Stato of Ohio, and had a writ of habeas corpus for tho prisoners, would oome altogether short of the exigency of the writ. They knew I that nothing bu the actual capturo of the vrieo nn.d their coisorcal custody would answer He, iuuuioiiuct. Hence, tho first lnoveasat was the seizing, by the assistant of the Sheriff, of the bri. Idle of the horso in the foremost carriage. He waa resisted in this attempt and immediately aimed hie rorolvcr at the Deputy; and if he did not actually fire, it is beyond ail question ho made the attempts Whether ho fired, or mado the attempt, the officer whose life was thus put at hazard had an un doubted right, iu sclf.dofcnce, to disable his assailant, aud was fully justified in firing at him with this view.

It may le noticed here, as throw ing some light ou the intention of the Sheriff' and his assistant, that the Sheriff states aa his impression that his assistant, as he drove past tho rear carriages pointed his pistol from the carriage in which he rode, thus giving a very significant indication of what might be expected the prisoners were not pencably surrcndeied. 1'ut it is said the Sheriff was most wantonly injured in this affray. In his oral testimony he states that, after leaving his buggy, he approached the carnage in hich Unurcbitl rode, with pistol in hand, prepared to hre, and intending to fire, at Churchill, ibis tact clearly proved by many other witnesses in their affidavits. And it is also proved beyond doubt that it was when the Sheriff was thus approaching that the latter seized him, with the sole view of disarming and thus saving his own or the life of another per son. Jt is greatly to be regretted that (he Sheriff was severely injured in this rencounter: but if any fact is established in this case, it is that these injuries resulted from the severe conflict in the attempt to disarm him.

In such a contest the de gree of forco which may bo used cannot atcu with nosoiute precision. If the writ put into the hands of the Sheriff had been issued in good faith, and were the well known writ of habeas corpus, requiring the Deputy Mar shals to produce tho bodies of the prisoners for the purpose of inquiring into the cause of their detention, it would have been the duty of those officers to take the persons before the Judge. I not as a matter of legal obligation, the courtesy uuo 10 me uuLiioLiLiua ui uiiuinur jurisdiction would have required this. In doing this the would havo retained the possession of the prisoners, ns no Stato Judge, it may be presumed, would havo authorized their discbarge when it was made known to him that they were held under valid United States authority. Rut, ns before policed, the writ under the extraordinary (hia law cf i856i, requiring tho officer to whom it is directed to take the ptisoners, no matter by wnom ot by what thority they are defamed, a wholly dinorent thing.

This net seems to have been inconsiderate, ly passed, nnd in its practical execution must lead to frequent conflicts between the National andj Stato authorities. It might, with great propriety, bo designated as nn act to prevent the execution of tho laws of the United States within tho of, Ohio. It seems clear that the Deputy Marshals were right; under the circumstances of this case, in re-, sisting the attempt to rescue the prisoners from, their custody, Judgn Nolson, one of the Justioee of the Supremo Court of the Unitod States, has stntcd tho law on this point with great force end accuracy. While he concedes that there may be cases in which a State Judgo will be justified io granting a habeas corpus for a prisoner ia confine ment under niicd Mates process, ho asserts that. process issued by oral tribunal under tho Constitution, or a law of the I uitcd States, or a treaty, it is the duty cf an officer not to iive him vp or to allow Aiwt lo pass Irom his hands at any stage oj the proceedings.

Ho should stand upon his authority; and if resisted, maintnin it with nil the power conferred on him for that purpose." (I lilatchford's Ilep. 635). Kven in cases where thore is concurrent jurisdiction in the Genera! Government nnd a State, it is well settled both by the adjudications of the Fedor-. ill and Siato Courts, that the tribunal to which the jurisdiction first nttflches, shall retain it. In the case Ex parte Jenkins before cited Judge Clrier says; 'YV hero persons and property are to seizure nnd nrrest by U.e process ai coin, mat which first attached should have the preference.

Any attempt of either to take thera from the legal custody of tho officers of the other would be en unjustifiable exercise of its pawer, nnd lead to moat deplorable consequences." Such is the where there is nn admitted concurrent jorindieuoo. With how much greater force does i apply, where the right or power exercised is exclusive ia the United Statos It cannot he necctisary to notice further the legal points aiisingin tho caso, or thd numerous tscts set torth 111 the ntlidavits. 1 tie conclusion indicated serpi to be fully sustained by the law and the facts. There is, however general view of the case that leavos no doubt as to the real cberea-ter of the transaction involvod. It cannot be eoo-trovertcd, that thero was a settle purpose, in at least a portion or the community in which these occurence took place to prevent, either by direct or indirect means, the execution of a law of the Uuited Statos.

Four persuns had been arrested, under legal process, for an alleged violation of one of tho provisions of the Fugitive-slave Lew. There known to exist, in the counties to. which reference has been made, a decided feeling of hostility to that act and tho "pinion ig -m .1... il nm.maia ia iHlnw h.mnn (h. nAnann un(ier nn(j circumstances.

The learned t.U 1 .11 mi i.i.iv. unuui uiucaa ipouuu Jk tu.