Donnell v. State
This text of 3 Ind. 480 (Donnell v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
This was an indictment against Luther A. Donnell, containing two counts; one charging him with [481]*481inducing the escape of, and the other with secreting, “ a certain woman of color, called Caroline, then being the slave of, and owing service to, one George Ray, in the state of Kentucky.”
The defendant was convicted.
The section of the statute of our state upon which this indictment was grounded, according to the decision in Prigg v. Pennsylvania, 16 Pet. 539, is unconstitutional and void. The conviction upon it was, therefore, erroneous.
Prosecutions under a state statute against passing counterfeit coin in the similitude of the currency of the United States, are sustained on the ground, as we understand by the case of Fox v. Ohio, 5 How. U. S. 410, as explained in United States v. Marigold, 9 id. 560, that they are in reality for the punishment of private cheats practiced upon the citizens of the state within her jurisdiction by means of the counterfeit coin as the instrument of effecting them. But state statutes punishing the enticing away 'and secreting of slaves from citizens of other states, are in aid of the execution of the constitution and laws of the United States only, and not for the punishment of wrongs perpetrated upon their own citizens.
The judgment is reversed. Cause remanded, &c.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
3 Ind. 480, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/donnell-v-state-ind-1852.