Important from Washingtontrouble growing out of the execution of the fugitive slave law — serious Military Riot — conflict between the Military and Civil authorities, &c.
It appears that the abolition agnut at Washington find more difficulty in dealing with the negro question than they anticipated. A correspondent of the Baltimore Sun writing on the 23d of May, gives the following account of an affair which took place at the Federal capital on the previous evening: ‘ The anomalous state of things here at this time, in connection with the institution of slavery, gives rise to new and unexpected incidents from day to day, which are not only perplexing but may become, in a degree dangerous. A just discreetness and a wise forbearance are to be hoped for, however, in the premises. Since the difficulty motioned yesterday, with the 76th New York regiment resisting the civil police in the reclamation of fugitive slaves from among them on write issued under the law, we have had another episode — a military guard going last night, by order of Gen. Wadsworth, the military. Governor, to the jail to take away a colored girl belonging to Mrs. Allnott, of Prince George's county, Maryland, and because of the jailor (Mr. B. Milburn) declining to deliver her up, placing him and the Deputy Marshal (Mr. Phillips) under a military arrest, and taken possession of the keys of the prison and the prison itself. These two officials were taken to the guard house, while Messrs Joseph H. Bradley and James M Carlisle, both prominent members of the bar, the first council for the claimant of the slave, who in the meantime went to the jail in their official capacity, were held within its walls as prisoners also. At a late hour of the night however, the U. S. Marshal of the District, Col. Lamon, having duly summoned the police, went with Police Superintendent Webb and Sergeant Cronin to the jail, and in turn placed under arrest the Military Sergeant and sentry who had been left in charge, releasing Messrs Bradley and Carlisle. During this morning the Sergeant of the Military Guard was released by the Marshal, and Deputy Marshal Phillips, and Jailor Milburn, it was expected, would be dismissed from the guard-house. The Marshal avails himself of the earliest opportunity to consult the President on the subject. ’ The Washington Star, of the 23d, has an account of the disturbance, which concludes as follows: ‘ The Marshal found it impossible to see the President, who was understood to be absent from the Executive mansion, engaged with the Secretary of War in the transaction of business of so great public importance as that he had some hours before given directions involving a declension to see any one on any business whatever last night and to-day.--The Marshal then repaired to the attorney General, with whom he consulted freely us to his path of duty in the premises. Subsequently he returned to the jail and arrested the military guard by virtue of his civil authority, disarmed them, and placed them under lock and key J. M. Carlisle, Esq acting as his posse armed with the revolver and sabre of the sergeant. Thus the matter stands at noon to-day.--Deputy Marshal Phillips and Jailor Milburn are held as prisoners by the provost guard in their prison. The imbroglio is not to be solved until the President can find time to dispose of it, which may be twenty-four hours yet. We hear that the Military Governor's order to take the woman from the lawful custody of the United States Marshal was predicated upon testimony impugning the loyalty of the claimant. ’ We learn by a dispatch from Washington, later than the foregoing, that all who were arrested by either side were released. The dispatch adds-- ‘ "Marshal Lemon and Military Governor Wadsworth had a long interview relative to the conflict of jurisdiction between them — the former claiming the right to exercise all his civil functions in the absence of the declaration of martial law. The question at issue will have to be settled by the Executive. The subject has occasioned general comment and some excitement." ’ The New York Herald, of May 24th, gives Gen. Wadsworth the following complimentary notice in connection with the affair. ‘ In another column we publish a telegraphic dispatch from which it will be seen that, under the leadership of General Wadsworth, a disgraceful military riot — even to the breaking of jail and the rescue of a prisoner — has taken place in the city of Washington, the capital of the nation. In the very presence of the assembled Congress the majesty of the law has been insulted and the dignity of the republic set at naught, by orders of General Wadsworth, who, because he wears epaulets, imagines he may play the despot and do what he pleases with impunity. It is very clear that Wadsworth is completely in the wrong, and he would have been far better employed in helping General McClellan to whip the enemy at Richmond, in sad of creating in Washington and helping to defraud the loyal citizens of Maryland of their property. It is an our laws, and indeed of the laws of all free tries, that the civil power is supreme over the military, unless where martial law is proclaimed by the Chief Even if martial law did exist at the the District of Columbia, the act of General. Wadsworth would have been a riotous proceeding, a high handed outrage; for martial law only suspend the civil law so far as is necessary to the safety of the army and the success of military operations, and can only be employed for the arrest of dangerous and suspicious persons within the lines of the army. There are no military operations going on at Washington, and the acts perpetrated by order of General Wadsworth might have been done with the same legality in the city of New York. ’