in force
since 1823, arrested and lodged him in the district jail, where he was
detained until the 26th of May, when, the Clyde being ready to sail,
Roberts was put on board, and sailed the same day.

"On the 9th of June, a writ in trespass, for assault and false
imprisonment, from the Federal Court, was served upon Sheriff Yates,
laying the damage at $4000.

"The Act of 1844, I take it, was intended to prevent all interference
on the part of any power on the face of the earth, with the execution of
this police regulation, which is so essential to the peace and safety of
our community. Had the legislature which passed it ever dreamed that the
sheriff was to be subjected to the annoyance of being dragged before the
Federal Court for doing his duty under a law of the State, I am sure it
would have provided for his protection. As no such provision has been
made for so unexpected a contingency, I recommend that you so amend this
Act of 1844, that it may meet any case that may arise.

"It is certainly wrong to tolerate this interference with the
laws enacted for the protection of our institution. In the general
distribution of power between the Federal and State Governments, the
right to make their own police regulations was clearly reserved to
the States. In fact, it is nothing more nor less than the right of
self-preservation-a right which is above all constitutions, and above
all laws, and one which never was, nor never will be, abandoned by a
people who are worthy to be free. It is a right which has never yet been
attempted to be denied to any people, except to us.

"The complaint against this law is very strange, and the attempt to
bring us in conflict with the General Government on account of it, is
still more remarkable; when, so far from its being at variance with the
laws of the United States, it is only requiring the State authorities to
enforce an Act of Congress, approved February 28th, 1803, entitled, An
Act to prevent the importation of certain persons into certain States,
where, by the laws thereof, their importation is prohibited. By
referring to this Act, you will see that the plaintiff in the action
alluded to was prohibited by it from entering into this State. I deem
it unnecessary, however, to enter fully into the argument. If any doubt
should be entertained by you, as to its constitutionality, I beg leave
to refer to the able opinion of the Hon. J. McPherson Berrien, delivered
at the time he was Atto