Anti-slavery bugle. [volume], April 07, 1855, Image 2

About Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861

Image provided by: Ohio History Connection, Columbus, OH

                
THE A N T I - S L A V E It Y 1JUGLE.
td tr ic trsca ; I Usiit upon my rights, and will!
bold the U. 8. Marshal responsible I t the Unlivery
Of the c.rl I claim to this U. 8. Commissioner.
AttorneT I'ugh mid that the Marshal n liable
to the master tor the assessed value of the clave
who escapes, with or without a writ. His client, lie
hoped, would not be ground between the upper aud
the nether millstone
Attorney Chase mid, it i intimated the exercise
of guardianship will be resisted. It Is the duty ut
the Court to entorce it order, and of the Shoritf to
see it executed. Where' the authority ? say Mr.
t'ugb.l It i tho universal pnctice, oiid ia an in
herent power of nil CouiU. Then the Court ha
no power to punish for contempt any i i' lor fere nee
In view ; without that pjwor no Court ald exist
one day. la tin proceeding e rescue f What
Court will coiiHtiuc thi role-ise, onjMie ordor of n
Court, itn eseaps.to make tlm Marshal rosponsiblo?
None, either North ur South.
Mr. Wolfe, of L .uisvilld, sought to any a word
a eeenset for Mr Deninso i the claimant.
Mr. I), i before the U. 8. OommiNiioncr Pendery
aevkMig the recaption of his fugitive slave Uosetta
ponding the proceeding, a State Court inter
fere which ia supremo, that of the United States
or an inferior court ! lias a State Court a right to
liberate lave ? Your houor ii sworn to support
tho U. 8. Constitution, and that in supreme. We
lax mid demand a decision before tho U. 8. Com-
mitsionvr. a determination of our lights if this
warrant i Talid.
The court informed the speaker that, not only
did the order of the couit decide the warrant inva
lid, hut on the merita of the case that tho gill was
free. .
Attornev Wolfe That dtschtreo ts what we
complain of as oonoxitMi. H is this court power
over the V. S. Court of tho Commissioner ? lie
came jut tJre highor court first; 1 mean no dis
respect. The Court said, that was necessary, or there
. would not have been any need for a habeas cor
pus. The case of her detention, logal or illegal,
was (ought to be known by the writ of habeas
corpus. Ho must have been in some other coutt.
Attorney Wolfe sai l, why can't gentleman let
the Commissioner adjudicate this matter? after
his docinsinn another habeas corpus mny be sued
out; I don't say it is r ght or legal.
The Court anid that tho warrant had boon sued
out from the U. 8. Commissioner, the girl was un
dor detention, but the warrant had not yet been
returned to the Cominiaaiouer bclore that officer
had commenced a determination ot her liberty,
writ of habeas corpus was granted, ana trial com
menced here bofore any trial hud been commenced
by the Commissioner. The ductaiun shows that the
pirl i not before any Court; the warrant is defect
ive and alio U free.
Attorney Wolfe Suppose a State Court deems
the Commissioner an unconstitutional officer
would it be right in a State Court to grant a writ
of habeas corpus to get a person detained under
warrant from such unconstitutional officer?
The Court replied that the general Court of Virginia
hod so decided.
Attorney Wolfe said both Virginia and South
Carolina have been in open rebellion to the United
States government.
The Court Virginia has in this stood at the
head of States, the champion of human right.
Attorney- Puirh denied the authority of tho
Court to do moru than declare as to tho freedom of
the girl. He asked Mr. Chase for his authority to
deliver her into the custody of a guardian.
Attorney Walker urged that universally courts
gave custody of minors, of children of Under age,
to father or mother, niter giving judg nirnt.
Attorney i'ugh urged that no contempt has yet
been committed. Ho thought the Court had inad
vertently ordered to much. Ho moved to strike
out all after the diechargo in the Court's order,
and simply leave it a decree of freedom.
Attorney Chaso contended that there was no
other proceedings ponding in any other Court on
this matter. There was a mo:k representation of
a Court, perhaps but the officer was only minis
terial at best, and not a judge, and even tits
o, and even Ins pour
powers were vain, his proceedings nothing, for the i
warrant was proved and deemed to tie ueioctive.
iNQiiner can mr. renutrj or .ur. luiuiiinun inou
any thing more to do with this girl, she being
free.
There is no power which he could exercise con
sistently with this Court.
Attorney Chambers on the part of his client,
Bey. Mr. Itanison, after a consultation, had de
clared his intention to withdraw from the Court
and soek their rights before tho Commissioner.
His client wished no difficulty. The reverend gen
tleman asked, as a courtesy, that he should be per
mitted to make an explanation, and make somo
statements.
Key. Mr. Dennison.said : If it plcaso the court,
I find myself in a most embarrising position.
When I spoke before, I was somewhat under ex
citement, in which, as the principal party in this
transaction, I could not but sympathise. As a
stranger, I foel that I have a right to say some
thing. I am far from wishing that there should
i
beany collision between the State and United
....: ..(K..- .;il T fool i,n,l t thvr,,. ..
.... . ....
.jf .,... .1 . ..t -;,h.!,.. t,i. i
case from this court.
I have denied from the origin of this matter-!
resnect to the Jurisdiction of tho State
Courts the authority of this tribunal tu adjudicate
upon this matter.
ftseoms to be supposed that every one who
a fellow ciriitine in l orduge is unworthy of
respect, and of a villainous heart.
Generosity would at least suggest some mitig.v
ting reflections in view of the fact that men have
Kaoii fimnfl a'mOArA i m tliA nil t'linnnv if nltrtnur avarv i
.pecies of crime.
N'i.w ir.wlmn I A .nm ton nr fiftonn mitlinn.
f thn intdli.ront noriion i,f ih nm.nlo ..f ); .
public, men of character and ropectability. and
high position in life, educated sumo in tho North
and some the South, men of as extensive reading
as any of those before tho court, men who would
just as little violate the principles of true morality
as any uf these I say, sir, that in the sight of ail
. this, it should, at least, raise a doubt as to whether
thoso who hold property in slavos really merit the
abuse that is so frequently heaped upon them.
In this position 1 nnd myselt in this court, and
it is upon this position I respectfully announce my j
intention that thi case ahull be carried beforo a
. tribunal of my country, where justice may bo
awarded to me that for sjme reason I have failed (
to receive at your hands.
The court then ordered the following entry to be
tnvio on record.
' It appearing to the court that the aaid Rosetta is
a minor, under the age of eighteen, and by the pro-
duction of a duly certified record of the Probate i
r . ..e V 1. 1: . . 1 1 . i . t r
umnui i rnimoii couniy; uni", linn ij. u. an
I31,. -I 1,,.l J , . . ,1
Coyne was on loe iiu uay oi niarcr., insr., uuiy
appointed guardian of said minor, by aaid Probate
Court, it U further ordered by the court, that the
said Uosetta be delivered to the custody of her
aid guardian, and the Sheriff of this county be
directed to carry this ordor into effect to prevent
" her caption until alio got to some proper place of
safety.
- . Mr. Pugh did not know what the Sheriff might
consider a place of safety. Perhaps he might not
consider any place short of her home as such a
placo, and would the court direct the Sheriff to see
- her safely there ?
Tho court thought (hey had gone far enough
. Mr. Van Slyke said he wisaed to make a few re
maka in justification of himself, a the guardian
' of this girl. So far aa he had any action in the
aaatter it had been that of a law abiding citizen.
He had expressed his desire from the commence
tnonl of this affair that it ahould be submitted to a
' fair and impartial adjudication. It had been in
: his power for two week post to remove her entire
ly out of the jurisdiction of this court, and to
' such a course he had bean warmly urged, but had
,s strongly resisted He would say to all interest
ed that he was opposed to any personal violence.
' lis certainly should use none, aud be hoped that
. Hons wouiu resort to ic
" Mr. Chase then filed the following affidavit t
In the matter of UosetM a minor.
. , And the said Lewis U. an Slyke, appears in
'.' open Court and being sworn say, that he is in
forme J and holievo that II. II. Uobinson, Marshal
' of the United States for tho southern district uf
Ohio, has declared his purpose to take U setta be
' fore John L. I'cndery, Commissioner, Aa., before
'' tho same cause of eapture, notwithstanding the or
. der nf thi Court discharging her from aaid custody
of this affiant, and he verily believes that ho will
eafry saoh purl use nto execution, anieso this
afBnbeprolo!lb7tbeorr of this Oitwt dicing
reeling tho Sheriff to protect him iu mid custody I
until lie van place the said Uosotta lit some proper
Swum uud subscribed in my presence in auuncu
Court, thi Ultu ilny ot Marth, A. 1. 1865.
THOS, SPOONER, Clerk.
By H. SMETHURST.
a
a
Mr. Chase in support of the motion raid : Thcro
undoubtedly exists in the minds ol the claimants
of tins girl, it wull-luuuded intention to re-arrcsl
uur ;no person w ithiu the sound ol my Voice 1 think,
at all doiiu.s the e.-.iateuce of such a purpose. The
Marshal thinks that it is due to himaeit lroui the
penalties bxed by the fugitive slave act o to do.
1 have no cinsuio to pronounce upou hitu lor that
opiuion, yet I think it is an unfounded one.
llaiiug discharged her as tree, you proceed in
tho next place to deliver her up to her le
gally appointed guardian. You proceed in the
loud place to ace that order ia executed. Mow
then, the question is whether that protection is to
lie continued not a single moment ullcr she bo iu
Hie custody of Mr. Vau Slyke, or until this child
reaches soiuu proper place of safety. 1 think that
iliu ciicumsuucea ot this caao lire peculiar, and
rouuu'u particularly tho protection of this court.
t ncro la tins child, and whure is her guaidiau's
residence f why was this case brought here? me
inure uo Commissioners in Ouluiuuus? 1 know
mere aro. Yt hy was tlio application imuiu oeiorc
a particular individual at the distance ol u hundred
and iwuntv miles awuv. and the Marshal seut at a
great expui.su to suite this child in thu dwelling ol
a peaccuole and quiet cituen, uud bring her here
amid all ihudiiiiguisol cullisiju and violence w hich
necessarily must arise? Tho Marshal lor the
Southern District of Uliio is sent to tho extreme
limit ol his jurisdiction to bring this child dowu
liuiu to have tier right ot irccuuiii, dear to her us
tho right of any individual iu the sound of my
voice is duir to him, to havo her right settled by u
Couimissiouur of this county, who lias acquired, 1
am sorry to say, an uueuvtable notoriety. Why
was all tuts extraordinary proceeding f it was lor
(ho advautage to be gained. Welt now, sir, alter
those advautages are acquired, by bringing thi
child hero, wuutis the remedy pointed out by the
Fugitive Slavo act? Why, air, upon a simple affi
davit of this claimant, the Marshal is authorize!
t j arrest and he musters a w hole pos.-c of the coun
try every man whom he can Bud, and they are nil
to bo paid out of tho United States Treasury. He
is protected to the very uttermost. He can have
the Marshal tho posse, and the whole Treasury ol
the United States at his disposal for that purpose,
and is a protection of liberty to be desired? We
simply ask that sho shall be protected until she
shall net into somo proper place. 1 think tliatj
these considerations arc pertinent to this case, and
1 think they show, in a clear point, the duties of a
State Court iu Ohio, to carry out the laws of Ohio.
Mr. Ueorge E. i'ugh Your Honor has decided,
that this piece of paper (the warrant) is not suffi
cient. The simple question then, is, whether the
Marshal fur the southern district of Ohio is au
thorised to huid this girl by that paper. There is
uo other question.
The gentleman says this is a peculiar case. It
is a peculiar case, uud us such thu"c ought nut to
bo admitted into it any feeling of prejudice or pas
sion. The gentleman says that instead of going
before the Commissioner at Columbus, this child
was brought here fur the purpose of gaining a par
ticular advantage How was it? Have we not
heard I'ruui the lips of her guardian that a mob
was ussemblcd iu Columbus, uud that it was with
difficulty they were quieted? With the character
of the L. 8. Commissioner we have nothing to do.
He is u duly appointed officer, auu acts under the
restrictions of uu until.
There i. evidently much excitement as to the is
sue of the case, caused undoubtedly hy the fact of
the girl bcitrg colored; lor it appears ull our sym
pathies are to be reserved for colored cases. It is
nut within the province of this court to sit iu judg
ment upon the Fugitive Slave bill That has been
States, as well as the constitution nnd laws of the
state ol Ohio.
LllllU UIIIIO Ulll 1I.ID IJUVII
passed; u is upon the Statutes ot the United States,
and your Honor is bound by your judicial oath to
...:. h- ..on.m.mo,, JJ 1,..Jm ,. ,i. ir,.i,,l
lt has been sustained
by tho tri-1
bunal authorized to deliberate upon it. Yet, not
withstanding this, your Honor is atLcd to go be
hind the principles of that act.
1 havo the highest respect for the laws of tho
State of Ohio ; 1 owe ioro to her than to any oth
er State; yet her State Courts must be bound to
enforce the laws of tho United Suites in preference
to their own. lias tins party nny rights winch
cannot be properly adjudicated before another tri
bunal? Sho is not without friends, uud has been
able to procure eminent counsel, w ho can well pro
tect ner iu those rights.
1 as men as a protection 10 1110 aiarsiia 1, iiiatir
.1 i-.i- .u .1 . -i 1
the power ol this court re at least so circumscribed
- . .
nut tu assume to a perpetual iniiinctiun upon
any lurtuer
Mr. Chase, in renlv. said -t do not mieslinn the i
gentleman's devotion to the State that has confer-j
m.oc .0 pe, peiua. .icon up...
proceedings iu regard to tho custody ol
-i r 1 ,..,
red sucti siirnal liunors upon turn, and to which he
is bound by the most endearing ties by which a
i... i i ... k;. ii.? i.i
w ... iuinij. w tvum
...!.: I... ,i i. r.:.i.r..i ..." k... i.:.. .
differ widely from mine as to what is necessary to
maintain the honor of the Stato of Ohio-very
Widely indeed. Does h think iho honor ,,r .i"
State uf Ohio is to be nreservod h this Court ma.
(king an order that is simply a nulity? In my judg-
juient tho honor of tho State of Ohio is to oe pro
holds served by this Cuurt saying that its orders are to
be executed, that they are to bo effectual. He
thinks it is the duty of the State t.f Ohio to keep
itself within its acknowledged limits, and not tu
.... l,l.i..l ....... ..J I.A I. T
jthink so too, but I think further that it is the duty
.. .I.Iu ... ,l.. ...!....:.. ... I...
.t. ....o. ,.r .1.. i:..:,.i v,.,. .. i.. ,t?
The primary duty of the Stato courts is to watch
.' .. . j, .
er the lioerties ot each indivuliial. unit ovorv
assault upun those liberties is an infringment of
stitutional Powers of this State,
1S IWU IJ V 1 lily O VI V(4 IIIU1I JUUllll llllt-l (JVUI T
the h .nor and dignity of tho State. A State is a
community uf men organized by and under a con-1
stitution. and regulated by lawsf and extendintr to
each individual certain rights and immunities, and
protecting him from unlawful seizure and arrest.!1"!11
What are courts constitutod fur but to sae that the
immunities and privileges are seemed from nn
infringement, and that no power lays the weight
juf a linger upon our constitution nnd laws. Sir,
our duty is to our State, and I must say that I am
somewhat astonished that my learned friend should
take up and udvocute so contrary a doctrine. Sir,
I cannot see, upon any such principles as I have
heard my friend contend for, whether he vindicates
the constitutionality of the law itBelf. I would
like to ask him whether the Fugitive Slave act is
.
not usurpation
... -
(Mr. Pugh I do not think it is.)
The Court then granted the motion, nnd the
girl was delivered into the custody of the Sheriff.
The Sheriff asked Mr. Van Slyke whore Im
wanted the girl delivered to him, ami was answer
ed by Mr. Chase, "at the Woodruff House."
On tho Sheriff and posse leaving the court-room,
to proceed to tho Woodruff House with "Uosetta,"
a largo-sized, hugh-tisted negro man, named Ciiis
holen, made a pass at Thomas Higdon, Deputy,
Sheriff, who held the girl, w hen he was seized by
Ben. Higdon, ex-Sheriff, who with Mr. Uaroute,
Turnkey who happened to be present, seized nnd
bore tho stout man to jail, where, on examination,
he was found to have a heavily loaded six-shoolor,
two jack-knives and a "bow lder."
The attendant officers, specially detailed, with an
immense crowd, walked without interruption to
the hotel, where the crowd was again immense.
At the hotel, the Sheriff, on the arrival of Mr. Van
Slyke delivered up the girl to him, when Mr. II.
II. Uobinson, U. 8. Marshal, presented himself
and produced a warrant similar to the first one.
demanding the girl to be taken, as a fugitive, ho
fore Commissioner Pendeiy. Mr. Van Slyko pro
tested against the domand, as she, was placed in
his custody hy the Court.
1 he marshal then proceeded to the front of the
building, on the -balcony, and addressed the as
sembled multitude, saving, "Iu the name of
the United States, I as Marshal of the Southern
District of Ohio, command the peace and my pro-
lection.
. JIo then read aloud a long list of detailed force,
and declared that no step would betaken without
authority.
RE-ARREST By THE U.S. MARSHAL-FRIDAY'S
PROCEEDINGS.
On Friday snnroing, at nine o'clock, oa thsopen-
of Jude Parker's Court, AttnYiu-y Timothy
Walker pri-sente
L. U. Vnn Slyko,
d the following affidavit of Mr,
guardian ot "Uosotta," and made-
tho motion recited below t
Stale if Ohio, ijtimilton cnvnltj 1.
Lotus 0. Van Slyke, makes oath and anys, that
about two or thrco o'clock 1. M. of this daf. to
wit: March t'Jih, lfOA. tho Sheriff of said county
delivered into the care and custody of this affiant
at the Woodruff House, in the city of Cincinnati,
in saiJ jounty, his ward, Kosetta Armstead, a col
ored girl, aged about sixteen years, in pursuance
mi nnlir nuiili! l.v the Court ot Common l'leas,
of said o unity, at said date, which said urder of
said court was made in tho hearing of a case upon
a writ of habeas corpus directed totnre Hiram II.
Uobinson, and issued by said court on behalf of
said Itosetia upon tiro affidavit nf Charles Langston
Affiant further says, that within tho period of live
minutes niter llicdelivcry to him of ins said ward,
1 1 n am H. Uobinson. upon the procurement of
Henry M. Dennison, as the affiant verily believes,
t'tireibl" nnd against the w ill of his affiant, and as
affiant believes unlawfully and in contempt of said
court, took from iho care and custody of this affi
ant his stiid wind, Uosetta Armstei'd; nnd affiant
niso says that sum liomnsnii ni.n sum. l'ciiihsoii
still forcibly nnd unlaw lull v continuo to detain the
said Uosetta in their custody.
And ntfiant further say, that said taking and
detaining of said Uosetta by said Hobiusoii nnd
j said Deiinii'on, was not made by virtoo of any law
hul warrant or authority, hut was made under a
protended warrant issued by one John L. Pcndory,
a pretended Commissioner of the United States for
tho Southern District of the said Mate of Ohio
nnon thu affidavit of said Dennison. which said
pretended wnrrnnt is the samo under which the
eaid Uobinson held said Kosetta in custody at the
time she was released from his said custody by
said order of said Court upon the hearing of said
case upon the said writ of habeas corpus above
nnmed, and is also tho samo pretended warrant
which was act forth in the return made by said
to the said writ of habeas
L. G. VAN SLYKE.
Sworn to and certified by Crcrk, under seal.
JUDGE WALKER'S NOTION.
L. G. Van Slyke, for the reasons stated iu the
annexed affidavit, now, by his counsel, moves the
Court to issue a writ of iiitiichment for the bodies
of Hirtin 11- Kobbinson and Henry M. Denuison,
on tho charge of a contempt of ho order of this
Court, set forth in said affidavit.
Judgo Parker said ho must bo satisfied that he
was right in whatever he might do. Was there a
disobedience or resistance of the order of the
eotirt? This would depend on the question wheth
er tho order remained in existenco at tho time of
tho second caption. He would ask counsel to'direct
attention to this point. Tho process of '.ho court
must bo respected The court would sco its pro
cess executed, notwithstanding tho opposition of
any other process w hatever, than that of the Su-
1 premc Court of thu State constitutionally express
ed. Had tho court supposed that tho original or-
dor c iitiuuing the custody of Kosetta w ith the
m,m1.,,i i,i i, .iixrcrai-dorl bvtr.kiiitf I, it im.
foro any other tribunal or authority, real or pre-
tended, that order would never have been made.
The court would havo retained tho custody ot tho
child under i's own ollicers.
Attorney Walker then proceeded to advocate his
motion.
Ho said that tho proceedings in the court yester
day showed an intention to commit co-. tempt and!
thu consummation showed it to bo tho most nggnv
cited mtpii.Kt that he had ever known or read of.
In its l,..t,.r st.h it tho nnler of the court had i
Iipioi viol ito.f
The
before
buhl announcement was made in open Court
tho order was issued, that it would be dis-;
regarded. The reverend gentleman, himself, if he
was rightly reported, had unusually broken in up
on the trial, and threatened his demand against
the Marshal, claiming Kosetta before the Court
. . ... . .,l . I ,,... ... ... n
,. . . , . 1 , .,,. ...
1 conclusion; he never heard anything more
incendiary, And it was not an immediate cm-
IUIII PI oil 1 Y, UUCIHIPU in nua hw.t'iiiipiuiicu ot v.-
pressed acknowledgment of respect fur the Court.
1 cannot permit myself to speak in terms as strong
as 1 am tempted to Uo, 111 approbation ot yonr
Honor's course, in sustaining the integrity of your
Court in giving tho order you did. Wlow then be
comes of the order, if, ill five minutes afterward,
it can bo disregarded ? What pruspect is there of
the Slate of Ohio maintaining her dignity and in
tegrity, if the sentiments proceeding such disobe
dience 11s were uttered in another forum, by dis
tinguished counsel in the case, from another State,
can fall silently on the ear? Thesu words were re
ported as follows : "Mr. Wolfo prophesied that
thcro would be bloody times hereabouts, when tho
. . . - ... ., r ,, c,. , ,
fanaticism prevalent on this side ol the Ohio had
. , F ; . r ., ,
nroceeueu a icw siuos iiiiioci. a no nuiu was up
as ' 7 . , ... A . . ... '..
ac,ud tllut ll,0..e
10 ? 1 .
wh if ,hoae outmsos 0n the rights of
w(jre )ert mod in, kl?onc. wmldo en-Should
acted that tho eye of humanity wuuld be pained
humanity wuuld be pained
Aro we, in view of these announcements,
nl-
. . .
I cmu,ymao.e, .0 " V -V"
to such threats ? Is there a North? Is there a
".(.,, ,, fi.;., tc ,i., ro ihan in ftitil'M ii.iiiia
to bo
taken.
Stale ot uniof i mere are, men 111 uou s uamn
j let ,"el" he eviuenceu .
L 1 he Court said they would enforce their own or
withall i dcr. but the point ho vyiahed the argument directed
: t0! Nva?' a8 t0 tlic Illlltu,7 BlcP "Ccessary
!ot (""t "u " ,u' "eriuino i ? ";. ouch as
! patents, bllld surveys, titles, &C, &C. I hey do It
j every day. W hat has been secured by our deeis
1 lramI"lu"w" "U"B '"
tiro u n lint hluvott tn I no 1' imIai-iiI liowor r
i . ....
i
i II I . 1 .1 I L .
' '" r ""'erncr m o
Arr..rno W.ilker. a.iid if there was a con lomnt
it was a palpable one, und a peremptory attach-
was the proper step.
Attorney JnliHo reml tho clause of the Constitu-1
under which the Marshal claimed to act, ami
maintained that state courts have heretofore, nod
ion? It a Commissioner or Marshal of the U. 8.
15111.10:. l,e 'i18 f P Jl.'0. u" our State
;j''' 'd.ction are involved in this issue Is it aeon-
I 'c"M'Mur '!"e """""B a,iu staining a percon
u.s authority tlierelor pronounced hy a
I
State
tribunal to bo void, for the same person in five
minutes thereafter by the same void authority to
re-arrest tho same person and render nugatory the
original order oi the same court, w hich process
uud proceedings might bo continued uu infinitum,
to the entire defeat of pcrsonul rights, and in
mockery of forms of security of personal freedom,
and of forms and administration of justice? The
so called Marshal by his assumed power in his un
authorized act nullifies the urder of a Stato Court
upholding tho dignity and representing tho power
of the State of Ohio. The order of tho humblest
Court iu the laud should bo respected. If the
.Marshal is dissatisfied, he has a legal remedy ?
crry up the case for review and reversal if in er
ror. The order of the Cummon Pleas Court in this
State is binding on the President of the U. 8. il
'he wore here. This question involves the . consti
tutional right of State Courts' tu puss on the law s
and enactments ut Lougross.
Attorney 8. P. Chase contended that tho act
complained of was simply disobedience disregard
ot the truer ot the uuurt. no nnd observed all
along, symptoms uf intended disobedience; they
evinced w hat has taken place. The Marshal again
seized the child, replaces himself in position as ho
was before the order, a few minutes previous. He
did it on a warraut that had been declared uull and
void. It was no new warrant. It was a gross
and flagrant contempt of the Court. She wua
seized iu absolute defiance of the letter and spirit
uf the older. The statute aaya, if any person re
sists or disobeys tho urder of the Court, it is a con
tempt. This question on the motion involves the
vital interests of the people. When the Marshal's
warrant is decided to be insufficient, and the Mar
shal assumes to disregard the State Court's urder,
he does it ut his peril, as any other citizen. There
has been disobedience threatened, disobediencn
throughout, and disobedience to tho lust. The in
tent is evident not to assert legal rights, but wil-
lul uisoiiedience. ilie order was not cold, tho re
uiovul from the Court waa slight, and tho disvbedi
euce was immediate.
Attorney Chambers appeared, and asked what
was the proceeding, nnd asked for the affidavit.
The Court asked if the gentleman appeared foi
the Marshal. He replied he heard the name of
Mr. Denuison, his client, mentioned, and he wanted
to see his rights protected.
Tho Court inquired if his client and the ilar-
shal aoneared here recoifnizin.'r the jurisdiction nf
this Court in thfl premuies. lie replied, "We will
see. After reading affidavit, Attorrrey C. said he
would wait until the rule was issuod, and theu ap
pear in defense.
The Court agreed to tho motion, and instructed
tho Clerk to issue on attachment for Mr. II. 11.
Uobinson, and a rule to show cause for cmitempt
against Kov. Henry M. llennisun, and tho I'rose
cuting Attorney was scut lor to prepare charges
and iiitorrogatories. The counsel asking the w r.ts
waived the attachment, and contented themselves
with a rulu in both cases. Tho wiits w ore issued,
maue returnable nt 11 o clock.
At 11 o'clock, Mr. (I. 11. Uobinson appeared by
his attorney, lien. 11. Keichum, nnd licv. 11. M.
Denuison by bis attorney, Mr. N. Wolf, of Louis
ville, and asked timo to preparo a.i nnswor. Mr.
Wolf nnd his client repaired to the library to make
preparations. In the meantime, tho argument was
proceeding beloro "JoinuiisHioner 1'endery, in an
opposite room of the court houso, on the claim of
.Mr. 1. to Kosetta as a lugmvo.
Attorney T. Walker urged, that if time was
granted to preparo an answer, would not tho time
bo used to defeat the object of their pursuit, by tho
removal of the girl, and we Imv-o another larce.--Ho
wished an interlocutory order, directing the
custody of the girl to bo given to tho Sheriff, to
await tho further order of the court.
Attorney 8. 1'. Chaso contended that both the
parties were now heroin obedience to tho rule.--It
was not an attachment. Charges and interroga
tions had bwn tiled by the prosecutor, nnd it was
proper that those who are to answer should have
time. They seek in their answer to purgo them
selves of the charge. Whether an ancillary order
may bo 'ssned, whether the court can again order
tho production of tho child, is fur their decision
They certainly hnvo power to give effect to their
original order, nr the contempt nnd its proceedings
under it set nothing right, and only render the eon
leinuors liable in fine and imprisonment. We,
who sue out the habeas corpus, cannot acquiesce in
the taking Iuick the cm Id by the Marshal, tv e
must be protected under the power to punish for
contempt, or apply lor a a6w writ of habeas cor-
Attorney lico. h, 1 ugh, appeared tor II. II. Jlob-
inson, and presented the following moiion: "The
said Hiram II. Uobinson moves the eotirt to quash
tho rule herctolorc issued against him in this in
stance, for the reason that the affidavit on which
the said rule is grounded, nnd the charpes tiled
under thu same, do not authorize summary pro
ceedings us for a contempt of nny lawlul writ, pro
cess, order, writing, decree, or command of this
com t."
Messrs. Pugh and Walker spoko on tho motion.
Mr. Ketchum said ho had not read the affidavit.
The court narrated tho points. Attorney G. E.
I'ugh rejoiued.
Ho proceeded to nn animadversion of tho course
pursued in bringing tho habeas corpus case in the
court, and tho impropriety of his Honor having al
lowed the writ. J'ho court reminded the speaker
(hut it was useless now to back ot the action iu
the court or its decision, as it was made, and
tno decision still stands tis the judncincnt of
M1'0 "urt. uulcs reviewed and revised by a higher
court.
Attorney Pugh contended that there had been no
disobedience or contempt. Tho Sheriff had exc-
'cutcd tho order of tho court; delivered the custody
ol the girl to the guardian, and the power of the
court ended there.
Judge Parker said that the motion of Attorney
Pugh was predicated on tho point that tho facts do
"'. ln themselves, show a contempt, ll the officer
re-arresting used the old warrant. Tho section ol
the habeas corpus act, read by the author of
the
motion had no other design than to protect the
personal lights ot the party aggrieved by a rc-ur-
rest. 1 he rule for contempt is for the court, and
may lay the foundation for the civil suit of tho ag
grieved party. One is for persons, tho other lor
the court in order that they may enforce their or
.1 1.1 ii. .....in .: ..1..
uui b Hliu ucci ct:r, 1 11 v com 1 mil liifttj null ill ur
cido on the merits of the en.'O under the nlfidavit
It is duo to us, to say that the court will not in a
case made out, permit the dignity of the State,
committed to us by tho suffrages of tho peoplo ol
the county, to bo degraded by contempt of the or
ders ol court. And while we announce that our
decision will not be made until we have calmly nnd
intcmgejuly examined all tho points lnv jlved, we
1
As to the motion or suggcsl
order the girl 'Uosetta'
j i'" l,lrt nt tms 8t'igo of t
may say that while it shall receive a full and com
plete investigation, tun) if ho contempt has been
committed, we will tny so; yet if one has been
committed, no person, no matter how high his po
sition or pretending his functions whether he be
an officer of the United States or of the Stato of
Ohio, or hold what station he may, it shall not
stand in tho way of a 0 I'm course 011 my part, mid
the vindication of my court.
Tho motion to quash is overruled and the parties
held to answer.
As to the motion or suggestion that tho court
ngain to bo brought
tnv proceedings, we
know of no process therefor that we possess under
tho statuta except Habeas Corpus; with regard to
,,!,i,. .,; r ,.,,. ii,. ii,,,,.. ., 1 ,1..
" r.Pr nrocecdinw except in a civil suit as if
"in." r proceedings exicpt in a tmi suit, as 11
lur debt iiiraiust too .Marshal, is thero not some
thing in the way of proceedings for false imprison
mcnt as to the custody of the girl, it might be
proper" to sny if the after decision of tho court may
he that a contempt has been made, tho interme
diate removal ot t li 0 girl nnd tho defeat ot the
design under tho Habeas Corpus, mny tend to ng
gravato thc-amount of the fine and ti.c term of im
nicnt prisonmcnt.
Iho attorney for Mr. nn Slyke, then made ap
tion, j plication for another writ of Habeas Corpus, and
the court announced that under the "rule" the
trial tor contempt w.miu commence vitnsj .-aturiiay
morning nt 10 o'clock. Wo now proceed to recount
further incidents of this "dual" procedure as it re
lates to tho whereabi uts of Kosetta, her reappear
ance before tho U. S. Commissioner, and what took
placo before him.
BEFORE U. S. COMMISSIONER PENDERY.
About 10 o'clock yesterday morning, the girl
Uosetta, in the custody of the U. S. Marshal and a
largo posso ot deputies, was brought into the U. S.
jomuiissioncr's court.
Although thoro were not many persona in the
oniirt-rimm. tho nonilhino in thoRlroot.il u-oro Honind
.,,li..iaaion liv tho Murslinl'il (riinril Pniin tho
opening of the court Mr. Hayes' counsel lor the
girl, addressed the Commissioner by claiming that
under the law he could not return the girl Uosetta
to her master, on tho ground that the fugitive
slave act provides that no slave can be thus re
turned unless she makes nn escape from a slave
into a free State. Counsel then cited in support
of this proposition, 4th Washington Circuit Court,
lie port, page 330 ; also the case of exparto Sim
mons.
Attorney Chambers, for the claimant, then ad
dressed the court by stating that the position be
occupied us counsel for Mr. Q. in claiming the ser
vices ol the girl itosetta, whom Air. U. alleges to be
hiu tiror.ertv. was ncculii.rlv embarrassing. Tho
excitement of Thursday had alinust driven from
his memory tho chain ol argument by the gentle
men who preceded him, and his mind had been di
verted from a preparation for a reply. He had also
lost his memorandum of authorities and notes of
the evidence, placing him in nn unpleasant posi
tion. In tho argument of this case the gentlemen
have relied upon tho fact that tho slave Uosetta
cume to Ohio by the consent of her master, and
therefore is now tree. 1 hey claimed than by bis
voluntary act Mr. Dcnnisou manumitted his slave.
und also that the Commissioner, under the law,
cannot return the girl Uosetta, fur the Fugitive
Slave act piuhibits, unless she escapes.. Mr. Cham
bers then remarked that the Somerse'ca au which
waa ao relied upon, was properly named, the de
cision in that case being that w hen a slave treads
on free soil she becomes free. Counsel for the girl
have forgotten their vocation, and have resurted to
outside pressure to back their argument in the
cuute, excepting Mr. Hayes, who addressed the
Court in an argumentative manner. Mr. Ball waa
applauded by the crowd for turning away from the
Court to the'public, and invoking all the martyr
dom known, if he didn't Bland up to Uosetta. Is
this outside demonstration customary iu Courts of
j ust ice ? IS o Sir. W as there ever such devotion to
be willed in oil or broiled on a gridiron 7 llns as
sumption to martyrdom was to get up an outside
pressure for the purpose of influencing the Court
M-. C. urgod that the court should disregard all
those mutters and administer the law to the letter
The gentleman had referred to liberty, as if the
genius of liberty was under their guidance and the
jnhadow of their wing. Liberty, said he; I bsvedon
w hat they never-dared to do that was tu advocate
the einuhcipaiiiMi of alavery, to a large audience
iu Kent ink I, a principle which was born rfith, ami
which was iiicortoiaicd into my manhood, and
w hich t now entertain with pi ide, Yot, here on
tliis t rue sot I, 1 and isjr colleagues are sneered nt iu
another court, w ho characterise us as sUve-hunt-,
era, nut that we strike down the liberty of any mnu
but because we have supported Iho constitution ol
thu United States iu behalf ol the claimant, w Irons
sens his right to property, and seeks adjudication
at the hands of a United States tribunal. Ho dwell
at length upon those who desired to distinguish
themselves i.s advojates of liberty, nnd said that
Incir acts am calculated to fasten the chains on the
Southern slave; Kentucky would have been a free
Mtato but lor this rebellious opposition. Counsel
then niirrafod the history of tho case, and claimed
that there was 110 evidence as to what boat brought
the .xirl from Louisville, the condition of the river.
nor is nny reason given why Miller MX the river
and took the cars, oxcept the Jotters of Air. llcniil
son, and they do nut show any mutual arrangement
tu go by any other route, exeunt by river ull the
way to Wheeling. On the contrary, Mr. Dein.ison
expressed his surprise to Mr. Van Slyke that Miller
should attempt a transit through Ohio. W hat is
tho trust or what the agency ? Simply Mr. Miller
takes Uosetta from Lji.isville to Wheeling, and
w hen he went beyond his itiNtiuctiona tho principal
was not liable. If 1 send my horse to the river to
drink water, and my agent crosses over to Ken
tucky, 1 am nut responsible. Mr. Den ison bad
nothing to do with Uosetta's transit through the
Slate, hy wili or consent, and his acts aro therefore
void. 1 he ease in point and already referred to, in
Sargent & Itnwlo, has never been contradicted.
This decision Mr. C. dwelt upon ut lengt'i. If, said
he, Uosetta crossed the line w ithout the consent of
her master, she is a fugitivo. Miller brought the
gii I here, he is the wrong doer, and Mr. leunison
is not bound by his actn.
The next question is Mr. Dennisun'e manumission
of tho slaxe ut Columbus. In narrating the con
versation, Mr. Chambers held that Mr. Vnn Slyke
was prejudiced and did not give a fair construction
of the language used. Tho arguroont, if any there
was, is void, uud to say the least, such kind of evi
dence, the contessiou of a party interested, has
always been held to be the weakest known to the
law. It amounts to no mnnumissiun, granting Mr.
Van Sly ku's evidence all to be true, fur it was made
urder duress ; and ngain, there was no object in
Mr. I), thus giving up his property. His letters to
the tifalesmaii were written nt the samo time, and
do they acknowledge a compact? No, Sir; they
allege tho acts of the Court ot Probato to be an out
rage, and that ho (Denuison) intended to Assert his
rij. li tc. Tho Court had decided she was free, and
Mr. D. was merely desirous of knowing whether
she would go back ns his slave. Ho compromised
no right. If she had consented, would not Mr. Van
Slyko have resisted the taking of this child, as Mr
Chaso has termed her ? Yes, Sir , nnd they would
havo hurried her away to Canada. It was contended
by Messrs. Walker, Chase, nnd others, in
cluding Judge Parker, that the submitting to a
slave whether she shall be set nt liberty ur not, is a
farce; so say I, and yet.they claim thisas a ground
for her release. Her guardian never gave his con
tent, and docs this Court believe that Mr. Denuison
would have gone to nil the expense ho has, if the
question of freedom was to be decided by tho girl?
It is absurd. His assent only amounts to ,1 willing
ness until I resort to the laws of my country. His
nnswer was, "As you say, so bo it." No court will
recognize tho act of Mr. Denuison as constituting
a manumission. When a slaveholder takos a slaw
to a free State to reside, tho principle applies. The
Kentucky court holds this to bo the law, and it is
right.
Counsel also hold that there boing no laws in
this Stato recognizing the institution of slavery, a
compact or agreement between a slave and her
owner in this Stato cannot be held valid it was
idle words. Uosetta is, under our municipal law,
a porson, except when the laws of tho United States
interfere in which caso sho is property. If a
slaveholder of Covington should come to this city
to reside, and bring with him his slaves, they arc
free the moment they put their feet on our soil, nnd
thus the courts south will and have decidou ; but
the transit 01 slaves irem heeling to Covington
through this Stntej tho courts would not hold the
slave to be free, for "animus fttrandi" was absent.
1 he loss to Mr. Hen 111 son was not less limn $000,
and I might here say that Mr. D, never intended
to sell her. Mr. Chambers then closed by appeal
tng to tue court 10 examine well the te tiinony
and the law, dispassionately, calmly and firmly
and, I presume, wo will abiilo by tho decision of
the court.
The Commissioner stated that much had been
said about the case and there ws a great deal of
excitement in tho community. This court is free
from outside pressure, nnd was determined not to
be bound by .nothing oiitside the case. They 'n
tended to review the law aud testimony, and decide
upon this question. Xhey did not recognize any
court ns having the right to investigate this case,
except the L tilled States courts. He was pleased
to say, that thu guardian of the child had commu
nicated to him liis regret that any other proceed
ings hud beeu held, und that they were held with
out his consent or know ledge. These facts may
havo a chastening influence outside this case, lie
desired time to examine: the authorities etc, and
would give his decision on Tuesday hcxt, at
10 o'clock, A. M Iu the meantime tho officers of
this Court shall be protected in the execution of the
order of tho Court. At tho suggestion of Attor
neys Wolf and Chambers, the Commissioner order
ed the .Marshal to retain Kosetta in custody, and
return her on Tuesday next, uud if intercepted or
interfered with in uny way, to report the same
him.
The Marshal then adjourned Court, and by the
am oi ins posso conveyed uosetta to tno county
jail, followed by a large concourse o people.
OTHER PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER.
On Wednesday, commissioner Pendery also sat
upon the same case. Such was his zcul for the
enslavement of the girl, tha he could not wait the
decision of Judgo Parker, before w hom she was
having her trial in custody uf the Sheriff. Thus
at the same time were two tribunals deliberating
upon her right to freedom Wolf (well named) who
had come prowling from Louisville, to help priest
Dennison carry off his human prey, put himself
upon his dignity and refused to plead for her free
dom before nn Ohio court, but betook himself with
woman stealing paison to Commissioner Pendory.
Afterwards however he and the parson both, ns
tho proceedings above show como into court with
Senator Pugh, to induce Judge Parker to stultify
himself by a refusul to carry out his own order.
We add a sketch of tho proceedings before the
Commissioner on AVeduesday. The following is
Donnisons affidavit;
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Southern District of Ohio,
Southern District of Ohio, City of Cincinnati.
Before mo, John L. Pendery, Commissioner of
the united Mates ot America, for said district
duly appointed, personally appeared Henry M. Den
nison, of the Stale of Kentucky, County of Jack
son, and being first duly sworn, d"poseth and
says, that on or about the 8th day of March A D.
1 poo, one negro gin, called Kosetta, aged about
sixteen years, of dark mulatto col ir, aud about
five foet high, did escape from him, tho said
affiant, to whum she owes service and labor in tho
State of Kentucky, to the State of Ohio where she
is supposed to be at this time.
IC ..1 1 IICK'IJV If Tl,lTlT,PnM
loiuuu.j si,iii.i hi. Icm imouiv
And further this deponent auith not.
Sworn to and subscribed befure me, the above
named Commissioner, this first day of March, A.
D. 1855 at the city aforesaid. Witness my hand
and seal.
JOHN L. PENDERY.
U. S. Commissioner.
Southern District of Ohio.
Col. Chambers for the claimant, stated that the
proceedings were brought under the fugitive slave
act of 1H50, by llev. Henry M. Dennison.
Mr. Hull contended that the girl did not escape
from custody, but came to this State with his con
sent but that, even if she had escaped from a
slave State into the State of Ohio, the aots of Mr.
Denuison himself tfter she arrived here, were
equivalent to full manuniifsinn, and was syrw
free to all intents and purposea. II denied that
the case tame under the provision of tho Constitu
lion referred to by claimant s counsel. '
Tha Court said that he did nut recognise tho
acts uf another Court, and asked counsel to fur
nish him with authorities to aid bim ia the in-
I ho vourt room wai uenaeij tnouiwi vj
and female, colored and while persons, all or
w hom manifested much lutorest as tho oaso pro-
grcsswl.
Aftot tho testimony of several witnesses!
Mr. Wolf, of LolaVi!te. then commerced tho
argument for the claiimmu Icy stating first that Mr.
Sillier, as an agent lor air. uwimaun, iranseenora
his authority w hen he left tho Ohio river, and
passed through the State of Ohio, Second that
the institution of slavery is recognised by tho con
stitution of tho United States, Ohio boing a com
ponent pnrt ; that the constitution provides thai
if a slave escape from a Slavo State too free State
said slave shall bo delivered to lb State from
which he or she escaped. Mr. Wolf contended
that Kosetta was still the property of Mr. Den-
nisun. He then dwelt upon the proposition.' i Has
thero been any escape? defining at length by
what lie understood by escape of a slave. Mr.
W. claimed that comity due from one State tor
another, required tho delivering up of property,
whether thoro was any constitutional provisions or
not. I cannot over estimate tho importance of
this case as vital to the interests of the union of
these States. The question is, shall the owner of
a slave a right guaranteed to him by the consti.
tution and laws of his own State nnd tho constitu
tion of the United Stales, suffer his property to br
w rested from him, and that too by fanatics, who
pretend to be lovers of freedom, but whoaro in
cendiaries in the temple of liberty ? lie contend'
ed that tho moment sho loft the Ohio river,, and
tread un Ohio soil, she had escaped from her'
owner, and was a fugitive.
Mr. Wolf contended that a citizen of Kentucky'
had, under tho provisions ot the lonstituuon, m
right to transport his slaves through Ohio Over her'
highways, w hethcr they be turnpikes or railroads,
under the general provision thereof, which says;
"The citizens of each State shall be entitled to all
privileges and immunities of citizens in the ser-'
oral States," and under that which empower1
Congress "to regulate commerco in .tho several
States."
He contended that the fundamentol law of dtix&t
"that there shall be no slavery in this PIMM," did
nut interfere with the Fugitive Slave law. Tho
right of property duea not ceoae to attach to tno
owner in a foreign country, bow much less in too
neighboring Slate of Ohio, where the property of
n Kentuckian ia fond to be ? lie contended for
the right of passage the privilege of transit.
Uo prophesied tnat mere wodiu oe Diooay
times hereabouts, when the fanaticism prevalent
on this side of the Ohio had proceeded a few steps
farther. The time was approaching wheu, if these
outrages on the rights of Kentucky were persisted
in, scenes would be enacted mat the rye ot nu
inanity would be pained to gaze upon. Kentucky
asks toniity of her neighbors ; she was character
ized for her mildness, for her earnestness and hu
manity; thero tho law shows more tenderness to
slaves than hero is shown between whites. lie
cited Ky. Kcports. 2 A. K. Marshal 712 1472Ran
kin vs. l.ydia. When a slave of Mrs. Rankin
cair.e to Indiana with the filtnily, resided a while,
afterwards went back to Kentucky, and claimed
by the family as a elnve, but the Court there de
clared her free. He referred to the case where
Jacob Struder had to pay $4,000 damages for
slaves escaped on her mail boat, of which bo waa
the owner.
To constitute nn escape, he did not deem it dC
essary flint tho girl should have rub off any re
moval from the control nf the master without his
tisstrht was escape.
lie examined the evidence of Air. Van Slyks
1 expect he is nn abolitionist. His philantl.ro
phy evidently gives him a leaning towards the-
girl.
But no voluntary relinquishment of his rights to
tho girl gives her her freedom. By Kentucky
statute it must be done by will or deed. Emanci
pation must bo done where slavery exists ; ia
this case it could have no efficacy except in Ken
tucky. ....
Mr. Wolf, in a peroration of some eloquence,
appealsd to the Court to respect the rights of a
worthy mnn nnd kind master. Ho inveighed
against tho liberality of ultra fanaticism, and their
infidelity tu their views of the equality of tha
cidored people, in not admitting them to tho polls
and to social rightB. He said he hoped his appeal
would not be in vain.
Mr. Flamen Bell (partner of Senator Chase)
made an excellent speech.
.Wo coul 1 like to give tho language and illus
trations of the speaker,, if we had room, but
must content ourselves with the statement of his
points:
1. Thero was no escape from Kentucky into Ohio:
or such nn escape ns is contemplated by the Con
stitution ot the Lulled states and toe lueitivo
Slave act.
2. That if she had so escnped, the subsequent
acts nnd conduct of Dennison amount to a manu
mission. 3. There is no question of comity arising between
the States that has been settled by the Court
of the United States.
4. The decision of the Probate Court of Franklin
county is still in full force, and is res adjuncata,
and cannot be collaterally impeached.
tiuthorford B. Hays, Esq. also appeared for the
girl, Uosetta. He contended that the proof showed
that an unrestricted liberty was given by Mr. D.
to take the girl to Va ; if he brought her into Ohio
it w-ns at the risk of the principal if one slave
can pass through Ohio, Rungs of forty in number
may do so. It has been considered by slave-holders
themselves that if they brought servants with
them to this State, it was when their affection for
their mastor rendered them indifferent to tha bene
fit conferred upon them by being on free soil. But
it baa been prjved that Mr. D. assented .formally
to the girl's decision, that having the election, she
preferred to be free, and he bid ber farewell,
believing his control of her as master had termi
nated. The want of faith in this reputed owner, rivinr
a simple, truthful girl, a choice to be free, and then
being reckless of bis promise, despising his nledr-
ed word, and suing out a writ she was a fugitivo.
was worse then the most ultra fanaticism of thoso
classed as Abolitionists.
The parol manumission he mado of her is rood
in Ohio, good in law and morals. 8th Humphrey
Reports.
A slave Court says that an act of manumiaaioa
may be inferred from the "acts and oonduct of tho
master." The acts and conduct ot air. 1). at Co
lumbus, were impliedly and expressly to tho lib
eration of Uosetta.
The following was a proposition which bo urged!
with happy illustration and eloquence.
If it does not appear from evidence that tho al
leged slave is a fugitive, "that is to say, has
escaped" from the State where sho was held to
service into a free State, the claimant of such al
ledged slave is not entitled to a certificate from the
Commissioner, authorizing him, to remove her to
the State where service was due. He cited many
cases in Courts in slave States.
He cited 1. V. S. Statutes at Large 394. See. 5,
Aot of 17'J3, and 4 Wash. Cir. Reports 393 where
n Southern Judgo of the U. 8. Supremo Court
under that law, whose language is similar to tho
Fugitive law now, decided that if a slave go from
one State to another, with tho conseut or oonnt
vnnce of the master, it is not an escape under tho
fugitive slave clause,
lie urged the court not to determine a ease In
volving the liberty of one of tho people without
duly weighing allpointbearing on the rase. The
oourt he sat in was an usurpation of judicial faao
tions, and having doubtful powers tha deeiston of
his court should be given on tho humane side of
doubt, to freedom.
The oourt adjourned until 11 o'clock on Thurs
day. .
In closing his Court, Commissioner Pendsry
said, it was a new question, and ho would giro
careful consideration. Ho had hoped that, after
the lengthy and able argument made before a
distinguisded jurist of our city, on most of tho
points, a few days since, after the publio had been
led to believe, from the ability of tha Judge and
his promise to decide all the points fearlessly and
irrespective of party feeling, he left the oaso to bo
decided by the person in whoso behalf the babes
corpus was sued Co. Uo said b ftlt ft imper-