The Cleveland Daily Herald

Cleveland, April 13, 1859

The Oberlin-Wellington Rescue Case.

United States District Court,  

                                                Willson, Judge.

Northern District of Ohio.

Geo. W. Belden,

U.S. Attorney.             For Government.

Geo. Bliss,

R.P. Spalding.

F.T. Backus.                For Defence.

A.G. Riddle.

S.O. Griswold.

Seventh Day – Afternoon Session.

      Court opened at two o’clock.

[The Marshal reserved the seats upon the East side of the Court room for ladies, and they were speedily filled. The Judge’s rooms, adjoining the Court room, were also occupied by gentlemen and ladies. Every available spot was occupied by spectators, and nothing save the admirable ventilation and the lofty ceiling, rendered the air of the room tolerable.]

      Judge Bliss opened for the Government. He commented upon the crowd in attendance upon Court, as proof of the interest the case has with the public, being novel as the first attempt to enforce the Fugitive Slave Law; this case excites interest because some wish to know if the Federal laws can be executed, and some desired to be permitted to pursue their rebellion to the laws of the country. Some people seem to suppose the States have the right to legislate on and repudiate the law of Congress in regard to reclamation of Fugitive Slaves; some States have passed laws in conflict with Federal laws on this subject; Ohio has laws subject to this objection, being in conflict with the Federal power, which is supreme over all the States. –

      Ohio has no right to legislate upon the subject of fugitives from labor.

      Counsel quoted the clause in the Constitution under which fugitives are recaptured; that clause of the Constitution underlies the Federal Union; and impugned by any one is ipso facto a dissolution of the Union. Under that clause, independent of any law, the ownership of any slave escaping to Ohio, remained in the owner; it follows, of necessity, that the master has a right to follow and re-capture his slave in Ohio. This question was settled years ago, in the case of Prigg, of Pennsylvania. By that case it is the duty of Congress to carry out that clause; and counsel cannot imagine how any lawyer or statesman could hold that the State has anything to do with it.

      The Counsel then came to the facts in this case: Was John the slave of Bacon in Kentucky, at the time he escaped in 1856? On that question Bacon swears he was his slave, and knew John’s mother, and the maternity establishes the status as a slave or freeman; Jennings testifies that he knew John to be Bacon’s slave, for a period of time; saw John in Oberlin, Sept. 13, ’58, and captured him. – Mitchell also knew John as slave of Bacon, and knew his mother to be a slave. This evidence is not contradicted, and it is all the law requires – the issue, so far, is established. The next fact to be considered, is John’s escape, and that is proved by his being found in the common resort for fugitive slaves, to wit; in Oberlin; but a question of identity is endeavored to be made. Counsel read the description of John, as in the Power of Attorney; about 20 years old, about 5 feet 6 or 8 inches high, heavy set, copper colored, weight 140 or 150 pounds. The height and color are disputed by defence; they introduce three witnesses, who say John’s height is less than 5 feet 5 or 8 inches high. One says he was 5 feet 4 inches, and two others say he was 5 feet 4 inches, but might be 5 feet 5 inches; another says John was about 5 feet 8 inches. The evidence does not show that John’s height was misdescribed in the Power of Attorney; one witness says he was in the habit of embracing this negro, or of playing with him, and their bodies were often brought in contact, and he says John came just about up to his ear, and thus infers John’s height from his own height. The next point is John’s color, and is described as copper colored. Bacon, Mitchell and Jennings say he was a full-blooded negro. Bacon says he is copper color, Jennings calls him black, and Mitchell would agree with Jennings rather than with Bacon. Witnesses on the other side say he was full blooded, and call him black. At the same time there are blacker negroes that john, and inhabitants of Oberlin have abundant opportunities of knowing, but those living in Kentucky have a better opportunity of knowing. John proclaimed that he was a slave, that he escaped from Bacon, and when a crowd of law violators were around him, he said he was Bacon’s slave, and must go back to Kentucky; and he said he desired to go back and see his master and his mistress. The identity of John is place beyond the reach of every question. As to his weight all counsel has to say is that he became a victim of a foul disease contracted by leaving Kentucky, and going to Oberlin; witnesses for the government estimated his weight when he was in health.

      It is said that in order to be chargeable with rescuing a slave it is necessary to show notice on the part of the claimant on the character of the person claimed. The Court will no doubt charge you that defendant should have some notice as to the character of John as a fugitive from justice. What is sufficient proof? Any circumstance that a man of ordinary appreciation would notice is sufficient. The counsel read from Giltner vs. Graham 4, McLean p. 418, being an action for a penalty of $1,000 for rescuing a slave as to the liability of persons who join in a rescue, and on the subject of the notice to rescuers, and the liability of the members of such a crowd.

      The Oberlin people who came to the rescue of John, knew he was a fugitive; their language showed it; they assembled on receipt of information that a fugitive had been taken by slave-catchers; all agreeing to the common fact that John was a fugitive and as such was captured. What other motive had they to assemble for his arrest except that he was a slave and they intended to rescue him. Several answered that they went to Wellington to rescue a slave; some were in favor of getting a process for the claimants, others that they cared not for papers but would have him any way: a miscellaneous crowd of black, white and blue – for some were drunk – crying out tear down the house, tear off the roof, brandishing guns and weapons. Is there in any doubt every one of that crowd knew John was a fugitive, legally held by due process, and their intentions was to rescue the slave. It was known that he was held under a Commissioners warrant to be taken to Columbus for examination, every person who knew that warrant knew that John was a fugitive slave. The Marshal freely exhibited that warrant, showing almost an undue anxiety to impress on that crowd the sacred obligations they were under to let him alone in the execution of his duty; sending for the Justice, Constable and the Lawyer, and Jennings shows his Power of Attorney, thus being doubly armed. Proclamations was made to the crowd, and the warrant read and Mr. Patton summoned the people and read the paper, and they all gathered around and the warrant to proclaimed to them that John was a fugitive slave of Bacon, and Jennings was authorized to arrest him. No information was conveyed by the warrant for they all knew before that John was a fugitive. The negro voluntarily interfered to quiet that crowd, and attempted to speak to the crowd and said his master had sent for him and he must go. If he had a master of course he was a slave; the mob interfered and told him not to say he wanted to go back to Kentucky, and then the cry arose from that infuriated crowd they would have him anyway. Now, shall that crowd say that they believed a free man was being kidnapped? We do not fear that Southerners will come to Ohio to kidnap free men.

      There is no need of Higher Law; there is no need of the rallying of the children of God – as Lincoln says of himself – in the shape of a riot to protect free negro me of Ohio; the children of this would are adequate for such duty. When these Oberlin men went down to Wellington they proclaimed that they did so under the Higher Law for they knew they were outraging the law of the land.

      It is a pity that all the good people of Oberlin had not behaved as well as Patton; had they, this indictment would not have been found; although Patton went from Oberlin to Wellington and his motive might have been good or bad, his conduct there was honorable to him and counsel would say to all his associate students of Oberlin, “Go and do likewise” and you will get the respect of all good men. He went out and told that crowd all about that warrant, and the Power of Attorney by which these men were armed, and that all that could be done was to try some process of law, by getting a writ of Habeas Corpus, which according to the Higher Law of Oberlin might have superior power to the United States Court.

      A young man by the name of Butler, a lawyer, swore that he was in the crowd, but never heard of fugitive slave in that crowd, but it is in proof that he did declare that John was held as a fugitive by lawful authority, and said so in the crowd and went to a Mr. Marks to furnish a horse and buggy that he himself might go and get a Habeas Corpus to get John away.

      Look out for the forgetfulness of these men you may expect that they will forget what took place in the crowd. Patton has told the whole truth but Butler has forgotten.

      Dickson says there was no seal upon the warrant, and spoke about it at the time; and the Marshal said it was not necessary. Mitchell says it was the Power of Attorney, about which this conversation took place, and Jennings says he took the Power of Attorney out of his coat pocket and handed it to Dickson to read. Here the Power of Attorney was openly proclaimed as the paper on which they claimed to hold John. Counsel does not say that Dickson means to testify falsely, but his memory is not so good in facts that tend to sustain the government as those that tend to its defeat. The authority by which John was held was the joint authority of Power of Attorney and of the warrant. Lowe, Jennings, and Mitchell all held possession. The indictment does not allege that he was rescued from a warrant, but was rescued from Jennings acting under a Power of Attorney, assisted by other persons.

      The defence says the indictment is bad because it does not aver that John owed service to his master in Kentucky under the laws thereof. But the indictment uses the words of the statue. Is not that sufficient? Such minds as Clay and Webster in framing the act did not think the words “under the law thereof” necessary, although they were in the act of ’98.

      The jury will be compelled to find that the crowd went to Wellington in defiance of the law, caring nothing for it, to rescue this fugitive, in the midst of his own protestations and against the right of his owner made evident to them. Mr. Bushnell was the principal one in that crowd at Wellington, having induced persons to go there armed, saying to one that he had no business there unless armed. Bushnell is proved to be in the crowd and there is no contradiction of the fact that Bushnell was in the buggy, being the same buggy in which the negro was placed, it was not Bushnell’s horse and buggy, and he therefore must have been selected for the purpose of carrying the negro off; Bushnell was in waiting according to his office, when John was put in the buggy, cracked the whip and away he went. At Oberlin this is thought to be a good joke; people around Oberlin think so little of their government and the statutes of the Federal Government, when they interfere with their sympathies with negro women and men that they consider their violation a good joke. Is it right any people should impugn the laws of the land, knowing no law but their own consciences? This is a serous question. Any jury of undebauched minds will execute this statute in the same faith as in any civil or criminal case under statute law.

      Judge Bliss spoke two hours and a half.

THE DEFENCE.

      Mr. Riddle opened for the defence, and said he should not make this Court Room an arena for the discussion of any subjects except such as were necessary to the argument of this particular case. He would pass over preliminaries, not spend any time on declamation as to the importance of the issues; the very novelty of those issued mark this case as unusual. Mr. Riddell said that he was a rotary of the dogma the “Higher Law.” [It is justice to Mr. Riddle to say that we could not follow him in his illustration of his views on this subject, owning to his peculiar intonation of voice and his position. We understood the gist of Mr. R.’s argument to be that a citizen has right to disobey a law if he submits to the penalty for such disobediences; and such a man cannot be pronounced dishonest.] When you send such a man to a cell for disobedience to a law it became a bright and luminous place to him. A good citizen who disobeys the law submits himself to the penalty, he runs from no Marshal, but voluntarily comes forward to abide the penalty.

      What is this case? John fled, came to Ohio, his captors follow him with pistols and Arkansas toothpicks; they decoy and seize him and the people rally and rescue him. They say the Constitution fixes that service; if so, let them show we have violated this Constitution. The conviction of this man can only be reached by the straight and narrow way of this law, for the common law guards him at all points.

      It is said John was a slave held to service in Kentucky. Held how? What bond held him? How is this Court to know unless the indictment disclose it, whether the bond is good or not. There is no other way of being informed. We are informed it follows the law. [Here the Court said it was sufficient to follow the language of the statute in the indictment.]

      It must be proved that slavery exists in Kentucky; no matter how many Kentuckians swear to the fact, the code must be produced. They say he is a slave because his mother was, but does the Court know such to be law in Kentucky? Common Law says the status follows the father, and this law being in contravention of the common law should be proved.

      They claim to take John by virtue of a Power of Attorney, to have followed him and captured him in Ohio, and this defendant and two hundred others rescued him. Government must prove its ease as laid down in its indictment.