The Cleveland Daily Herald

Cleveland, April 15, 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.

Ninth Day – Afternoon Session.

DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S ARGUMENT.

      Judge Belden did not know whether to address the court, the jury, or the audience. For three days has the crowd been addressed; not the court, not the jury. Are we in a dream? are we in a court of justice? or are we in a political hustlings? If that is so, all counsel has to do is to ask the jury how they expect to vote. – Here are the Saints of Oberlin, Peck, Plumb, Fitch, to which are to be added Saints Spalding and Riddle and something Bushnell – all saints of the Higher Law. When it comes to pass that we take a cause from the jury and appeal to the crowd we had better disband. Sad will be our condition then.

      The counsel commented very severely upon what he called the clap-trap argument of the white boy brought in to get up a scene. He pronounced the scene the most disgraceful he had seen in a court of justice. This was their constitutional argument! And their constitutional argument was continued by reading resolutions passed in this city in 1850 – and read for no purpose but to stab this Court; to stab his Honor upon the bench; read by a man who knew, or ought to have known that the resolutions were a libel on the opinions of the Judge, and were not his sentiments; such arguments will not weigh a feather, and such demagoguery must fall, though you had a thousand Probate or Crow bait Courts, and a boy to exhibit before you.

      At the meeting referred to Messrs. Hitchcock, Foote and Bolton, were appointed a committee to examine the law and report at a future meeting as to its constitutionality, and the chairman after holding the resolutions some two months, came to the conclusion the law was constitutional and no report was ever made. What the gentleman and Saints of Oberlin called Higher Law he called Devil’s Law.

      Sam. Johnson wrote that the Higher Law was the law of one’s country. Your Higher Law as interpreted by the Saints of Oberlin is just that law which makes every man’s conscience and private opinion his guide. Such doctrine would make chaos, and until all me have the same conscience, same control of passion, don’t talk of Higher Law as God’s Law; it is Devil’s Law and it would make a Hell up on earth. Higher Law comes in and upturns government because there is slavery; it has piety and conscience for the black man, but devil take the white man.

      Judge Belden then argued the question of the constitutional power to pass laws to enforce a Fugitive Law; the latter and spirit of the Constitution admit of such law. Counsel on other side forget to say that Washington recommended the passage of the law of ’93, which is actually the law of ’50, and it was passed with only seven dissenting votes, and until abolition, Higher Law and Devil law came in vogue to refuse the jails, to strike down officials, the law was enforced. Judge Belden entered into a review of the opinions of Mr. Webster upon the Fugitive Slave Law. That law was a peace offering made by Clay, Webster, Fillmore and others. In the midst of agitation and lawlessness, this law was passed by the great lights of the country, signed by Mr. Fillmore and sanctioned by Webster, the lover of law. Higher Law people run into the predicament of free love and infidelity. If St. Peck and St. Plumb “go oft” on this law, he would advise them to where some good man preaches the bible and not politics. Do you teach the bible at Oberlin or do you point out the spires of the churches as hell poles? The counsel then went on to show what the state of the world was when Christ came; many were in bondage and not a word was said against it; Christ denounced idolatry, polygamy, but not a word against slavery. He did not tell them of a Higher Law as against the laws of the land. He said observe the law of the land, render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, to woman and man, to slave and free. If these saints of Oberlin had half as much piety as the poor slaves, their masters and mistresses, it would be well as between them and their god. According to Higher Law we should turn our wives and children out of the house.

      Counsel then argued that the slaves were not fit for freedom; and that there were very few white people fit for self-government, but the whites can be treated on an equality, although not equal in every respect. He argued the unfitness for freedom of the slaves, and contended that there was no perfection, and because there were cases of cruelty in slavery these could not argue in favor of freeing the slaves. The Judge went in to the history of West India Emancipation, and argued from that emancipation that the white race must take charge of the blacks. He then referred to the introduction of slavery in this country, and argued that it was a creature of common law, and not of statue, in every colony of this country; and no law was passed in regard to it for fifty years after its introduction here. The whites must predominate over the blacks, they cannot exist on an equality.

      The citizen who harbors fugitives from labor is a bad citizen, he don’t deserve the blessings of this government.

      The District Attorney then read largely from Mr. Webster’s opinion on the Fugitive Salve Law and the effect of the law in its operation. He also read from the letter of some Englishman who wrote a letter to Mr. Webster upon the subject of slavery.

      (The Court intimated to the Counsel that there was no necessity of arguing the constitutionality of the Law.)

      Counsel proceeded on the facts.

      The defendant is charged with rescuing the negro; is he guilty of the act? Did he do it within the jurisdiction of this Court? That’s the question. Did John owe service to Bacon? We have been told that Bacon only owns one-sixth – the proof is that the father of Bacon died without a will and the slaves were divided by the heirs. The Court is bound to take notice ex officio of the laws of Kentucky. The ownership of John is complete, for in addition to Bacon’s is the testimony of Mitchell and Jennings.

      The next question is, did John escape? – Frank, Dianah and John escaped in the night. Where did this negro go? He went to Oberlin; was there from spring of ’58 to time of his rescue. Prof. Peck knew him, and some of the witnesses understood him to be a fugitive slave; if he had not been now to be a slave there would have been no mob to rescue him. Was the man whom they rescued John? Mitchell knew him to be the nigger John. When the Kentuckian met him, the negro went towards him and recognized him. John talked with a number, admitting he was a slave of Bacon. – Was John in the custody of Jennings and Lowe? It matters not whether there was a warrant there or not; Jennings was the agent of the owner. The owner had a right to take his slave and take him home. Judge B. then gave a history of the Prigg case in Pennsylvania.

      Adjourned till nine o’clock.