The Cleveland Daily Herald

Cleveland, May 11, 1859

Rescue Cases – Trial of Langston.

FIFTEENTH DAY – MORNING SESSION.

      On the coming in of the Court, Judge Willson told the prisoner, Mr. Bushnell, to stand up and receive sentence. The Court asked the prisoner, if he had any thing to say why sentence should not be pronounced, or any regrets to express for the crime committed by him. Mr. Bushnell intimated that he had not, and thereupon the Court proceeded to read from manuscript the sentence of Bushnell, as follows:

      [The idea could not but be suggested that if Bushnell had expressed regrets, the Judge would have been compelled to write his sentence over again; hence the putting of the question looked a little farcical.]

      Judge Willson said:

      It is at all times a disagreeable and painful duty for the Court to pronounce the sentence and impose the penalty, which the law demands for its violation. The discharge of this duty is peculiarly painful in dealing with the class of offenders to which you belong, who deem it a praiseworthy virtue to violate the law, and then seek its penalties with exultation and defiance.

      A man of your intelligence must know that the enjoyment of a rational liberty ceases the moment the laws are allowed to be broken with immunity, and thereby fail to afford any protection to society: - that, if the standard of right is placed above and against the laws of the land, those who act up to it are anything else than good citizens or good christians. You must know that when a man acts upon any system of morals or theology which teaches him to disregard and violate the laws of the government that protects him in life and property, his conduct is as criminal as his example is dangerous.

      The good order and well being of society demand an exemplary penalty in your case. You have broken the law. You express no regret for the act done, but are exultant in the wrong.

      The Court therefore proceeded to sentence Bushnell to pay a fine of six hundred dollars, to pay the costs of this prosecution, and to be confined in the Jail of Cuyahoga County for a term of sixty days from and after this day. – And the Court further ordered that the Marshal see that sentence is carried into execution, and that said Marshal, in case of any casualty by which he deems this jail insecure for the keeping of said prisoner, commit him to such other jail in the District as he sees fit.

      Judge Spalding then moved that the next case in order, to wit, that of John Watson, be taken up.

      The Court asked District Attorney Belden if the Government was ready for trial. Judge Belden replied that the Government wished a continuance of the remaining cases, and gave as a reason that since the trial of Langston has ended the Sheriff of Lorain County has taken Jennings, Mitchell, Lowe, and Davis into custody and now holds them to answer the charge of kidnapping, and that he, the District Attorney, has been instructed to defend those men in Lorain County. He therefore asked that the remaining cases be put over until the next term this Court. Mr. Belden stated that from his communications with the Sheriff and the Deputy from Lorain County he was satisfied the machinery brought to bear against Jennings, Mitchell, Davis, and Lowe had been originated with these defendants. He stated that he should be willing that the defendants should go out of jail on giving good bail in the sum of $500 each. – The District Attorney then went on the state that he had been informed that one of the defendants, Mr. Plumb, last night abused the Sheriff of Lorain because he did not promptly execute the process in his hands.

      Judge Tilden, then in behalf of Mr. Plumb, arose and emphatically denied the assertion of the District Attorney.

      Judge Spalding, for the defendant Watson, demanded a trial for his client now lying in jail of this county; a speedy trial is a right guaranteed to every citizen of Ohio, and he demanded that trial. He remarked that the excuse offered by the District Attorney is no excuse, for every lawyer knew that by a writ of Habeas Testificandum those men whose testimony he wanted in this case, could be brought into Court any time. Judge Spalding wished to reply to the District Attorney but the Court checked him and would not allow it. The Court said that if required by defendants counsel the motion of the District Attorney must be reduced to writing.

      Judge Spalding said he wished it reduced to writing, and the District Attorney required to swear to it, and not only that, but then required to prove the truth of it, as the official character of the gentleman, with his private character superadded, did not give the motion any weight.

      The Court said the motion must be made in writing, and Judge Spalding said the defence would put in counter affidavits, and thereupon the Court took a recess until 2 o’clock.

AFTERNOON SESSION.

      On coming into Court, the District Attorney renewed his motion for continuance, and the Court continued the remaining Rescue Cases until the July Term next.