The Cleveland Daily Herald
Cleveland, May 12, 1859
The Rescue Cases – Trial of Langston.
Court came in at 10 oÕclock. Judge Willson called the case of Langston for sentence and the prisoner stood up. On being asked by the Judge if he had anything to say in mitigation of his crime, Langston addressed the Court in a speech of half an hour that riveted the attention of the crowded auditory, and during which repeated bursts of applause spoke the admiration of the listeners.
We can give only a meager sketch, as the speech was not written out.
Langston said that for the first time in his life he was arraigned for violating the laws of the land. He did not expect in the least to mitigate te punishment that the Court had determined to make out to him, as justice for the colored man was not to be expected. He said that on the memorable 13th of September he found the colored people of Oberlin all excitement on account of the presence of kidnappers.
Men were known to be prowling around seeking an opportunity to steal away colored people. Mothers were afraid to trust their children to go to school, through fear they would be kidnapped. Under this intense excitement news spread that a man had been decoyed out of town and captured by these men thieves from Kentucky. He went to Wellington, and having been taught that even under the infamous provisions of the Fugitive Act it was his privilege to have a legal investigation of the manner in which the negro was held, he did all he could to procure such investigation.
He believed that it was the duty of the captors of that man to have a prompt investigation of the matter, and that such right was guaranteed by the laws. He had heard even in this Court that in Ohio every man was presumed to be free proved a slave and he only acted on that principle when he went to Wellington, determined to see to it that the negro had a fair investigation, and was not illegally taken back to slavery.
Langston said the idea that there was no danger of free men being taken to Slave States and consigned to perpetual bondage, was a false idea, for it is a well authenticated fact that out of the first eight captives sent from the Free States back to Slave States, as fugitive slaves, four of them were freemen, and it was so proved. He said it was but last Saturday that he received a letter from a gentleman in St. Louis, conveying to him the information that a colored free girl was now lying in jail waiting proof of her being free. This girl had been one of his, LangstonÕs, scholars in Columbus –when he was a teacher there, - and she going to Illinois had been captured as a fugitive, and now is in jail at St. Louis waiting proof of her freedom from her parents in Columbus.
Langston claimed that by the very nature of the case he could not have, and had not had, a fair trial. That the Court was prejudiced against men of his court, that the Government prosecutors were, that the jury were, and even his own counsel were, for all white men must be so prejudiced. Langston said this prejudice was owing to the fact that his race submitted to be held in bondage.
Langston pronounced the testimony that went to show him as resisting the law at Wellington to be false testimony. He did all he could to have a legal investigation, and under the charge of this Court he perhaps was guilty; if that is a crime, he is guilty, and for such guilt he was willing to submit, if needs be, to the extreme penalty of the law – six months imprisonment and $1,000 fine.
Langston said he had done no more for others than he should ask others to do for him under the same circumstances.
The closing of his speech was greeted with a burst of applause, which was rebuked by the Court and Marshal, but which was rebuked by the Court and Marshal, but which rebuke was little heeded by the auditory.
Judge Willson remarked that the considerations presented by the defendant would induce him to inflict upon him a very light sentence. The Court appreciated the remarks of defendant and had sympathy for him, but Courts did not make the laws, they merely executed them.
He therefore, sentenced Langston to pay a fine of $100, to pay the costs of this prosecution and be imprisoned for the period of twenty days.
After the sentence of Langston, Judge Andrews arose and called attention to the three indictments against Matthew DeWolfe, Abner Loveland, Loron and Wadsworth.
Judge Andrews said that these defendants wished no longer to contend with the Government, but in withdrawing their plea of not guilty they protested against its being supposed they had knowingly violated the laws of the land and they wished such protest to be made a part of the record.
Judge Andrews, in behalf of his clients said they were among the oldest and most respectable citizens of Lorain County, that they were law-abiding men, that they were accidentally connected with the rescue, that they went to Wellington village to help their neighbors who were suffering from fire, that while there in the midst of an intense excitement which would naturally arise o such an occasion in a small village, the report was made that a justice had issued a warrant to arrest persons supposed illegally to have in custody a negro man, that they mingled in the crowd, and talked with the crowd in endeavoring to ascertain whether the man was legally in custody or not. They supposed they had a right to enquire into the matter but as soon as they found that the negro was legally held they desisted. They did not intend to step over the limits of law.
Judge A. said that as the law had been laid down by the Court, and correctly laid down, they were responsible for the acts of the crowd, being identified with it, but he had no doubt, if a trial should be had, that the facts would appear as above stated.
Judge Andrews said he was instructed by his clients to say that they had no sympathy with those men who thought this law was one that should not be obeyed; they had no sympathy with those men who think this law should be resisted even to blood.
He further stated for them that they had no conception of a worse country than that in which the decisions of the highest courts should be disregarded; they hold themselves, as good citizens, to stand by the law; whether that law is constitutional or unconstitutional, they think should be determined by that body, which under the Constitution of these United States is appointed to decide such questions; Judge A., for his clients, further said that they have no sympathy with the doctrine lately breached that would bring our Federal Courts and State Courts into conflict; they believe that if any reform is needed, that reform must come from the courts themselves, and they disclaim any intention of resisting the laws of their country.
Judge A. said that his clients, as good citizens, felt bound to submit to the law as it is laid down, and if the law is bad they thought it should be reformed in the mode pointed out by the Constitution of the United States.
We, of course, have given a meager sketch of Judge AndrewÕs remarks.
The Court accepted the apology of the defendants and in consideration thereof would sentence them to pay a fine of $20 each; to pay the costs of prosecution, and be committed to the custody of the Marshal for twenty-four hours.