Port Tobacco times, and Charles County advertiser. (Port Tobacco, Md.) 1845-1898, 1847-06-03
The SLAVE CAsE.-We Fugitive Dis

our readers, was set at liberty at 1 o'clock
on Saturday (22d( night, by means of the
legal ingenuity of his counsel. The facts
of this important case are thus given by the
Ledger:
Under requisiion from the Governor of
Maryland, alleging that he had committed
an assault and battery, with intent to kill
Alexander Somervlle, his former master, the
Governor of this State had directed war
rant to Judge Parsons or any other magis-
,rate, directing the officer receiving it to is
sue warrant for the arrest of Isaac Brown
as fugitive from justice. Upon the war
rant of Gov. Skunk, Judge Parsons issued
the warrant by which he was Detained
Governor Skunk, in conformity with the O.
pnion of the Hon. B. Chamneys, Attorney
General, revoked this warrant, but issued
second warrant in accordance with second
accompanied with a copy of the bill of in
dictment found in Calvert County. The re-
vocation of the first warrant by the Cover
nor revoked Judge Parsons acarrant, and
there acas mo authority TO detain the man.
This might have been avoided if second
acarrant Of arrest had been issued upon the
Gorernor's second lcarrant, and lodged at
the prison for his detention. By some error
the parties claiming the alleged fugitive neg
lected this precauton. The friends of the
slave Immediately took advantage of this, to
procure his release. On Saturday morning,
his counsel, Messrs. Charles Gibbons, David
Paul Brown, and Thomas Earl, caused to
be issued out of the Supreme Court, writ
de homime repzegiando, which is wri, to
repevy man. 1t commanded the keeper
of the prison to release him, and was issued
by the Pro.honotary in the same manner as
common writ of repIevn for personal pro-
perty, upon security being given that he
should be forthcoming to answer any charge
that might be brought against him. This
is the second time this wri, was ever issued
in Pennsylvania. In 1919 one was issued
in slave case, but was quashed by the Su-
preme Court, upon the ground thai it would
conflict with the act of Congress in regard
to the arrest of fugitives from labor.
The writ de homine replegiando is a COM
mon law writ, and until The passage of the
habeas corpus act in England, was the only
manner in which a person illegally held in
prison, or in private custody, could be re-
leased. The habeas corpus act being more
beneficial, and the proceedings under it more
simple, the writ de homine replegiando has
fallen into disuse in England and this coun-
try. As there has never been any statute
passed abolishing the writ, there is no doubt
but that it can be legally issued if parties
seek to revive it, /
W.T. upon o Fne e presentation 81 lie writ
the keeper of the prison, he was released,
and given up to his friends and it is pre-
snmed is now far beyond the reach of any
process of this Commonwealth.
The Philadelphia papers of later date
furnish some additional particulars:
On Monday morning, Charles Gibbons,
Esq, commenced an action in the District
Court, at the suit of Isaac Brown, against
Alexander Somervlle, Thomas c. Wilson,
Samuel Y. Harris and John Zell, for con-
spiracy. Capiasses were issued, and the
bail fixed at $4,000. At 10 O'Clock, Judge
Parsons was in Court, prepared for the
hearing which had been fixed for that hour
A Deputy Sheriff was sent down to prison
to bring up Isaac Brown. He made return
to the writ, that the jailor said he was not
in custody. The Judge said that there was
consequently, an end to the hearing upon
the habeas corpus, but the keeper of the
prison was liable for the prisoners escape,
and warrant was issued for his arrest up
on the charge. Whilst the Court was wait
ing for the return of the Sheriff upon this
warrant, MIR. Ingraham made application to
the Court, on behalf of Mr. Zell, Somervlle
and others, against whom the wris had
been issued in the civil suit. He said that
the Sheriff Was prepared to arrest them the
moment thew left the Court Room, and he
wished the JuGg &c to instruct the Sheriff that
they were witnesses in attendance upon the
Court, and were privileged from arrest 60
ing and returning from their homes. The
Judge said it was so, and if the Sheriff at
tempted to arrest them he would get him
self into difficulty. The Sheriff having
brought iii Anthony Freed, the keeper OF
the prison, the Judge asked him if Isaac
Brown was in custody? He said that he
was not that by virtue of writ under the
seal of the Supreme Court, he had delivered
him up to the High Sheriff: of the city and
county OF Philadelphia.
Freed, the keeper, was then held to bail
in the sum of $1,000 to answer for the
escape of Brown. The latter has made an
affidavit before the District Court, in which
he denies that he fled from Maryland, OF
that he ever assaulted his master, Mr.. Som
erville. He alleges, that in 1915, while he
had the management of plantation for his
master, whose residence was three miles
distant, he heard of the assault, and started
to 60 and see Mr.. S., but was arrested by a
body of armed men, who charged him with