Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1848-12-29
Correspondence Of The NeW York Tribune.
Case of the Pearl Prisoners.
WASHINGTON, Dec. S, 1913.

The Circuit Court Of this District, the SUI
preme tribunal in all criminal cases-fof in
criminal cases no writ OF error lies in this
District 10 the Supreme Court Of the United
States-has been engaged for more than a
week past on two cases-Daniel Drayton,
plaintiff in error, Us. the United States.
These writs Of error are brought to review
and reverse the conviction of Drayton in the
Criminal Court of this District on two sew
eTal indictments for the larceny Of slaves
They are a part Of the 345 Pearl cases, of
The trial of which, last summer, before the
Criminal Court here, | sent you some ac-
count.
The counsel for Drayton in those trials
hled no less than twelve bills Of exceptions
in each case to the rulings Of Judge Caw-
lord, by whom the cases were tried. The
argument of those writs Of error before the
Circuit Court has consumed no less than
seven days-so numerous and important were
the errors alleged TO be committed by the
Judge below. Both cases were opened for
the plaintiff in error, by Richard Hildreth,
Esq, Of Boston, followed by the District At
torney and J. II. Bradley, Esq, an eminent
lawyer of this city, retained on behalf Of the
prosecution. The closing argument for the
prisoners was made in the first case by Hon.
Horace Mann, and in the second case by j.
Vaudeville Carlisle, ESQ.,, a young and III
sing lawyer of this city, of great promise.
Besides other points of great interest, such
as the constiIutionality Of Slavery in the Dis
trict Of Columbia, color in the District as a
presumption Of Slavery, and the amount and
character of the evidence necessary to estab-
fish the fact Of servitude in the District, the
whole doctrine of the law Of larceny was gone
] into IL tho E,Ila., 10000 ,rr,,.ltv ehN on-
plication Of that doctrine TO the subject Of
slaves. Mr.. Hildreth, in his opening, den-
ounced the instructions of Judge Crawford
on this point, as not only bad English and
bad law, but as exhibiting the appearance Of
an attempt at legal double cntendre, preserving
the sound form of legal words, but intended
to convey, and actually conveying to the ju-
ry, a totally false and unfounded idea of the
law. He denounced Judge Crawford's de-
fnilion of larceny as false and 4" %rotten," I'M
supported by a single adjudged case in any
book, or by a tried treatise of any preten-
sions, and, in its special application to the
subject Of slave property, in positive and d.
rect contradiction to the whole course of leg
~islation in every slave State Of the Union, and
TO every case on the subject to be found in
the books the boldest attempt at judicial
Legislation of which he had any knowledge.
Mr.. District Attorney, when he came TO re-
ply, accused the opposite counsel of an in
d~ecorous and unfounted attack on the person.
al character Of the Judge.
Mr.. Hildreth, in the opening Of the second
case, denied explicitly that he had made any
personal attack on the Judge. He had at
tackled his instructions and his law; it was
those, and not the Judge personally, that he
had pronounced rotten" Of the Judge
personally he had said but one thing and
That was, that he was a Pennsylvanian.-
And why had he said that? To explain how
it happened that the Judge had given in
structions, moi only in contradiction 10 the
whole tenor Of the common law, but TO the
whole course of Southern legislation-a blum
der into which a Judge educated at the South
would not have been so likely to fall.
One Of the points made for the prisoner
was, that it was necessary to prove the SER
vitude of the negroes alleged to be stolen, by
something more than the claim of the mas
ter. And the case was likened TO that of an
indictment for stealing foxes. Now, foxes
being animals wild by nature, there can be
no property in them sufficient TO sustain an
indictment for larceny, at least not unless
they are alleged and proved TO be foxes
caught and subjected. While Mr.. Mann
was proving tliS llluStIdlohi the DISuICl Az
torney wrote the following lines, and passed
them along to the prisoners counsel:
To illustrate the point he's making
"In larceny there must be taking"-
A fox, he says, cannot be stolen,
Be he a young or be he an old 'un.
Pursuing hounds say he's mistaken,
At least SO far as to the taking.
1t was not long before the following retort
courteous was written on the back of the
same paper, which was left on the table for
the District Attorneys serious consideration:
Fox-hunting abroad, and sIave-hunting in
doors,
/ beg leave to suggest do not run on all-fours;
Foxes do not eat foxes-brule natures have
bounds,
But Mr.. District Attorney, out-hounding the
hounds,
Hunts men, women, and chiIdr rem, his pocket
to fill,
On three hundred indictments, al len dollars
bill.
The Court has adjourned for a fortnight,
to take time TO draw up its opinion. Very
little doubt is felt Of the reversal of the con-
v~ictions. Another case against Sayres, the
master Of the vessel, upon which he was
fined the very moderate sum OF ST. 800, with
costs, amounting TO 8 1856, for transporting
the slaves, yet remains to be considered
That case involves also some very interest
ing points.
Nonro D;cinr