Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1848-02-11
Supreme Court of tic United States.
DECEMBER TERN, 1916.

W. 90 NHARrON JONES, Plaintiff; JOHN
VAN ZANDT Defendant.
IN a certificate IF division in opinion Jctpeen
Tie Judges IF Tie Circuit Court Of The United
Sfafes for the district Of Ohio.
MIR. Justice Woodbury. delivered the opin-
ion of the Court.
lie case comes here on a division of opin-
ion in the Circuit Court of Ohio.
ne subject matter of the original suit was
debt Tor a penalty Of $500, under the act nj
Congress of February 18th, 1893, for con.
ceallng and harboring a fugitive slave he.
longing to the plaintiff.
Inc certificate OF the division of opinion,
as VIII be seen in the record, relates TO yari.
Gus questions, arising under two heads
FIRST, on rulings made at the trial: and, Sc.
condly, on a motion in arrest Of iud rment.-
These questions extend to the unusual number
oil fourteen; not, however, that the presidine
Judge in the circuit and his associate enter
talned strong doubts concerning the genera
principles involved in them all, as NAV be
seen In the report of the case. q Mclean
Y. C.,) but because the question involved
could not otherwise be brought here; and they
possessed so wide and deep an interest as to
render it desirable that they should come un.
der the revision of this court.
for that purpose, in conformity to what is
understood TO have been the usage in the cir
cults, they accommodate the parties, by let
tlng a division pro JOrma be entered on all
the points presented.
1t Is not understood that any of them en-
brace things urged merely as reasons for a
new trial. For if they did, as such a trial
rests in the discretion of the court, and is not
a matter of strict right, a division OF opinion
In relation to it furnishes no cause for bring
ing the case here for our decision Oh dues
tons certified.
Before entering on the examination of the
points, 1t will make several of them more in
telllglble, if we advert to the clause in the
Constitution bearing on this subject, and the
act OF Congress under which the action was
instituted.
The former is, that NO person held to ser.
vice or labor in one State, under the law.
thereof, escaping into another, shall, in con
sequence OF any law or regulation therein, b.,
discharged from such service or labor, blu
snail be delivered up on claim of the party tc
whom such service or labor may be due
Article 4, Sect. ?.
In respect to the statute, it will not be lie.
cessary to repeat here any of it, except the
portions of the Sd and 18th sections.
Sec. 3. When a person held To labor in
any OF the United States, or in either of ia.
territories on the northwest or south of the
river Ohio, under the laws thereof, shall es-
cape into any other of the said States or Ter
rltory, the person to whom such labor or SER
vice may be due, his agent or attorney, is
hereby empowered to seize or arrest such fu-
gltlve from labor, and to take him or her be-
fore any Judge of the Circuit or the District
Courts OF the united States, residing or be-
Ing within the State, or before any nagis-
trate OF a county, city, or town corporate,
wherein such seizure or arrest shall be made,
ana upon proof, TO the satisfaction of such
Judge or magistrate either by oral testimony
or afldavlt taken before and certified by a
magistrate to any such state or Territory,
That the person so seized or arrested doth, un-
der the laws OF the State or Territory from
which he or she fled, owe service or labor to
The person claiming him or her, it shall be
the duty OF such Judge or magistrate to give
a cerllhcale to such claimant, his agent or at
torney, which shall be sufficient warrant for
removing the said fugitive from labor, to the
State or Territory from which he or she fed
SEC. 4. Any person who knowingly and
willingly obstruct or hinder such claimant,
ms agent or attorney, in so seizlng a. arrss-
tlng such fugitive from labor, or shall rescue
such fuglilve from such claimant, his agent
or attorney, when so arrested, pursuant to the
authority herein given or declared, or shall
harbor or conceal such person, after notice
that he or she was a fugitive from labor, as
Aforesaid, shall for either of the said offences,
forfeit and pay the sum Of FIVE hundr red dol
lars. Which penalty may be recovered by
and tor the benefit of such claimant, by ac-
non OF debt, In any court proper to try the
same; saving, moreover, to the person claim
Ing such labor or service, his right of action
for, or on account of, the said injuries, or eth
er of them.
The first question at the trial, on which a
DIVISION arose was, In substance, whether the
notice referred to In this 4th section must
be in writing.
No doubt exists with this court. thatit may
be otherwise than in writing, if it only bring
home clearly to the defendant knowledge that
Inc person he concealed was "a fugitive from
labor
The offence consists in continuing to Sc
crete from the owner what the acts of Con-
gress and the Constitution, as well as the
laws Of several of the States treat for certain
purposes as property, after knowing that
claims of property exist in relation to the flu
gitive.
Now, the act of Congress does not, in
terms, require the notice to be in writing, nor
does the reason of the provision, nor the evil
to be guarded against, nor any sound analo.
gy..
The reason of the provision is merely thai
the party shall have notice or information
sufficient TO put him on inquiry whether he
is not intermeddling with what belongs to an.
other.