The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-10-30

owner Be brought home the defendant. but that Il is
sufficient il the evidence show that he knew the person
he harboed or concealed was fugitive from labor.
The word "habor" is defined by photographers BY the
words 10 entertain, to shelter, secuIe TO secrete II
evidently has various shades OF meaning exactly
pressed by, any ,synonyme Il has been defined IN
and without lawful authority. person for the purpose Of
conceaing him, that another, having the rgh TO tbe
lawful custody Of such person, shall be deprived q he
same. This definition is quoted IN the opinion OF tne
court, as delivered by Mr. Justice Woodbury., IN Jones
Us. yanzandt, Howard, 227 but without Inc inenuon
OF affirming either the authority OF me pook OF .e COT
recness OF the definition; foi although the word may
be used in the complex meaning there given TO IT. u does
not follow that all these conditions are necessary ee
ments in its definition. Receiving anu eplef'anlng q
nent may we'll be called haTbong, the word is
times nsed Yet one may harbor without concealing
He may afford entertainment lodging and shelter 10 vag
abonds gamblers. and thieves, without the purpose
attempt conceament, and II may be correctly affirmed
OF him that he harbors them
The act OF Congress, by using the terms "harbor
conceal" evidently assumed that the terms were not
synonymous, and that there might be hafborng with.
out conceanent The act seems to be drawn with great
care and accuracy and bears marks OF that soveny
dctlon which sometimes charactenzes acts OF assembly
where numerous syDopymes heaped together, and
words multiplied only 10 increase confusion and OBJ
security. But neither in legal in common par.
lance is the word harbor precisely defined by the words
entertainer shelter Ii implies Improperly in the con-
duct OF the person giving the entertainment or shelter
the person who receives it. An innkeeper is said TO en-
terrain travellers and strangers not to hdrb0r them,
but may be accused oil harborng vagabcDds deserers
fugitlves thievespersons whom he ought not TO en-
terrain.
It is too plain for argument that this act does not in.
tend to make common charity crime, OF treat that man
guilty OF offence against his nelghbor who mere
y furnishes food, lodging. or rament, to the hungry
weary or naked wanderer though he be an apprentice or
sscape Of he but ne the q
claim him. II points out the mode in which this reca.
nation is to be made and i is for an unlawful interior
hindeance of this right OF reclamation, secured to
the master by the constitution and laws that this penalty
Is imposed
The harborng made criminal by this act then, requires
some other ingredient besides kindness charity
rendered to The fugitive. The intention or purpose
which accompanies the act must be to encourage the u
gitive in his desertion OF his MASTER to further his
cape and impede and Illustrate his reclamation " The
act must evince intention to elude the vigilance Of the
master. and be calculated to obtain the obect"-t2 Nc
Lean, 6oSl
act to constitute illegal harborng is not to be measured
by the religious political notions OF the accused the
correctness perversion Of his moral perceptions Some
men may conceive il religious duty to break the law,
but the law will not receive that as an excuse.
If the defendant connected with any society or as
sscation for the purpose Of assisting ugves from other
States TO escape from their masters and in pursuance OF
such scheme, afforded this shelter and protection TO the
fugitive in question. he would be legally liable to the
penalty Of this act however much his conscience or tina.
OF his associates might approve his conduct.
The difference between the action Tor the penalty and
the action the case is this: The defendants might be
liable for the penalty If they illegally harbored and
cealed the ugitives, though the master may have
afterwards reclaimed them
But in an action the for damages, the plaintiffs
must show that the slaves lost TO him through the
illegal interference OF the defendants that other
appreciabe loss injury, or damage was suffered by him
in consequence thereof. In the rst case, he would
the whole value OF the slaves damages in the
latter only TO the amount OF loss actual damage which
he shows he has suffered
In answer TO point put by defendants COUNSEL fol-
groes came or were brought by George Cole 10 Kauf
mans barn. they had eluded the pursuit OF the owner
and his agent the plaintiffs are not entitled TO recover
the Judge remarked that in the abstract this point
hue, but did not become the defendants TO say II it be
proved that they harbored concealed the slaves,
carried them of in their wagonthat they did thus
Illustrate their efforts TO reclaim them, much
person carried of anoiheIs horse and when be reached
certain stage delivered HIM 10 comrade who IN turn,
delivered him TO another, by which the property became
entirely lost to the owner-no one would doubt their re-
sponsbility.
PENDANTS any OF them, harbored concealed the fug
tives mentioned in the declaration
Did they do this, knowing them 10 be fugitives from
labor and to further promote their escape from the Pur
suit or reclamation OF their masters!
Did they, by such harbong and concealing, the
escape OF the fugiyes hinder their recapure II you
hnd these facts to be true your verdict should be for the
plaintiffs for the value OF the slayessay 3O0O and in
terest II you see III TO add H.
But the burden oil proof is on the plaintiff and unless
ne hV made Out his case ny satisfactory evidence, you
should find for defendants for such OF them have
not been proved to be guilty Yeu should suffer peju
dice to operate your minds against either party on ac-
count OF peculiar notions either you they may
entertain the subject OF slavery.
In this court the same equal and exact justice should
be melted out both TO master and seryan-to STAKEHOLDER
and aboitionist
With these remarks the case is committed TO you.
The jury failing TO agree, misunderstanding
len for the plaintiff and too tor the defendants.
lfk General Agency.