The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1850-11-11

cedonce between a criminal process OF the State
and the certificate of the commissioner. IL no
other criminal charge could be raised, it was pro-
posed with his own consent, to arrest him for for
nication (Which is a criminal offence in Massa-
chusetts,) on account of the nvalidity of his slave
marriage.
Gas soon as it known that they were about
10 take out a warrant the vigilance committee was
called together, and various sub committees APP
pointed Among these a committee Of legal
gentlemen, whose duty II was to give Crafts the
benefit Of every legal weapon Of offence or defence
His committee consisted of S. G. Sewall, Charles
Sumner, H. II. Dana, jr, John Z. Park, and 4 Gorge
Minot. In addition 70 these gentlemen, Charles g.
Lorng, esq, Of the most distinguished lawyers
in the State, volunteered his services. Alter full
elaboration, this committee notified the commits
soners that if they acted under the law they would
be sued the ground OF the nnconstitutionality OF
their appointment, and that the same course would
be taken with the marshal and his deputies, any
other who should act under the direction Of
the commissioner"
We cannot undertake to discriminate between the
fiction and fact in the above extracts, and in other
parts Of the letter which the Union bases its
comments. We are not informed whether such u
committee as that above mentioned has been APP
pointed and if 80, whether they have given the adj
vice above attributed to them. We doubt if any of
the gentlemen named have accepted such com
mission.
In regard, however, to Mr.. Loring, VIC can say
confidently that he mas never Deen appned 10 by
any committee acting in behalf Of fugitive slaves,
volunteered or pledged his services to any such
committee, or authorized the use of his name by
any such. He has, understand, as we presume
any eminent member of our bar in general prac-
tce would do, the application of the counsel of
Crafts and his wife, consented to act, without Pc
cuniary compensation, their counsel, in case
they should be arrested, considering it the duty Of
every professional man so applied to to aid in the
defence of person arrested, intimating at the
same time that. although he considered some Of the
provisions of the law highly Objectionable, he in
clined to the belief that it not unconstitutional,
and that in the event of any forcibe resistance to
the officers of the law, he must be expected to take
side with the latter. Whether any Of the other
gentlemen named have given more countenance
than this for the use that has been made of their
names we are not informed.
1t deserves to be stated that yet there has been
no actual resistance to the legal authority. The ar
rest of Knight civil suits for Islander and consp
racy, with the allegation of enormous damages,
was farcical proceeding, disgracefu enough to
the parties concerned in it, but it was attended with
no serious embarrassment to the party arrested, as
it was easy to obtain bail for meeting the issue OF
90 frivolous and obviously vexatious suit 1t is not
even pretended, in the letter above quoted, that
these suits advised by the gentlemen named
aa the committee.