The republic., 1851-02-21
WASHINGTON: FRIDAY MORNING, 81, 1851

Mr. Sewall replied that he appeared as attorney
for the alleged fugitive.
The commissioner replied that he could not hear
him in behalf of a client who had avoided.
Mr. Sewall replied that it appeared, from the
officers return, that Shadrack had not fled, but
removed by force.
Of the deputy marshal appeared to be proper, and
ordered it to be placed on file.
In reply to question by the commissioner,
whether he had any thing further TO submit, Col.
Thomas referred to- the documents produced on
Saturday in relation to Shadrack's running away
from Norfolk, and moved for certificate by au-
thority OF which Mr.. Cuphatt could. without any
| further judicial proceedings, take Shadrack and
| convey him back to Virginia.
The commissioner said he was not aware of any
precedent for the course suggested, and would sus
pend further action on the complaint itself until it
should appear that Shadrack was permanently be-
yeond the control Of the marshal And he
dered.
Mr.. Sewali now undertook to read some authori-
ties by which he purposed to show that the court
could discharge the prisoner. though absent there
being no sufficient proof in support Of the COM
paint; but the commissioner interrupted him by
saying that he had already passed the order for
further at present.
Mr.. Sewall persisted in addressing the commits
sioner, until his honor in decisive tone ordered
the marshal to proclaim the court adjourned, and
he thereupon left the bench, and Mr.. Sewall had
no court to argue to.
ANOTHER ARREST ON ACCOUNT OF THE NEsCUE.-
Yesterday morning colored man, named John
Foy, laborer occasionally employed by Mr.. For
risal, was arrested near the custom. house, on a
warrant issued on the complaint of Mr.. Lunt, Uni
ted States district attorney, alleging that, in
cert with others, nc rescued Shadrack from the
custody Of MIR. Cuphart ON Saturday.
lie was taken to the United States court room and
arraigned before Commissioner Hallett, and hav-
ing pleaded ''not guilty. and postponement till
Saturday having been agreed to, question to
the amount Of bail was raised. The commissioner
| at once named 83 900. being the same amount as
in the cases Of Wright and Davis.
Mr.. Hidreth, one Of the counsel for the defend
ant. objected to the sumfirst, because it was more
difficult for poor laboring colored man TO procure
high bail than for the other parties named; second,
that bail for the value Of the property rescued (.
be asked; and third that the penalty was only a
fine Of s 900 and six months imprisonment, and
the $4,000 suggested by the commissioner
more than equivalent to that penalty.
Mr.. Lunt, attorney for the United States, nied
| that il was a mere question of property The Of
fence was not only violation of the rights of pro-
pcrty, but high handed outrage, in which the law
| and its officers had been set at defiance, and dc.
| fcated.
Mr.. Scwall, also counsel for the defence. said
there was one strong circumstance of mitigation
in the case. The defendant was a colorcd man,
and could not fail to have strong sympathies with
his fellow colOrcd man, the alleged fugitive II
was both legal, just and proper Tor the commits
sioner to take into consideration the operation of
this natural feeling
The commissioner replied that the suggestion
made by Mr.. Scwall might be very proper one,
after conviction, when the defendant was brought
up for sentence. lie then ordered the bail to be
entered in s 5000, and William w. Marjoram, con-
fcctioner, then became surety in that amount.