Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1851-06-28

| by the representation of such facts, combin-
| ed, as shall go to make him a slave under
the laws of Virginia.
The Court would consider the objections
The government was allowed to proceed.
De Bree ontinued-Shadrac wns my
slave, without qualification he was what
we call bacon color; between mulatto aud
negro complexion. The witness testified
the same as in Scott's case.
John Caphart the officer sent by De Bree
in pursuit of Shadrach was next called
and testified to the same facts as in the pre-
viOus case.
In Cross Examination witness was asked
it he ever had any thing TO do with certain
slave hunt in 1886, in Wisconsin.
The Court inquired how such question
could be shown as pertinent to this case.
Mr.. Hale replied that they wished TO
show what the witnesses occupation has
been.
The Court ruled that it would be proper
TO make such inquiries of the witness as
would bring out the fact of his occupa-
ton.
Mr.. Dana then asked the same question as
before.
Caphart replied that he had something to
do with the order of the Mayor of Norfolk
TO 20 to Wisconsin aud arrest some two hun
dred whites aud blacks and il permitted he
would tell what part he took in the matter.
The Court thought such n history unne-
cessnry, and therefore ruled it out.
George Il. Curtis swore that the he was n
United States Commissioner aud that Shad-
rach was brought before him for examina-
ton. This witness also testified the same
as in Scott's case.
John Clark-Am reporter for one of the
Boston papers attended meeting last Oc-
tober, at which Lewis Hayden presided, in
Belnup street church; several speeches
were there madc,--a dozen, | should think.
Mr.. Lord-What was the nature of those
speeches, ms hearing upon the Fugitive
Slave Law, &C.?
NJ Dana objected strenuously, against
such interrogatories, and appealed 10 the
Court to make a stand here, aud final one
as TO what evidence the government should
Introduce. lie contended with ability for the !
right of individuals, white or colOred, in |
their social aud political relations, in public !
meetings or otherwise, TO express their free !
opinions upon matters of general interest," |
lie urged upon the Court not to allow the |
breaking down of this personal right
MIR. Lord replied that the question was
one of law, aud therefore proper TO be put.
lie wished to show that the defendant was
The presiding officer of II meeting that used
the most inccndiary language in regard TO
Lc fugitive law aud all who should carry it
nto effect. The government has n right to
enter all reasonable meetings, and make
hose prisoners who are present, even if by
presence alone they encourage the OBJ
ect of the meeting.
Mr.. Hale said, the learned counsel on the
other side had wandered from the point rais-
cd. 1t was simply whether the government
had the right TO put in the character of
speeches at II public meeting to bear upon
the alleged guilt of a party TO Il rescue that
took place five or SIX months subse-
quently.
Mr.. Lunt said, it was not that the defend |
ant presided at Il certain meeting, or was
present at it, but whether the meeting was
called for the express purpose OF resisting, |
ut all hazards, the very law under winch, in /
part, he is now indicted.
Sprague, Justice, ruled that if the govern
ment merely intended to show that the de- /
fendant was present at meetings at which |
course Of resistance to the law was arranged, |
the testimony was admissible.
MIR. Clark cOutinucd.-l sat near the Pres
ident at that meeting; Messrs. Smell and |
Snowden were Secretaries; certain rcsolu- |
tons were adopted by the meeting, a sy- |
nopsis of which was handed mo by the |
Secretaries.
Mr.. Lord. What was the purport of
those resolutions!
MIR. Dana rose to object to the questions ,
that were being asked, when at the sugrcs- !
ton Of the Court he gave way, being assnr- |
ed that his objections should be fully consi,I. !
cred. The further examination of this Wit |
ness was postponed.
George Greenlcaf, one of the reporters of |
the Times, was next called to testify as TO |
what he heard Mr.. James n. Bnfliim. of
Lynn, say TO Mr. Hayden in the Marsia's |
office when the later was arrested.
Mr.. Dana objected, on the ground that !
such testimony did not bear upon the case.
The Court ruled the testimony in.
Witness continued. Buflum renlnrked IN !
Hayden did not think of you-l always |
thought you was pretty clever CellowD- |
MIR. Hayden replied smiling, "You know |
1t takes pretty clever fellow to do such an |
act" va
Cross Examination. Mr.. Buflum was nor
smiling al the time, but thought he looked |
quite blank; Hayden smiled.
Samuel Lansing called. reside in Nosb.
ua street; Hayden, the defendant. lived in |
South street in a block in which lived iS |
years. There is an alley way running along
The rear OF SAID block the Southac street
church is within hearing distance of IIay-
den's house.
No cross examination.
Charles Sawin called was an officer in
this court when Shadrach was arraigned.
saw Hayden back of the further railing be,
Shadrach, "Fred don't he afInid ,ve y,;II
stand by you till death; lIayden's dress WINS
different now from what il was then think |
his complexion was lighter than it is now, / |
ana not then know him; first knew his name
when he was brought into court 10 be ex.
amined ON the present charge then recognis.
ed him as the man who made the remorR
Cross-Examination. Am a U. S. Denutv |
Marshal am certain Hayden is the man
nlthnInh hn anna ,I,.,