Richmond daily times. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1853, 1851-01-28
ANOTHER FUGITIVE SLAVE DELIVERED

VI.
+ The ollowngi is the conclusion of the of Flu.
gtve Slave, named Stephen Bennett, tried in Phladel-
phia on Friday last:
The evidence for the claimant was here closed, and
the claimants affidavit taken in the United States Court
OF Maryland, was given IN evidence.
Alter the evidence had closed, Mr.. McMurtrie arose
and said. theirst quesonlto decideis-s he the man
mentioned in the claim The second question is
whether il is proper to remove him (Stepben BennetU
into another State Mr.. M. after expatating the
case reduced to the following That the respondent
il here upon demand from another State. Mr.. Pierce
asked for posponement OF the case Tor the purpose
OF proving by the evidence OF the respondent himself
that he Sephen Bennett brought into the State OF
Pennsylvania by the claimant. lie proposed to swear
the respondent Tor the purpose oshowing that they were
competent to prove the foregoing.
The Judge said that it was imm ateria about the
master bringing him into the State of Pennsylvania that
at the time the writ was issued he supposed that the
petitioner for it prepared go into the hearing and
examination suppose that the object OF calling wit
nesses from Columbia is 10 show that by the statute
OF Pennsylvania, this person ceased to be slave by the
act otthe master II it can be shown that The law OF
Maryland recognizes the act OF Fennsylv ania, the
proper authority TO establish relations between the mas
and servant, then the evidence proposed would be
admissible. he Constitution under which the fugitive
slave law has become the law OF the land that
no person held to labor according to the law in any
State and escaping into another State shall be dscharg
ed from such labor by reason oil any law therein
The plain meaning Of this provision is, that by the law
OF Pennsy lvana, person shall be discharged from
service labor in which he was held under laws OF
Maryland.
That, in regard to the pos'ponemen, the application
for should have been made at the beginning of the
case. The Judge then on to lay down the cases
in which p0stponement would be granted 10 nvesli-
CATIONS of this nature. Ii the claimant come here pre-
pared ior the purpose of establishing his clam time
procure additional evidence ought not to be allowed
him. Ihoweyer, he resolved. on an occasional visit
aud sudden met his slave and arrested him, time TO
procure his evidence ought 10 be u lowed him. 80,
upon the hearing, the alleged fugitive wasmet Py 1ac
winch he heard for the first time and which II was al
leged ne could rebut, time should also be given hin
to produce his evidence. But whereas this case, h
alleged iacts gong TO establish an emancipation til,
knowledge OF which had always been 10 his possession
| he should make prompt application to the Court, for
| time to produce the necessary evidence
David Paul Brown, Esq, came into Court about this
time, and remarked that he could not on account of
engagement another Court, attended to This ease =
That since coming into Court he had little light she'd
upon his mind reference TO the case, which, how.
ever, not sufficient to warrant him ate mptjnp
to argue the case. That otherwise, would give him
pleasure to argue sneh case He said il there wa.
any point OF fact or law in the proceeding, which he
could throw any light upon, il would give him g,ea
pleasure so 10 do. The Judge then gave a recital 0
the main features OF the case. for the benefit OF Mr.