The daily crescent. [volume] ([New Orleans, La.]) 1848-1851, 1851-03-03

GERS return that Shadrach had not fed, but was
removed by force.
The Commissioner now decided that the return
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 Shadrachs running away
from Norfolk, and moved for certificate, by
authority of which Mr.. Cuphart could, without any
further judicial proceedings, take Shadrach 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 Shadrach was permanently
beyond the control Of the Marshal. And he SO
ordered.
Mr.. Sewall now undertook to read some auhori-
ties by which he purpossd to show that the Court
could discharge the prisoner, though absent, there
being sufficient proof in support of the COM
plant but the Commissioner interrupted him by
saying that he had already passed the order for
pending proceedings and he could hear nothing
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 Rescue.
Yesterday, a colored man, named John Foy,
laborer occasionally employed by Mr.. For
ristall, arrested the custom house, on a
warrant issued on the complaint of Mr.. Lunt, U
S. District Attorney, alleging that in concert with
others, he rescued Shadrach from the custody OF
Mr.. Cuphart Saturday.
He taken to the U. s. courtroom and ar.
raigned before Commissioner Hallstt, and having
pleaded not guilty" and postponsment til
Saturday having been agreed to, question as to
| the amount of bail was raised. The Commissioner
at once named $4,000, being the same amount as il
| the cases of Wright and Davis.
| Mr.. Hildreth, one of the counsel for the defend
ant, objected to the sum-frst, because it wal
more difficult for poor laboring colored man t,
procure high bail than for the other parties named
second that bail for the value of the property res
cued Il. e. the slave,) and costs all that coult
reasonably be asked and third, that the penalt,
| was only fine of $1,000 and six months impri.on
ment, and the $4,000 suggested by the Comms
| sioner was more than equivalent to that penalty.
| Mr.. Lunt, Attorney for the United States de
MED that it was mere question OF property. Th
| offence was not only violation Of the rights O
property but high-handed outrage, in which tn
| law and its officers had been set at defiance, AM
| defeated.
Mr.. Sewell, also counsel for the defence, sal
there was one strong circumstance of mitigation
in the The defendant was colored man
and could not fail to have strong sympathes wit
his fellow colored man, the alleged fugitive.
was both legal, just and proper for the Commis
| sioner to take into consideration the operation
this natural feeling.
The Commissioner replied that the suggestio
made by Mr.. Sewall might be very proper one
| after conviction, when the defendant brougl
| up for sentence. He then ordered the bail to b
entered in $500, and William w. Maioram col
fectioner, then became surety in that amount.