Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1851-01-10
Reported for the n. Y. Journal Of Commerce
UNITED STATES COURT-MoSDAy, JAS 8
JUDGE ) CDsOS PREsIUISU.
THE FUGITIVE 81 AVE CASE

THE FUGITIVE SLAVE CASE
Judge Judson having far recovered from his ndsposi-
ton as enable him preside in court took his seat on the
bench this morning, and continued the examination of the
Alleged Slave Case.
Mr. Western addressed the in reply TO Mr. Jaws
opening for the defence the last day of the examination
and commended that his trial merely like proceeding
before grand jury try if there sufficient evidence
Of the probable commission Of crime send the defendant
Jury in this send him back sister State
try il this guilty Of the offence hc
csed Of This tried be fugitive slave and that
Dir. Smith his owner and the statute points out how
far must 20 in proving il.
We prove Ire satisfaction Of the court and after
j. }. Smith has submitted his proofs it for the
decide whether they sufficient II the court thinks that
the proofs sufficient il can, like grand nry
evidence in order that further light may be thrown on
the subject But il is ONLY necessary for the court 10 he sal
sed in order send him back There other reasons
which should restrict the defence in giving evidence.
The statute that slave shall not give evidence in his
behalf lest il might lead TO his committing perjury
The laws OF Great Britain also provide that shall he
put in position where his interests might overweight
his honesty morality md induce him falsely
Now suppose that if the fanatics who support this
introduced to testify for hin who need doubt tina, they
would consider themselves above the law of the land and
governed by higher law than that OF the Legislature,
the suncy of an OATH and resort 10 perjury in order de-
feat an act which they consider unjust and injurious Ii
the proof the part Of the claimant Is not satisfactory
your Honor then you can call Tor more; and 1t can't he
produced then defendant must be discharged. But if there
is clear p-ma fce mado out for the claimant you
mus, send the back again to Virginia be ried for all
your Honor will do by sending him back TO have fair
trial for hch the laws Of Virginia have made ample pov
sion There this would have right 10 be tried by
nry and might plead orn paupers and be defended BY
The State or District Attorney.
Such law showed high tenacity for the rights Of
oycJ neo,c and was glorious feature in the institutions
Of Yrrnia before whose tribunals the free the slave
md The black man as we'll the white, might be certain Of
obtaining justice. have carefully examined the laws Of
virginia and | quite certain that not title of this
mans right Il be lost endangered by his being tried in
Virginia From the spirit Of the Act il does not appear TO
me bu intended that defence should be made For if
defence BE- entered nto which might
sume wseks months, how can the proceeding be sum-
mary one what resident of Virginia would come here and
summit 10 the loss OF time and expense necessary TO
cover his slave! woud defeat the object of the law and
render il useless the slave owner for it would him
more than the slave was worth.
Mr. White read an from the decision Of Judge
Cr!e which stated the provision OF this Act which
prevented the slave giving evidence in his behalf
no more than the law provision which prevented
any other interested witnesses giving evidence in his
cause But lawyer wonld be so absurd TO say that
evidence should be received for the defence.
The Court said my impression remains unchanged
By this discussion have taken pains ascertain what is
meant by Act and think the sensible Interpretation Of
h that though Congress does not prevent testimony being
given favor of the defence tits nevertheless 10 be
mary proceeding in which it necessary for the claim
give the alleged slave six OF eight days notice. it