Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1851-12-06


Dist. Ar. Aslnem read the law rs laid
down hy Judge lInlwiu, iu the case Of Porter
aud Wilson, IN reference 10 challenge, aud
whose duty it was first To challenge.
Mr.. Ludlow went OIL to argue ilic propric-
" of the question put ly him TO the juror.
lie said il would ber inrcc IN the irinl to
allow Juror io go into the jury box, whose
opinion is, That Tic fugitive law is ilncOusii-
tilOnal, aud that no uaiirr WliHt act is com
united IN the county of Lancaster, il will not
amount to treason.
Judges Grirr aud Kane took tho written
questions 10 examine. uud after consultation,
Judge Kane said that lr was requested hy
Judge Giicr Ia say, that it was due Ia tho
prisoner, us Wrl! us io the purposes of JUS
iicr, that. us Ear us possible, The jurors ~ try
this ease should he without bias. That tie
offence charged consisted of Two clrlrnis,
the act aud the intent uf the act; aud there
fore it was proper 10 know tie fleet deduri-
blc from either on his mind. The questions
were slightly uudiiicd.
Solomon Newman, of Pike, set aside for
the present at the suggestion ol the United
States.
David George, Dlockey, set aside by the
us.
Jonathan Wainwright, Philo,la., set aside
10y the U. :.
Erskinc llnzzard, challenged 10y the de-
fcndnnt.
Ephraim Fentou, Montgomery, set inside
by L. :.
Robert Walsh, Philutn., had read the pa
pcrS about tIis rnsc, aud had formed his
own conclusions. He was challenged for
cause.
James Lowdcn, Lancaster, moi challenged
10y drlt.-srt aside hy the United States.
Robert Elliott, Perry, not challenged 10y
dcit-qucslions read 10 Him 10y Mr. Ludlow,
for the 4. s.. hc answered all The questions
satisfactorily, aud was sworl MS juror--llic
first one enpaunellcd.
John REYNOLDS, Lnncnstcr-!Ind in com
pnny spoken of this cnSc, aud had expressed
an opinion that tho white persons, If any
were engaged, were more culpabe Than the
slaves; hat have expressed 40 opinion as TO
the guilt of the deit. In answer Ia another
question, ic answered, that his mind was in
doubt as to whether this act was treason but
if it was not treason, he could not see how
treason could he committed against the u.
States by levyng of war, bccaiise The United
States would not permit large army to be
Mr.. Stevens said, hy his answer, the Juror
had shown that lac was not competent To be
sworn.
After some further conversation between
the Court aud counsel Oh both sides, MIR.
Reynolds wns challenged 10y the defendants
aud set inside.
john Horn, Philadelphia, had expressed
an opinion that the net did not amount to
treason.
Stevcns-Wonld you alicr that opinion, If
directed otherwise by the Court.
Juror--lf the Court would make the case
quite clear, aud satisfy my mind llIut was
wrong, would. Not challenged 10y defend
ant, hut rejected for rause 10y U. s.
james Wilson, of Adams, in answer TO the
questions read To him, answered that as far
as his judgment went, hc would support the
Court OF the United States; sworn TO try the
cause.
john Kraus, Lebanon, in answer to the
questions, replied thai Inc would he governed
by The testimony and The law, bni is opposed
conscicnlinuSly To capital punishment, and
would Ent like to serve where that would he
the penalty
He WAS not challenged hy the def. Set
aside by the L. s.
Samuel Small, York-ln answer 10 qucs-
tions, that he had formed and expressed an
opnion from reading the papers that the Of
icnSe wns not treason. luI it might hr alter
ed otherwise hy the Court Challenged ly
def. but challenge subsequently withdrawn
and set inside by U. States.
Caleb Cope called. and not answer. Or
dcrcd 10 he iud SlC0.
Thomas Connolly, Calbon-answercd So
isihrluriiy all the questions and was sworn.
John g. Wnlmnugh, Observation-Disclosures
swered, that be had formed an upininn, aud
10 his tcl,Ow.ciiZcus had expressed himself
decidedly against the whole untlcr. Clal-
lenged far cause hy dll. aud rejected.
Josiah Rirh Bucks--Not challenged hy
IN. Int set aside by United States for The
present.
Matthias w. Baldwin, CiY-Not rhnlcn-
ged by def. hut set inside by United States.
George Suiilli, Delaware-Not challenged
by deii, hut set aside hy US.
Solomon Dillcr, Lnncustcr-Not challcn.
gcd by def. but set inside hy U. ).
Evans Rogers, Philadelphia, hnd formed
and expressed an opinion upon the subject
Challenged by def, and rejected,