New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1851-01-09
ALLEGED SLAVE CASE.

Closes In Order and Quietnoss.
Our Reporter furnishes US the following synop
sis of the closing scenes in the case Of Long, the
alleged Fugitive from service or labor;
UNITED STATES CoURT.-Before Judge Judson
In the case OF Henry Long, claimed as fugi
tive from Slavery Court room was densey
crowded yesterday to hear the decision OF Judge
Judson-the gallery being occupied by coIored
persons among whom were several females
Judge Belts took a seat on the Bench beside
Judge ]. Henry Long, the alleged fugitive was
in Court as also DR.. Parker the claimant for Mr.
Smith, with several friends from Virginia,-Ar
Tappan, and other gentlemen. The Judge pro-
ceeded TO deliver his opinion.
This proceeding has been brought into Court IN
pursuance of the Act of Congress OF Feb l2, 1923,
and an amendment of Sept. Is, 1850. j. 3. smith,
the claimant, is a resident of Virginia, and claims
the restoration of Henry as fugitive from ms
service To reclaim to that service he has. under
valid power of attorney, caused the arrest OF
Henry by his authorized agent and attorney.
AID affidavit having been filed in Court, war
rant issued and the arrest made Henry is now
in custody of the Marshal of this district awaiting
the determination of this matter. No questions
have been raised in regard to the form or validity
of the papers or the case.
The claimant has produced his evidence in sup
port of that claim, and the alleged fugitive, by his
counsel, has produced such evidence as the coun,
sci deemed proper, all Of which has been heard
and considered.
Counsel, learned in the law, have discussed
with great ability the questions involved In the
case.
And now it devolves on the Court to decide
these questions according 10 law and evidence.
However important cause may be to the pubic
or an individual, no other rule can ever be adopt
ed in the administration otjustce.
If eUidence is to be 1cetghed that must be done
in even scales If the law is TO be interpreted,
there must be no departure from the long 'estab-
lished rules belonging TO the code Of the civilized
world.
Before stating the questions now to be deter
mined it may be proper to remark that, In the
argument of the case, the learned counsel oil the
defense, who last addressed the Court did, with
great frankness and candor, admit that the law oil
Congress Of Sept. ls, 1850, by virtue OF which TINS
case is now proceeding in the Circuit Court OF the
United States, is in no manner inconsistent with
the provisions of the constitution.
Or in other words, so far as this Court and TINS
cause are concerned, this lap is constitutional,
calid and binding
To this admission it may well be added that
every Judge and Court in the United States, hav-
ing taken upon himself the oath to support the
Constitution, by no possibility fall In the per
formance of that duty whenever case railing
within the law, supported by comp tent proof, Is
brought before them To do otherwise would be
= ,iola,;oo of known duty and prostratlon oil all
laws, never to be required OF any Jodge by SIN
be called to act
These considerations and this admission, super
sede all necessity of discussing either the cOnsti
tutionality of the law or its power over this
Court.
What remains then to be done in the present
case 1t is simply to inquire;
lst Does Henry Long by the laws OF Virginia
owe service and labor to John I. Smith, the claim
ant and
I'd. Is Henry Long fugitive from that ser
vice within the meaning and intent Of the second
section of the WITH article OF the Constitution OF
the United States, and within the meaning OF the
act of Congress above mentioned.
These questions OF fact comprehend all that the
Court has to determine.
The case is therefore brought down to very
narrow point the common sense construction and
qceight of evidence, may be alluded to as furnish
ing guide for the mind.
The means ofknOpledge the integrity and stand.
ing of witnesses, the probability OF the story re-
lated, the liability to mistake as to time, facts
or circumstances, connected with the case, these
are all to be taken into the account In giving
effect to the terminating OF the case. To return
to the first question. does the person arrested &C.
cording to the laws of Virginia, owe service and
labor to the claimant
BY the laws of Virginia Slavery is tolerated.
The Constitution of the United States yields its
sanction to that law, and since the organization OF
the Government the Supreme Court OF the U nited
right; therefore, no subordinate tribunals now
call it in question. In point OF fact then, how
stands the case and the proof in regard to the
person caimedf
DR.. Wade, a citizen of Virginia, an intelligent
witness, speaks of his own knowledge to this
Court bearing testimony that Henry was born In
own immediate neighborhood, in the town OF
Christianburgh, VA that his mother was slave
owned by Mr.. Anderson that they were brought
up together as boys and men that he has always
known him. and seen him in service as slave
that this claimant married the daughter OF Mr.
Anderson; that after the death OF Mr.. Anderson,
the mother and son passed into the hands OF this
claimant; and this witness adds that he mas now
met Henry in New. York, and in conversation
with him, and in seeing him here in Court, he
knows him to be the same person, and positively
swears to bis identity as he would to his own
brother
DR.. VIM. Parker, another citizen of Virginia,
testiies that heretofore he has been In the habit
of visiting John T. Smith, his brother-inlaw, In
Russell County, Virginia and saw there IN SER
rice as Stare, the person here arrested-that at
the instance and request Of Smith, and as his
agent, this witness had the letting OF Henry In
Richmond, Va to the house OF Haskins q Libby,
as the Stare of this claimant, and collected the
wages transmitting the same to his brother lnlaw
Smith; that while so in service In Richmond,
Henry was sick more than once that ne was his
physician, attending him while sick. and set up
with him through the night; that at the request
of Henry he wrote to Henrys wife and masterin
Russell County. =.
Two witnesses, masters Of vessels sailing be-
tween the ports of New. York and Richmond. have
also testified that they have frequently seen this
man at work in the store Of Haskins Libby du-
ring the time stated by DR.. Parker; that since
that time. thew have seen him in this city. and
seeing him here in Court identify him as the same
individual
The second question is-Has Henry Long es-
caped from the service of John I. Smith
br. Parker testified that in Dec. ls49, Henry
left Richmond; that he advertised him that with
diligent INQUIRY he could not be found there and
that aimee that time he has been found in New
XorI