The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1851-01-08

THx ALLEGED TIVE SLAVE.
JAN. 0.-Judgs Judson, who, We regret to say, hsl
this n SsraSs :. II ea
alleged fugitive said he prsssmsd that he nssS
not make any apology for the unavoidable delay Does
accident which occurred to him. lev svsninss sSo.
On leaving the judges library, where he had been IN
Sorsu.o1 70 late hour and IN conseq ueaos Of the
ground he fell from the steps leading nom the court
The fall produced serious injury In his back, ron
proceed though yet quite and shosi1
be experience asy inability In the progress Of TIE
Mr. white said 1t was understood that the examine
ton was delayed by the unavoidable absence Of HIS
There was but feeling amosgst counsel in the
case and that was regret for the cause Of absence
Mr. western, in answer to the opening argument q
Mr.. Jay submttes that the testimony offered By the
defence should be excluded This was . summary
proc,e dpg, and be contsndsd that 1t nothing
more than inquest and not trial and IL So they
are not entitled t. go into any evidence for the de-
,ns witnesses produced BY the claimant. He (Mr.
desired that the act OF Congress should be carried
nu,, ne.hsr yielding to clAmor or fansticsm. The
man long will be entitled to trial on his return 70
ha ns can there plead Jormo pauperis, and
torney OF the State OF Virginia He (counssD there
lore claimed the certificate Of the Judge.
there wa, no nse.ssia. 20 Ispy but the Judge ssid
term summary proceeding merely oontradistin-
civil suit is not brought on In ordinary caass hseo,
twelve days before minor tribunals in ak ssys
his mind inc term was contradistnguishing It from
Mr. Western begged 70 interrupt the Court to refer
to Storsy's Commentaries on the Contribution sec
677 (aready published In the proceedings in this case
before the Comnissioner).
Mr. White would content himself BY reading in
Judge Grier 1t IL this-Judge Grier says :-ss The
provision, that in NO trial or hearing, under TIL,
in evidence, is no more than the Enactment Of sn
established principle Of the common Law, that
shall De witness IN his own cause II this provision
81 the prisoner to prove that he the person
described, or that he was free 1t would be 8
temptation to perjury which tribunal should permit
To be presented to any man. No lawyer would urgo
before court such absurd Of the act
OF Congress as that 1t means that evidence should
be heard the part of tbs alleged fugitive III suoh
were the intention OF the legislature, it easy to
express 1t In unequivoca terms In truth, there Il
nothing equivocsl in the language of the act-it for
bids the Judge 10 hear the testimony Of the fugitive
seems that nothing but desire to render the
law odous Tor the sake OF political agitation could
great . libel on our national legislature"
The Judge said that his opinion was not CHANGED
The word summary" meant forthwit that is, THAI
the man can be taken to exaninston without days
notice, which Is necessary in civil II there
any disposition either side to delay then the
Court could insist on their proceeding in a summary
manner.
The witnesses for the defence who were examined
before the Commissioners, then called and exa-
Their names are JOS W. smith Elizabeth DiIon.
Emene stsnsberry, and John Butler, all people q
color. The witness Stansberry produced paper dated
January "a l84S which agree bet ween hsr
and Long to board with her.
On cross examination, Mr. Wood asked the witness
to write copy OF the paper produced by her She
did so and counsel retained the copy
Mr.. Lewis Tappsn being sworn, proved that paper
now produced WAS found by him in = trunk belonging
to Henry Long. THE paper not put In evidence
On cross-exsmnston he said it since the invss-
tisation before the Commissioner that no got the
paper
Mr.. Jay said they had two other witnesses. one Of
the was In court this morning, but neither Of then
antwered.
claimant.
G. 1 Tucker deposed that the Tarolints sailed from
New ork on 18th January, 18s9; he had brother on
board OF her, bound Tor California This testimony
was to contradict Emeiine stansberry who fixed the
date to be January. 1913.
The testimony being all In on both sides the
Judge eaid he would not hear the argument to-day.
The court was accordingly adjourned to III O'Clock,
to- morrow morning.