The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1852-06-30
The Indictment for Alleged kidnapping &C
Syracuse.

| The ndictment for Alleged kidnapping az
Syracuse.
TO THE EDITOR OF THE HERALD.
SYRACUSE, June Is, 1862.
In your paper of to day is an editorial article
which, for want of full statement of facts, create
a wrong impression. ! will give you tho facts
you will make your own conclusion. Henry w
Allen, Deputy United States Marshal, indicted.
under the laws of New York, 1910, for kidnapping
Jerry. He acquitted by the jury on Wednesday
last. You say it shows reaction against tho anti
slavery cause in Syracuse. I say it does not. You
know | am abolitionist; but you know equally
well that | never sent you u missatement. SO viii
give you the facts. The law Of New York, Of 1910,
prov DIES that he who attempts to take from thiz
State negro mulatto against his consent, with
out authority of law''-mark the words-shall, on
conviction, be fined $500, and imprisoned In ths
State prison ten years.
1t was under this act that Allen was indicted o
few days after Jerrys arrest by him What tho
testimony before the Grand Jury was, do not
know and whether there was testimony that Allen
took against Jerrys liberty, outside of the
warrant, is than know. The indictment was
found, and was met by Allen with special Piles,
instead Of general plea of ''not guilty" He was
never arrested-never gave bail 1t asserted
on all hands, that the question was to be tested
no feelings of unkindness were entertained towards
the marshal, personally. The special plea admitted
by authority Of law" and set forth the affidavit
Of the u S. Commissioner, the warrant, the return
on the warrant, and closed by denying that he had
done any g other acts /" in the premises. This
met by the prosecution, with denial of all the nj
legations of the special plea, as to Aliens alleged
authority to act-dened that Salen was U s. Com
missioner, that he issued warrant, &e.
On the day the trial commenced, council stipu-
lated to admit the allegations denied in their plea to
be true.
When the case was opened, the counsel for dc fenoo
maintained that inasmuch as they. in their special
plea, had admitted the doing Of certain acts touch
ing the man Jerry, named in the Indictment of
which the prosecution in reply specifically denied
that inasmuch as they had In terms declared they
had done g no other acts" and the prosecution in
reply had been silent to that egationthereforc,
the case was limited to showing the part Of tho
defence that the acts admitted TO have been doRe
were done by due authority oflaw"
The prosecution called witnesses, and offered to
prove that Allen guilty OF acts ter the deton-
iion Of jerry outside of the warrant, before and
after his arrest but the court took the view givea
above, by defence and excluded all testimony save
the record Of the warrant, &c, which the proseou-
ton had stipulated to admit. In other words, it
left the only question, this-Was a warrant, issued
under the Fugitive Slave law Of 1850, authority Of
law =
Gerrt Smith and Charles y. scdgwick main
tanned the uDconstitutionaty of the Fugitive law,
STEPHEN u. Dilage and George f. Comst0ck, the
other side The Judge, Or f. Marviu,) held the
law constitutional, and recommended that the jury
bring in o verdict Of not guilty, which was done at
once, and without leaving their seats. Az there
not fact to pass on IT was generally under
stood by lawyers, like myself, that the verdict Of
the jury was to be formal matter. and that which,
ever way the decision of Judge Marvin, Of Chau-
tauque county, was so was TO be the verdict.
Ny business is with facts You and others may
make the comments. OBSERVER