Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1853-07-16

| prisoners defense to the claim of Ellinpton
oiid the time aud probable costs of obtaining
the evidence necessary to sustain the defense.
For this purpose, he introduced an affidavit
containing substantially statement of the
same facts as those which appear in the pleas
! filed before the judge OF the circuit court
The same papers also accompanied the alfi-
davlt as those accompanying the pleas. The
affidavit alleged thut the prisoner was free in
Brunswick county, Virginia, us long ago as
1891 and that from 1892 till 1874, the time
when he removed to to this State, no was
free, aud ms a freeman, resided in Walton
county, Georgia. Mr.. B. also referred to
certain telegraphic dispatches tending to
show that the claim Of Ellington was false
and fraudulent.
At this point Com. Sullivan pushed the
| $l0 gold coin away from him aud nyowed
he would not have any fee in the case, let il
l,e decided as il might be.
Mr.. Ketchum still insisted on the rule for
costs. The case was one that called for Sc
curity. The prisoner had money to prepare
for his defense. He had made some money.
lie was willing to eXpend it in defending his
liberty. He would yield il all up to show
thnt he wHs iree-the last cent should 90;
apd when that little stream wns dried up,
there were other aud larger streams that
would bo opened to aid him in SO worthy
purpose.
Mr.. Wnlpoe replied nt length. II was
admitted that claimant had right to a con-
,inunnce; and there is no law TO authorize
security for costs. The law don't contem.
plate trial for in trial there is equality
OF rights between the parties Here is no
equality of right. The claimant may tuke
| affidavit Instead of dopositons; ichiie he fi-
rf~II Ia
shoiD his freedom. AlIudes to the discussions
in the U. 5. Senate while the law was pend
ing there. The trial of the question of free
dom or slavery must be tried, If al all, IN The
SLAVE SiuieS. lie denied the right of the
prisoner to ask a contnuance for ms he has
no right to offer any evidence in the case IL
he were so prepared he Gun lave no right
| To continue the cause to procure evidence
which he cannot offer. Nevertheless, he
was willing TO give the prisoner 80 days to
prepare to show that he was free, though he
| did not believe he was. twas often the case
that such men supported their prctensions
to freedom by forged papers, gotten up by
nbolitionsts for the purpose. The Judge
would become personally liable by making
an order for costs. Do you suppose Congress
has enabled you to oppose the obstruction Of
costs upon the claimans's right. Such pow
er would violate his constitutional rights. To
require security for costs would make you
liabc for an escape. The rule of court re-
ferred 10 is of no force. The judiciary has
no power to mike q law, and it it should at
tempt H. the law would he void.
Mr.. Ketchum referred Mr.. Walpole TO the
act of Congress of 1927, comforting certain
powers on courts, and among them the right
TO adopt certain rules of court regulating
the practice, &c.
MIR. Walpole read the case of Prigg vs.
Pennsy ylynnia; and called on the other party;
TO show precedent on their side. lie then
mude some general remarks, placing the law
Congress above that OF conscience.
But the Marshal is bound for the safety of
the fugitive; and, If he is liberated by your
act, then the penalties Of tfe law will recoil
on your own head. If you take this step,
you do it at your peril. We demand that it
shall no, be done.
lie then descantcd on the libernity of his
offer to give 30 days: and alleged that the
expense of the 80 days would he $500 to
claimant. Besides, he spoke of them as days
Of sorrow to his cIent-duys of mobs and
riots, &c.
When Mr.. Wnlpole concluded, he was ably
answered by Messrs. Coburn and Ketchum,
who met all his positions, and showed that,
| Duu us Nlb ueNhG pluNt l1uW huS, ~ Nuo
not so bad as TO admit of theIoutrages which
gentlemen seemed willing TO perpetrate in
It's name. 1t did, they contended admit of
an investigation full aud ample, TO establish
the freedom of the prisoner, if il existed.
They nlso urged the propriety of ruling the
claimant TO give security for costs, which
question the court took under advisement
and gave the parties nine weeks from the
9Th Of June to prepare their proofs, and get
ready for trial.
With this decision of the Commissioner
all parties seemed please,l and they left the
: court house in better humor with them
selves and each other, than was to be ex-
pected, all things considered.
The following will make our readers ac-
quninted with some further particulars
From them it will be seen that no effort will
he spared TO reduce this poor man to slavery.
IL they can get him nway from his home and
his acquaintances, with only the Ohio river
between him aud slavery, they doubtless
} hope to spirit him away somehow. Hence
the attempt TO move him TO Madison.
From the Indiana Free Democrat.
THE CASE OF JOHN FREEMAN.
We mentioned last week that John Free
man, a respectable colored man Of this city,
had been apprehended as a fugitive slave,
f and that his case was pending when we went
10 press, "Wednesday mornng) before Hon.
Stephen Major, Judge Of the Marion Circuit
Court, on writ of HdbeGs Corpus. The
proceedings had before Judge Major aud the
! subsequent proceedings before Commissioners
Sullivan, will be found elsewhere in this
5 paper.
Z; The case has caused great excitement, and
: it would be strange If il had not. freeman
I has resided here as freeman for nine years
: having come here from Georgia in ls44'-