Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1854-02-25

published at the time, dscharging the prisoners
under (the act Of "a of March, 1888. commonly
called the Free bill.")
Things remained in this condition until few
lays since, when n cdpids was sued out Of the STU
lreme Court of the State at the instance Of Bill
Thomas against tho said officers for trespass ri ei
orRiis. The Sheriff was directed by Justice Wood
ward to hold the parties to bail in the sum ,OOC
each.
The officers being arrested, again sued out q
writ OF habcas corpus, under the Act Of Congress
above mentioned, and the case came up for hear
ing yesterday afternoon before Judge Kane.
Before the case was opened, Mr.. jackson, one oI
the counsel for the plaintiff, deposited with Mr.
llazchurs, the Solicitor for the Sheriff. Il warrant
ofarrcst, issued by Judge Cunningham of Luzcrnt
county under the act Of 1880, upon bill found
against the defendants in a criminal action Mt vii
kcsJarrc. The object of this warrant is, that tho
Sheriff shall hold the defendants in the event o.
their discharge By the Court under the habcas cor
pus.
Mr. IIazlehurst said, the warrant had not beer
served ON the Sheriff, and he would only make Q
return to the habcas corpus now before the Court.
ID. p. Brown replied that the Sheriff was bound
to make supplemental return setting forth all the
authority by which he holds the prisoners, other
wise they might be discharged. The Sheriff mus
state simply by what authority he held them.
Judge Kane-I doubt whether the Sheriff ought
not to recitc all the causes of detaner. see nC
difficulty either in making full return or sup
Elemental return. The proofs intended to be offer
ed may apply to different matters. Before counc
begin, desire to know whether this is the same
trcspass that we heard before Judge Grer, where
the prisoners were discharged from arrest.
ID. p. BrOwn-Counsel were not heard before
Judge Gricr
Judge Kaue--I ask council whether they intent
to make different statement Of facts from thosc
heard by Judge Grier2
M, 49, -. r..l I.r..
Judge Grer. We don't know where he obtained
his facts.
Dist. At. Ashmoad-Judge Grer ordered testi
mony to be taken on both sides, which was done
and is now the records of this Court. II counci
had consulted these records, they would hay,
known whore the Judge got his facts. This is th,
same occurrence that was decided by Judge Grier.
ID. p. Brown-Wo were not permitted to prcsen
any thing Allwas heard for the relator and moth
ing for the respondent.
Judge Kane Assuming this case to be differen
from the one heard by Judge Grier, will go oi
with it, with notice to councils that if on hearing
il | find it to be essentially the same as that 81
determined, | will not permit n defendant to b
held to bail in civil suit where the plaintiff cou
have been a contempt witness, if he thought prope
to attend.
Mr. Hazlehurst, for the Sheriff. then read tn
following return;
To the Honorable, the Judges Of the Circuit Coul
of the United States, in and for the Eastern Di
trict of Pennsylvania:
certify that hold, and have the bodies here
Court, of John jenkins, James Crossn and Georg
Wynkoop, the rolators named in the within wri
under and by virtue of n certain writ of capia
and issued out Of the Supreme Court, in and ft
the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
To answer, SAMUEL ALLEN, Sheriff.
January 81, 1854.
U. s. District Attorney j. W. Ashmead, state
the objections Of the habeas corpus and read III
petition of the officers. lie then cited the scveri
acts of Congress in reference to the matter yin
exclusively upon the act of I'd March, 1858
Commissioner Ingraham and Marshal Wynkoo
were then called to testify to the issuing and SCI
vice of the original writ for the arrest Of the ael
ed slave. A witness from Wilkesbarre was ais
called TO testify to the arrest and the circumstance
growing out OF it, but the Judge informed the Di
triet Attorney that it was not necessary.
Mr.. jackson then stated the case of the plaintiff
and read the record of the Supreme Court togotht
with two aiidavits from james ID. Rex and Wi
throp W. Ketchum, in relation to the occurrenct
at Wlkesbarrc on the day of the arrest of the say
| Judge Kane asked If their was no affidavit lro
the plaintiff himself2
| NJ. jackson replied that their was no such af
dayit
The District Attorney said he would offer n
other affidavit of James ID. Rex taken at the tin
/
the one just read by Mr.. jackson.
d. p. Brown--lt can't be read. This is not Il
! trial of the cause.
Judge Kane-I have no doubt that il can be rel
under the act of Congress, Judge Of the U.
Court must inquire whether an officer Of the Unit
States is in prison for oboyng the lws of the Unit
States. The Judge was about to give his dccsio
when Mr.. Brown asked that they might be p,
mitted to argue upon the act Of Congress Of
/ March, 1858.
This request was granted and the construction
the law is now being argued.
LATER,-On Friday morning Judge Kane deli
cred awritten opinion upon the question argue
and upon the Interpretation OF the Act Of Congrc
of March I'd, 1858. The Judge decided that u
der the Act of Congress, it was the duty Of I
} Court to hear evidences Of the relators that
might be informed whether, as United States U
: GERS, they were acting in pursuance Of the dir
; ton of the Court and in the service Of the proco
The Judge referred to the opinion delivered
Judge Grer, when this case was before him
concurred with Judge Grier in that opinion thu
: and his mind had undergone no change since,
reasons having been adduced to make him thi
; otherwise now.
/, Judge Kane desired the Council for the pla
, tiff to show how they connected the relators wi
| the acts of violence complained Of against Thomt
in the nfidavits fled on which the suit in the
preme Court was founded. lie said he could n
see any thing in these aihdayits which connect
} them with the violence alleged.
, David Paul Brown read tthe afidavits and co
mented on the facts there in stated. lie also arg
cd that the petition Of the relators admitted C
! nexion.
Judge Kane said, as far as he could discover
r the afldayits, Deputy Marshal jenkins, in Wilk
E barre said in answer to a question, that he was
D officer Of the United States, but not that he h
committed any violence on Thomas. The relate
petition, he said, appeared to have been dra'
with great care and precision.
Mr. AshmcOd said, the petition denied an assa
and battery on the part of the Officers, and aleg
that they were violently resisted by Bill Thorn
and others, in the performance Of their duty.
I, After Mr., Brown had argued at some length Il
suiiciency of the afidavts, Judge Kane said
; would again examine the afidavits, and il he
! not find sufficient therein to alter tho opinion
now entertained he would not require anOth
argument from the United States District AttornC
On Tuesday he would give his decision.