The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1855-01-29

Sentence OF the lnlwaukie Prisoners nor IN
Attempt 90 Rescue = Fugitive Slave.
NEW TRIAL DENIED OPINION OF THE JUDGE.
(From the Milwaukee Wisconsin, Jan. ISL
The Cont remarked:
The motion for q new trial in the case Of Booth,
opinions adverse 70 the cause Of the defendant pre-
yous to the trial; and that the court charged that
Glover was IN tee CUSTODY OF the Deputy Marshal q
the time Of the rescue In regard 20 the last point,
need only remark. that the law places the person
arrested In the custody Of tbs ofcer until the hear
DR and 10 this case the person arrested was merely
lodged In jail ss IN any other place, not under the
cialy appointed by the officers for that purpose.
|. In support or the first point, several er parte
affijaviss in the handsTiting Of the defendants
that William Finkler and Joseph r. Treat, two
Of the juiors, before the trial, made use Of ex-
pressions adverfe TO she defendant, and that he
ought TO be punished. This court has never,
within my recollecton, granted neS tria
upon sr parts affdsvits drawn e these are. tbs
true practice IL to have depositons taken, upon no
tce upon the whole conversations, and declarations
nation. such il the practice in this court, uaies
waived. Going TO hearing upon these affidavlts ma
perhaps be considered waiver Of The rule. Tn
jurors before sworn in the case were examined on
u cir coiS dire, and they expressly ans xered ths
they bad not formed nor expressed an opinion AZ to
the guilt or inn0cercs Of the defendant. While this
examination was going on, some Of The persons who
have made these sfidasits were IN the court room.
The counsel for the defendant said ut the argument
the motion, that during the trial Of these wit
ne sses informed him OF the previous expressions Of
Of the juror bao gwen tine information then, they
and the Juror could have been examined as To
the mAtter; and II true that ne had made the ex
pressioD alleged, he woHld have been excluded or,
II after the 1ia had commenced and witnesses ex-
ahmed the defendants attorney mad brought the
matter to the notice Of the court, 1t would have
been examined into, and II true, the juror could be
Withdrawn and the case continued, according to the
ny N "a Inif q
vs.. Morris, Curtis Rep. 23.) We cannot favor q
party who will first take his chance with the jury,
with knowledge OF objections to any OF them.
These sfidavits are BY NO mt ans 81 isacsory; they
do not give any Of the circumssan ces connected
with making the DE- clarations, tue Conversations
Tie rescue Of Glover and its attendant circum
stances and the subject of this prosecution, have
been kept before the public In some form or other,
TO such IN extent tia IL might be Impossible to pro-
cure jury who had not SAID something on the suo-
ject. BY the defendant himself this very public a;t
has been kept cons, antly before the public.
FiDkler BY his affidavit explaining tue converse
ton, clearly removes all objections TO him.
Treat by his affidavit, positively states that at
the time lie was sworn as juror, ne had not ex
pressed any opinion whether the defendant was
guiity or not guilty Of the matters alleged against
him Ill the indictment. That he has 90 recollection
ct hsvir ever espresso an opium that the dsfen
dart was guilty OF not guilty Ct tho offence alleged
again ct him. or should be punished therefor. prior
~ his agreeing to the verdict; but believes that he
often expressed opinions that the persons guilty Of
The rescue should be convicted and punished, and
may have sad that the defen cant, If 30 guilty,
should be convicted and punished. That he has read
the afidsvits filed, and that II he ever used such
expressions as are stated III those adavts, be has
forgotten It, ard knows that he never seriously
stated such things, because he knows he had not
come to any opinion on the subject.
The expire ss0nB as stated in the afdavi,s, to
have been mace by Treat are strong, bat for thu
ress0ps stated and as this an exceedingly plata
upon the evidence, plain that tia jury could
not do otherwise than convict. the court nov does
Dot feel justified in granting ibis motion upon those
tryarts xnd UNI stisfactory afidavi:s, accompsnied
with The explanation OF the juror IN b o affidavit,
Expressions OF opinion against rho crime do not sis
qusl,fy juror.
The notion in arrest Of Judgment have con-
sidered with cesire to its correct dscsion
whether or not il 10 hncumbent upon the prose-
cution to prove these indictments for the
rescue nom process issued upon the act OF Sep.
owing service or labor and that he es ,aoed, Is q
question upon which good lawyers AMI judges may
offer. Ny inclination has been, that upon indic-
nen's such as these, merely setting forth the war
rant, arrest al rescue from the custody OF the OFF,
cers, taking the seventh and eighth sections to-
ge,her, pr3of Iced rot be made OF the slavery and
escape therefrOm OF the person arrested. He Is
described in tire warrant "a snch person, and as
such person be arrested and rescued and in the
eighth section he il called the supposed fugitive.
The copetrul ton OF statutes by judges OF toe Su-
preme ConrL of the United States we should follow
II possible, for they have opportunities fer consuta
ton which have not; and 70 that court this court
ia subordinate In ADDITION TO the authorities refer
red TO In tie charge upon this suhecs,I am advised
that such Is the opinion Of other judges OF that
court.
Glover was su opposed and alleged fugitive, and
o. such was arrested upon the warrant, and res
cUed.
The motions are overrulsd. Legal process In
the hands Of the Marsnal, the executive officer OF
this court. was violently resisted III open contempt
and dere gard Of law. A spirit of resistance pre-
vailed which had TO be met In the due administra-
ton Of Justice and the maintenance If our boasted
privileges and rights under our free institutions.
Tins eprt did not cease with the commission OF the
offence, but hiss been kept mp; and the court, and
its officers aud jurors have been subjected TO gross
msrt prefentations. Unde. ah these circumstances,
IN the performance Of their several oficisl acts
thing more has been done than duty required; and
such these defendants and their coadutors would
es obliged 70 dS ney
| court, nor officers nor juries have manifest.
eo virdictiye feelings against either Of these de-
fsrdaLts. While they have regretted TO have been
tmpeIled to perform their respective duses they
have resisted al ontside pressure with the rmnees
required Of them by the people In the faithful dis
| charge OF duty No man regrets the occurrence Of
the 18th March last moro than DO. Sach outrages
strike at the very existence Of free and popular
| government
The action Of the &C urt and the vsrdicts Of the
uries in these cases ere not proper subjects for ami
| msdversior The court endeavored TO resist an
extra pressure upon the administration Of justice in
| very plain and undoubtsd cases Of guilt, and the
jury did nothing than their oaths required OF
honest men. The cases were 30 clear Of doubt that
II the court and jury TO do otherwise than they
did, they would prove their own imoeciity or cor
| ruption. The court would have been justified In
stoppipg the prosecution from advancing more tran
opeourth Of the proof in support ofthe IN
On both trisls there ware four times evidence
of the defendants guilt than necessary TO salts
| fy any honest mind; and II the warrant had been
issued upon any other law, conviction wonld have
| been msce without murmur from any individual,
save possibly the defendants themselves. In this
court and in this country all laws alike binding
| and must be enforced alike upon all.
| These cases we're 70 clear Of doubt that Juror
| who would refuse 70 convict, would be guilty Of
moral perjury. Slavery being conscientionsly dissp