Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1855-11-17

wit. 1t does not appear what were the reasons
ana motives which operated in changing his opin-
ION during the interval between the sittings OF the
Court in Bedford and In Philadelphia but, more
grossly inconsistent than his iellow,iudges, in spite
OF hs very strong impression" that the pris-
rnor is Illegally aud uniustly Imprisoned by a
judge who had no jurisdiction in the ease, he de-
Alternately refuses to perform his Judicial duty in
rctressiug the wrong
Subsequently another Decision was pronounced
hy Judge Kane. in the Disuict Court Ofthe United
States in reply to a petition OF Jane Johuson, pre-
scented by her counsel, j. Il. Townsend and John
VI Read, Esqrs., showing that she is enc OF the
throe parties named in the writ OF Haboas Corpus
ISSUED in the case of John IL. Wheeler rerSuS Pass
more Williamson, and stating First, that Wheeler
had no control over her children at the time OF is.
suing the aforesaid writ, they then being free !
Sssoaa, that the writ was issued against her wish;
Third, thar since she left Mr.. Wheeler, which,
she asserts. she did Of her own will and desire,
shc has not been restrained OF her liberty 10y Mr..
Williamson, or any other persons; and fVuih, that
Under this writ Of habeas corpus, a writ designed
10 restore frecmcn u liberty when unduly restrain
eli thereof JOHN II. Wheeler seeks to recover the
ratitiOuor aud her chilcren, and reduce them again
into slavery. She therefore prays that the writ
may bc q%uashed, and that Passnore Williamson
may be discharged from his Imprisonment.
Judge Kane refused the application to enter this
paper among the records Of the Court, ON the
ground that Jane Johnson had no status IN the
Court. a very small part Of the decision relates
directly to the application before the Judge, the
principal portion of it being an elaborate defense
Ol his cJndnct towards Passmore
The most important point of his decision is the
bold assertion of the right of the Shareholders to
pass, icth TIER shares, through Pennsylvania or
any other State IF the Union. lie asserts this ON
the ground that slaves arc property, and asks, how
can it he that a State may single out this one kind
of property from among all the rest, and deny to
II the right of passing over its soil-paSsing with
its owner, parcel Of his travelling equipment, as
much so us the horse he rides on, his great coat,
or his carpet-bag?" The decision is a bold rev ella
ton of what Il discerning eye could see from the
beginning of this case, that the object and deter
animation was and is. to obtain possession Of Jane
Johuson and her children and re-enslaye them,
and to this base end he is keeping, and is deter
mined to keep, Passmure Williamson in prison.
Notwithstanding the well-estabiished fact that
At is and was utterly beyond the power of Mr.. VII
hanson to bring Jane and her children before the
Court; that neither she nor her friends would suf-
fer lin TO expose her to such peril, even u he hdd
wished to do 80, Judge Kane says
His duty, then as now, was and is, to bring In
the bodies, or, if they had passed beyond his con-
troll, 10 declare, under oath or affirmation, so far
as he knew, what had become Of them" (That
is, to give the i formation which will enable the
claimant either to recover dis property, or to hold
some one else for their value "And from this
ddtv, or from the constraint that seeks to enforce
it, there can be no escape"
Pcuusylyanians are now to decide whether they
will submit TO the establishment Of slavery on
their own soil; whether they will permit slaves to
be carried or drireR across their State singly OF
chained in coffee, or whether they will enforce
their oUa lars for the protection of freedom. II
this right og transit be granted, who is to decide
now long 4 time Shareholders, or salvedrivers witt
their gangs. may spend in passing through" {
free State, or what operations peculiar to theil
trade, though revealing to humanity, they may bt
permitted to engage in. Judge kane's defence O
his persecution OF Passmore Williamson, on tht
ground thai. Pennsylvania may be made a slave
holding State, whenever a traficker in human be
lGls chooses to drive his victims through it, vii
aug avail Gor his justification before the tribunal o
the PEOPLE.
Subsequently Mr.. Williamson's Counsel mad
another effort for his release-presenting a petition
in which the jurisdiction of the court was denieC
in the case. This the judge refused to receive OF
the ground that Mr.. Williamson had no status il
the court inasmuch as he had not purged himsel
OF the contempt, nor even prayed to be permitted
to make such purgatiOn. The Judge further or
dered that, whenever, by petition in writing, to b
filed with the clerk, Passmore Williamson shall
set forth, under his oath or solemn affirmation, tina
he desires to purge himolf of the contempt be
cause of which he is now attached, and to tina
END Is willing TO make true answers to such inter
sOgltions as may be addressed to him Icy the Cour
touching the matters heretofore legally inquire,
OF by the writ of habeas corpus, to him d'rectev
at the relation Of John II. Wheeler then the mar
shal 90 BRING The SAID Passmore Williamson be
lore the Court II IN session, or II the Court be no
an session. men before the Judge at bis chambers
70 aDide the 1urtner order oil the Court IN his be
half"
In accordance with this suggestion of the Cour
on FRIDAY the ma INST MT; Williamson appeare
IN me Court ny his counsel and presented a pc
ulioh expressive OF ms desire TO purge himself @
tue contempt Inc Judge was not satisfied Wit
the'petition and retained it for consideration.
On the next day Mr.. Williamson appeared i
- IL - ~ On :
Eogrt, accompanied by hessrs, Meredith Hlpl
ana hopper MS counsel ana oHered the loLoWIn
petition:
PETITION.
u. S. A. VS.. Williamson, District Court u. S
Eastern District of Penn.
10 the Hon. the Judge of the District Court 0
the United States for the Eastern District Of Penn
gylvania.