Raftsman's journal. [volume] (Clearfield, Pa.) 1854-1948, 1855-08-08
tFnr the Inurnnl.l

other eleven years of age. The master and his |
servants were e,, route for New York While upon.
the steaInboatzthc woman found means to make
known heR<desirc 10 be free. Passmore Willianss
SON Secretary of tho Ant-Slavery Society of Phil
adcIphia went on board the boat, told the woman
that she and her children as free their
mas terand advised her TO leave the boat. Wheeler
resisted the departure of The slaves, and they were
assisted to leave the boat by several negro porters
At the instance Of Wheeler John X. Kane, the
t. 5 dge of the Eastern District of Pennsylva-
mia, awarded a writ of la5ezs corptls, coInmand-
ing Prssmore Williamson to produce the bodies ct
the negroes To this writ. Williamson made re-
turn that the persons named in the writ, Z. ner
either Of thenr not ROW, were at the time
of the Issuing of the writ or at amy ether time IN
| the custody, power, or possession oi the resPon-
! dent, nor by him confined or restrained where
! fore he was not able to produce them.
! For making this return, Judge Kane ordered
| Williamson to answer for a contempt Of Court.
| and on the hearing, committed him to prison
without bail or mainprize," where he now lies.
It is difficult to characterize this proceeding in
| temperate language. An impartial reader, on
| view of the facts would naturally deem the con-
duet of the Judge unparalleled outrage But
the dough-taces ofthe Ioccfoco party Will endeav-
. II
sue by some Of their Gust omary lodges and it
will not be surprising to hear some of them who
pretend to be law yers approving of the decision of
KANE, and asserting that the indignation express
ed at itin some quarters is erely the ba5ble of
/ few "vilanous abolitionists.i 1@
I propose Mr. Editor to cndeavor to show that
the decision of KANE was erroneous both in fact
d. andin law, and if should seem tedious, the i'm
, | off fho oS,Il,i lpS han
great right of personaLiibcrty must plead my cx-
cuse.
KANE bases his action on the words in the return,
:. or at any other time lie admits that William
sons answer is correct and proper. with the cx-
ception of these six words. but the addition of
these six words, makes Williamson liable TO be
punished at the discretion of the Judge for con
tempt Of Court. -.
Now these words '.or at any other time 7 do
not constitute eonteaptof Court The powers
of Court to punish for contempts at the common
law were so extensive that Congress deemed il
necessary to limit them. The act of Congress of
the 81 March. 1881 declares the right Of tic I. S
Courts to punish for contempts, only in case OF
l the hsisIetqUioy Of person persons in the
presence of the Court. or so thereto to OBJ
Sfruct the administration of justice''-'' and the
q afso5edjemcc or resistance of any officer Of said
Courts party. juror, witness, any other person
or persons to any lawful writ, &C.. of the Court
c Here is the sole authority under which any
Judge car, punish for contempts in the l. > Courts
for statute is a limitation of the common law OF
is subject matter, and is to be construed strictly
! It seems unnecessary to argue that William
S case, even by the most glarins stretch of petit
: Jogging ingenuity, cannot be brought within th'
provisions Of this law. lie did not a'SiSJetare il
: the presence OF the Court nor It o did no
a aiy7Jey rrssst the mandate Of the Court. Hoy
h then IS he guilty
J. .:I9ut,'' says KANE. and after him the dough
/ faces like lsEek of hounds rc-echo the cry, -bG
/ he Atk dis25cE and resist the mandate of tn
i Court lie makes an issue with tho respondent
# and decides it against him 1lr. Williamson say
y the slares were never in his possession. Wcr
e they2 n they were Judge Kane is so far right
e and the return Is false If they were not, Judg
O. Kane has manufactured facts and law to suit them
e, Suppose these negroes to be chatteIs. had vii
/ hanson ever any possession Of them? II
d owns horse, the right Of property and the righ
of possession concur in him; but ii A. lend hi
/ horse to 3. or if 3. take him wrougfully from
t. then the actual possession Of \. is gone out c
r him, and is in =. But suppose g. goes to the tay
u orn door where \. Is sitting. with his horse tic
le to the post and demonstrates with upon The cru
in city Gfieaying his horse IN the sun. and silaut1
* neoGsiy two other men, moved by the same fee
IL ings, loosen the rein of the horse and he escapes
&c in such has the of the horse
at hetn in 3 / is perTersion of language to a:
IS cert it. so with Williamson. He went upon tn
ID boat, and told the woman that, under the laws
G. the State she was free, and told her master tha
Of he Williamson would be responsible for any lega
" rights of the master At the slne time four POI
a tiers upon The boat, entirely unconnected wiz
til Williamson $50 far as sprovedJ assisted the wonla
ne to leave the boat and prevented resistance th
a part of wheeler Were the woman and childre
p eceJ in the possessionof of Williamson The argr
Inent that " iliianson went to the boat with HI
1o assistants. and lorcby abducted the slaves, is
e sustained, but the contrary, directly negative
Sc by the evidence.
IL But suppose the so-calcd slaves have been fire.
= and that they freed by the act of their ma.
z ter, under the laws Of Pennsylvania, is beyon
n controversy, although kAYE affects to have som
st doubts on this point Then if the wa
is free. she was the legal custodian of her chiIdrel
OF and if she went off voluntarily. the preence thi
G Williamson ever had possession Of her is prepo
n tcrous Now.this woman Jane johnson by nam
n in solemn affidavit, made since this commit;
ut for contempe deposes that she wanted TO be fre
to chat she found means to make known her situs
'e ton to one of the servants on the boat that s
L went voluntarily, that she was in way eoereeC
tn and that she would never return. In what sort
T. position ise h tN. placed by the new evidenc
&c thrown into the case2 / suppose that he woul
re act further the negro CATCHER and decide, that
%, slaYes affidavit is not evidence. FortunateI,
be KANE is not the Court in this case, but far grea
b. or tribunal-than his-the people of the North