Daily Nashville patriot. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1857-1858, 1857-11-10
N ASH WILLIE:
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 1857.
Undergronnd NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS. Far-
ces.

Underground udfcIaI Par
Some days ago. Mr.. Thornton Witbers,
a citizen of Virginia, was passing through
Cincinnati with three slaves, being his own
property. The agents of the underground
railroads, leading from that city, took fore
ible possession of the negroes, contrary to
their own and their masters consent. The
matter was speedily brought into court.
Judge Burgoyne, the presiding genius of a
Probate Court, issued a writ of habeas cor
Pus. Very soon afterwards, another Judge,
(of what Court we misremember, issued
another writ of the same kind. Mr. With
ers occupied the position of one party to
these proceedings, bnt who the other party
was our reports do not disclose. Of course
there was a conflict of jurisdiction, between
these two functionares, to accommodate
which they held an Informal conference.
Judge Carter said that he would not inter
fere with the jurisdiction of his brother,
and would have nothing to do with the
case till Judge Burgoyne had disposed of
it. Judge B., not to be outdone in courtesy,
requested that Judge G. should proceed to
hear and determine the case. Without re-
plying to this, Judge c. remarked that his
practice, in such cases, was that, a0here TIE
slares aOished TO go back TO h-ir master, h
permitted them to go free and tollo10 their oa0n
inclinations. Judge B. replied that was
probably the correct practice. Mutual dis
Chalmers of wishing to interfere in each 9th
er's jurisdiction followed, and the inter
view terminated.
On the day of the return of the writs
both Judges took their seats, surrounded
by Attorneys and spectators. After wait
ing some time in their respective courts
the negroes were brought before Judge G
and whilst Judge B. was still waiting fo
their appearance. Judge c. proceeded t.
ask the respective counsel, what they hat
to say in the matter. We now quote tn
trial, as reported by the Cincinnati Times
Mr.. Dennis 1.-THE counsel Of witness) then remark
ed that the time for the disposal of the case befor
| Judge B. had passed, and that official mad mad
| no request for the parties 10 be brought befOr
| him, that it was proper and right for his Honor
| Judge c., to proceed with the disposal of tn
| case.
Judge @. then said he would interrogate the ne
| groes, and proceeded as follows:
Judge C.-Eiza, where do you live!
| E2izd.-Iu Virginia.
Judge els this man your master? (pointiug tc
| Withers)
Judge C-Do you wish to go with himH
! Hizd.-Yes
! Thr same queries were prOpounded to Catharin'
! and Edward, and the same answers returned. A
the end Of the last answer from Edward, Judge C
simply remarked:
| ''Wel, you can go, then This is merely a cas-,
| OF kidnapping. Mr. Sheriff, Ito Captain GLASS; de
| liver these persons to Mr.. Withers."
H then came down from the bench and the ne
! groes went off
1t is thus seen, that both these virtuou'
judges agree that the correct practice" is
to consult the wishes of the slaves that may
be brought before them, and actually de
termine cases accordingly. The right 0
property ia Southern slave owners, is ad
judged, not by law and evidence, but by ;
! simple declaration of a wish or preference,
on the part of the slavel In this case i
resulted in the restitution of the negroes t,
their owner; but we wonder what estimat
Judges place upon their official duties ant
obligations, and what must be the state O
their consciences, who thus decide question
of law, of right and of property!