Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, Va. [W. Va.]) 1852-1859, 1859-11-01

his health is evidently improving. He laid on
the bed as usual. The Court House and it's
approaches were densely crowded
AIR. Griswold opened for the defence, taking
up the several charges of the indictment,
replying to the points made in the opening
argument of the prosecution
He alluded to the peculiar circumstances sur
rounding the present case and hoped the Jury
would give it calm and dispasionate attention,
divesting, as far as possible, their minds from
nil prejudice and disregarding outside influen
ces. Let the prisoner have an impartial trial
under the laws of Virginia, and let him be ac-
Quilted or convicted according to those laws and
the evidence given in the case. With regard to
the charge OF treason brought against the priS-
oner, Mr.. Griswold argued that Brown could
not be guilty of treason as he was not a citizen
OF this Commonwealth, and none but a citizen
OF the Commonwealth could commit treason.-
Never having sworn allegiance to Virginia, he
could not be rebel against her authority. He
was also charged with levying war against the
otate1 out the evidence glven did not support
the charge. There was a great difference be-
tween evying war and resisting authority, by
men VINO are congregated together to perpetrate
crime, and have their rules and reguiations.-]
When they are assailed they defend their lives
to the utmost, sacrificing their own and intend
ing to sacrifice the lives of others, but that is
resisting. not levying war.
he would not shrink from the admission, and
the prisoner had openly admitted that those
men came for The purpose of running away
slaves. That was a crime under the laws Of
Virginia for which the prisoner was amenabIe
to punishment to the extent of those laws In
carrying out that purpose he temporarily took
possession OF the Arsenal at Harper's Ferry
while these attempts were made to arrest him
Mr. Griswold had no complaint to nuke abou.
that. But it was resisting these attempts that
this blood was shed and the lives taken, and
not in levylng war against the Commonwealth
OF Virginia. 1t was in resisting that which was
claimed to be the legal authority of Virginia
seeking to arrest those men assembled in viola
ton OF the law. Such things have often hap
Pened- JailS have been broken open and men
taken thence aud executed, in defiance of law,
after being acquitted by jury of their coun~
trymen, and the power of the Sheriff tramplcd
under foot. Neither does it constitute the levy
ing of war il murder ensues, because the COIN
mission OF the offence of shedding blood may
not have been contemplated.
1t is said there was an organized government:
a pamphlet is referred to as evidence of that
fact, but it does not necessarily follow that the
overthrow of the Commonwealth Of Virginia
was contemplated by anything that appeared in
that book. The most harmless organizations
in the country have been created with all the
outside forms and machinery of government
In debating societies governments have becn
established. Congress enacted resolutions aud
laws discussed, aud any one reading the bulle
tin oil these associations aud knowing nothing
about them would suppose them miniatures OF
governments organized within the limits of the
existing government. No matter what names,
what officers they may have that Of itself is not
sufficient. Bands OF robbers or desperadocs have
their rules and reguationS-their officers, and
prescribe death as the punishment for violation
OF their laws; but that docs not imply that they
contemplate tho overthrow of the legitimate
government. 1t it only an association or gov
NrNr Itl, Al.
with each other.
Hefurther argued. that the jury could not
find Brown guilty Of treason, unless they find
him guilty of aSsociating with others to organize
a government 10 su6vert and overthrow the gov.
ernment OF Vlrginia, but if the pamphlet proves
anything, it shows that an attempt was made to
organize a government in opposition of the u
s., and not Of Virginia, for all the terms used
and all the officers appointed have reference to
a government like that of the U. S., but it was
vague, unmeaning language which really proves
nothing at all. However, there was clause in
it which must be taken, for it was all in evil
dence. He referred to the distinct and positive
statement that it contemplated no overthrow Of
the State government, but simply the amend
ment and repeal of obnoxious laws in consti:
tutional manner. The learned attorney who
opened the case seemed to occupy tho ground
entirely, not even giving over the evidence
wherein the treason was proved. lie said the
pFIsoueF was Sullty Vi giving alu ana comfort
to the enemies of the Commonwealth and that
was the only specification he made charging the
defendant with treason.
He was surprised to hear that gentleman
burst forth in such a sublime apoStrophe to
freedom in terms and language, and with the
action of such surprising eloquence that ono
need be told that he received inspiration in the
land that urns the ashes of Patrick Henry He
alluded to his distinguished associate for the
prosecution, who had brought into his remarks
the dishevcIled tresses of frightened beauty
He proceeded to consider the charge of comspi.
racy with slaves He said there was manifest
distinction between the effort to run of slaves
or steal slaves and conspiracy. To induce them
to rebellion and insurrection was rising up, not
to run away, although freedom might be the
ultimate object but rising up against he mas.
ters against the whites, against the State, it
contempIates not rapinc, murder, arson, and all
the crimes which follow instruction, and more
especially surviie insurrcction The question.
was as to the subject and intention. Has any
man testified aught going to show that Brown,
OF any one with him, said or did one thing to
induce any slaves to rise in rebellion or perpe.
trate any offence out of which rebellion grows,?.
The slaves were taken possession of for tenn
porary purpose, and placed in the Arsenal
d. ITo1