Cleveland morning leader. [volume] (Cleveland [Ohio]) 1854-1865, 1859-05-07
- CLEVELAND, SATURDAY MORNING, MAY 7, 1859


90 il the crowd would let their company 90
safely,
Anderson Jennings recalled, said that Pat.
ton said TO the outside crowd that If they would
keep still a few minutes he would have the
boy out Witness never made any arrange
ment to let the boy go.
Esq. Bennett re called testified that the gen.
eral reputation of Mr. VIM Sciples at Wei
lington was not as good as of men in general
He would believe him under GA n in sor,e cases
Mr.. Mcrcham gave testimony similar to the
above. He would not believe him under oath
Both these gentlemen had known Sciples seven
or eight years.
John Watson being recalled, testified that
he went up stairs with Langston but once on
that afternoon, that time being at the request
OF Lowe, before any papers were read
Mr.. Gillett, lone OF the indictedl testified
that he has known Sciplcs for several wears -
His reputation for truth aud veracity is not as
good as of men in general, and witness would
not believe him under oath, if he had any in
terest in the case.
Lorin Wadsworth [indictedl has known
Sciples for probably ten years. His general
reputation for truth and veracily is not as good
as Of men in general. Witness would not be-
ieve him under oath If he was interested.
Here the testimony closed and the argument
was commenced by Judge Belden for the prose
cution
lie should study to be brief in his arpument
and should assume that the law upon which the
indictment was based was a law in accordance
with the Constitution Of the United States
He should ignore the constitutional question as
a settled matter Il was for the Jury to take
the case as one against the law of the land and
not to question the propriety of enforcing those
laws which are found in the statute books of the
United States. Their private and peculiar no.
tions in regard to the law itself had nothing to
do in influencing their verdict
He then took up the indictment and stated
the facts to be found that John had been and
was slave that he escaped without leave or
license, and came into Ohio, where he was pur
eued and seized by Anderson Jennings as the
agent Of the owner; that being arrested by
Jennings and Lowe ON the 18th of September.
1858, he was taken and rescued from their Gus.
tody by the defendant Langston in conjunction
with others these points were passed rapidly
over. In regard to the fact of rescue, he claim
ed that even If Pattons evidence that Jennings
and Lowe gave him up voluntarily was to be
entirely believed it would still be a rescue If
the arrcsting party were 80 worked upon hy
thelr teare as to deliver up the boy, il was still
a rescue lie claimed that Jennings being the
agent Of the wner, Lowe acting under the di
rection OF that agent needed no warrant to give
legality to his arrest. The legality of the
power OF attorney was thon discussed, and the
charges against the veracity of Mr.. Cochran
were strongly denied.
The circumstances of the rescue at Yelling
ton were reviewed and commented upon. The
strongest language was used against the "hy.
pocrlsy' Of Langston. The crowd knew, or it
was their duty to know, there was Power of
Attorney for taking the boy, and they knew
that John was fugitive. Langston says 1--WE
will have him any how" to the crowd, but
keep cool' to the party that had John The
law requires that every man shall know the
law, and it was the duty of every member Of
that crowd to know of the consequences OF
their acts. Reviewed the connection of Lanes.
ton with the rescue as elected, and claimed
that he was the chiefest man among them, all
the more powerful and effective because he ad.
vocated cooness and delay.
Court here adjourned to this morning at
o'clock, when Judge Belden will close his argu.
ment lie will be followed by Mr.. G1iswod