Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1859-05-28
Che Auti- Slavery Bu9le.
STATEMENT OF THE OBERLIN PRISON
ERS NOW IN JAIL.
CurAnooA CoUNrr JAIL, May II, 1856.

. CUTAu0CA COUNTY JAIL, May Il, looS'
To Me people Of The Western Rsserrc'
The undersigned, citizens of Loraih county,
now confined in this prison, under indictment for
alleged violation of the Fugitive Slave Act, have
reason to know that the history of their ncarceEa-
tion is quite generally rtisapprehended, and that
this misapprebensioh 10 greatly prejudicing their
cause with the public.
Iii to state the facts pertaining to the impris'
oument clearly and correctly. and to define the
present position of the imprisoned, that this arti-
Gle is offered to your consideration.
To make the statement proposed ineligible and
conn plete, the narration must begin with the ar
rest which brought us before the U. 5. Court AT
the rising Of the Grand Jury in December last.
Marshal johnson visited Ogetlin, and notified the
indicted, who lived there that he had warrants for
their arrest, and that he should expect to meet
them in Cleveland at given hour on the next day.
: The parties on whom the rotce was served proved
their appreciation os the polteness of the Marshal
in dispensing with the usual forms OF arrest, and
their disposition to give prompt answer to whatev-
er charges the law might bring against them. by
appearing in Court at the time appointed. Being
brought to the Bar, they declared themselves
ready and anxious for immediate trial. The
District Attorney, evidently taken by surprise at
the unexp pected promptness of the defence, asked
delay. The defence earnestly protested against an
adjournment of their cases. The Court, however,
granted the motion Of the District Atsor.ey but,
in consideration Of the fact that the defendants
had made prompt appearance, and that they had
been refused trial, discharged them on their per-
sonal recognizauce, instead of putting them under
bail as the Prosecutor had asked them to do. The
cases we're set for trial on the second Tuesday oi
March. At the approach of that time the Dis
trict Attorney asked for q further continuance OF
tbe cases to the fifth of April. The delay although
II nut the defence 70 great Inconvenience, was
conceded by its Counsel. When the appointed
time at length came, all the indicted who had been
arrested, except one gentleman who was very ILL.,
presented themselves at the bar of the Court, nor
did any of them fail Of daily attendance during
the Bushnell trial without the express permission
of the District Attorney. a
In the course Of the Bushnell trial it was made
clear to the defence that there was desire on the
part of the Court to secure the conviction, and
determination on the part Of the District Attorney
to bring about the humiliation Of all the indicted.
The proofs Of a purpose to make judicial and
personal war upon them go plain, that the
defendants could not shut their eyes to them.
They felt constrained, therefore, to be On their
guard and to be watchful against emergencies
which might involve them in lasting injury and
reproach. This purpose. however, did not pre-
vent their continuing the full compliance with the
rules Of the Court. and with the terms OF their
recognizances, which they had b. fore renderedss
Affairs being in this posture, the Government
evidently seeking opportunities for assault and
the defence looking we'll to it's means for parryne
the assault, the Bushnell trialoaro to end. On
the rendition of the verdict. conversation arose
between counsel on the two sides as to what case
was to be tried next. 1t was finally determined
by the Government that Langston's case should
be called on, and counsel for the defence, which
had previously said it was not ready to 90 on
With that case, sgui6ed that it would be ready
BY the time the jury was drawn. What was the
surprise Of counsel at bearing the Court declare
that the same jury was to try all the "rescue''
oases--all Of them, be it noted, involving the
same material points. How then could jury
lust having risen from the consideration of one Of
them, ip,partially address itself to the consider
alton of another?, Against this remarkable order
Of Court the counsel for the defence made earnest
protest. and fnally, declared that "under such a
ruling, the court might 20 with the cases as fast
as 1t pleased the defendants, would not stultify
r. themselves by either Offering evidence or appear
ing by COUNSEL" With this the District Attorney
moved that the defendants be ordered iuto custody
The Court replied-"The District Attorney is en-
titled to the ORDER Let the accused be called"