The daily exchange. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1858-1861, 1859-11-01
The HARPER'S FERRY INSURRECTION.
TRIAL OF CAPT. BROWN.


ihe hAfPtH'S FEhHf INSURED Il0N.
TRIAL OF CAPT. BROWN.
CHARLESTowN, Oct. 81, 1859
The Court met at O'Clock. The prisoner was
brought in, and the trial proceeded without delay
Brown looks better than heretofore, and his health
is evidently improving. He laid on his bed, as
usual. The court house and its approaches were
densely crowded.
OPENING FOR THE DEFENCE.
Mr.. GriSwold opened for the defence taking nm
several charges Of the Indictment and replying to
the points made in the opening argument of the
prosecution. He alluded to the peculiar circum-
stances surrounding the present case and hoped the
jury would give it their calm and dispassionate at
tention, divesting as far rs possible. their minds
from all prejudice and disregarding outside infu-
ences. The prisoner entitled to IN 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 prisoner Mr.. Grswnld arpupd that
Brown could not be guilty of treason as he was NOT
citizen OF the Commonwealth, and none but a cit
lzen OF the Commonwealth could commit treason
never having sworn allegenca to Virginia, he
could not be a rebel against her authority He
was also charged with levving war against the
state, bat the evidence given did not support the
Una" Sr' IuCIc was Il great QlHerencc between
levy!ng war and resisting authority. Men congre-
gate together to perpetrate crime and have their
rules and regulations, and when assaed they de-
tend their lives to the utmost-sacrificing and in
tending to sacrifice the lives of others. but that was
resistance, not levying war. lie would not shrink
from III" admission, and the prisoner openly ad-
mlttca If, that those men came for the purpose of
running away slaves That was the crime under
the laws of Virginia for which the prisoner was
amenable to punishment to the extent of those
lawS-!n Carrying out that purpose he temporarily
took possession OF the arsenal at Harper's FerrT
ana while those attempts were made to arrest him
Mr.. tFriswold had no complaint to make about
that, but 1t was in resisting those ATTEMPTS that
TINS blood was shed and lives taken and not in e-
Vylng war against the Commonwealth. 1t was re-
sisting that which was claimed to be the LEGAL au
thority of Virginia ecking to arrest those men as
Sembled in violation Of law
Such things have often happened. .Jails have
been broken open, and men taken thence and exc
cuted IN defiance of law, after being acquitted by
Jury OF their countrymen, and the power of the
Sheriff trampled under foot. Neither does il ne
ceSsarv constitute levving war if murder cpsues:
because the commission Of the offence or shedding
OF blood, may not have been contempIatcd Ii is
Sald, mere was an organized movement, and pam
ph!et Is referred to evidence of that fact but it
GOES 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 ma
chInery OF otgovernment. In debating societies GOV
ernnentS have been established, a congress created
| resolutions and laws discussed and any one read
ing the bulletins of these associations and knowing
nothing about them, would suppose them miniature
! governments, organized within the limits of exist
| ing governments. No matter what names, what
officers they may have that of itselfis NOT su fl
cient. Bands of robbers or desperadoes have their
rules and regulations, their officers and they have
prescribed death punishment for the violation
OF their laws; but that does not imply that they
contemplate the overthrow Of the legitimate roy-
ernmcnt. 1t is only an association and government
to control themselves in their intercourse with each
| other
lie further argued that the jury could not find
captain Brown guilty of treason unless they find
him guilty of aSsociating with Others to organize
| government to subvert and overthrow the govern
ment OF Virginia. But if the pamphlet proved
anything 1t shows that the attempt to organize
government In opposition to the government of
the United States, and not of Virginia for all the
terms used and all officers appointed have reference
| to government like that of the United States
! But 1t was vague, unmeaning language which
! really proves nothing at ALL
However, there was a clause in it which must be
! taken, for it was all in evidence meaning a dis
! tnct and positive statement that it contemplated
| no overthrow of the general or State governments
! but simply amendment and repeal of obnoxious
! laws in a Constitutional manner
| The learned attorney who opened the case seem
! ed to omit this ground entirely. Not even going
! over the evidence, to show wherein this treason
was proved he said the prisoner was guilty of Civ
ing and and comfort to the enemies Of the Common
| wealth, and that the only specification he
made, charging the defendant with treason Hewas
not surprised t. hear that gentleman burst forth in
! such sublime apostrOphe to freedom in terms and
! language and with action of such surpassnU el
oquence that no need be told that he had recei
we'd his inspiration in the land that urns the ashes
! of Patrick Henry He alluded also TO the distin-
| guished associate for the prosecution who had
brought into his remarks the disheveled tresses of
| frightened beauty, and he proceeded to discuss
the charge of conspiring with slaves. lie said
there manifest distinction between an effort to
run oil slaves or steal slaves, and a conspiring in
duce them to rebel Rebellion and insurrection was
rising up, not t" run away, although freedom
might be the ultimate object, but rising up against
their masters, against the whites against the State
1t contemplates rapine, murder, arson and all
crimes which follow insurrcction more especial
ly a servile insurrection..
The question was as to the objects and the inten-
ton OF the parties. Has any testified aught
going to show that Brown or any one with him
said or did one thing to induce any slaves to rise in
rebellion; or perpetrate any offence out of which
rebellion grows? Slaves were taken possession of
LOT temporary purpose and placed in the arsena
but Col. Washington who knew more about it than
any other witness testified that not a slave took
part In the matter except Phil, who, at the sugges-
tOn of the prisoner, attempted to drll port holes
In the engine hOuss. That was not done for the
purpose of insurrection or rebellion, but to protect
themselves. True, they were engaged in an unlaw-
fol act, but it was not the act charged. They were
amenabe to punishment but not as Indicted
lhey are punishable in some ways, but not as
charged.
Here the counsel proceeded to consider the count
charging murder in the first degree. This was
crime involving premeditated murder but he ar
gued that no such malice had been shown. First
Haywood was killed. How it happened nobody
knows. 1t was done in the dark. Whether it was
an accidental or Intentional killing does not an
pear IN the evidence, or by whom it was committed.
Perhaps these men were guilty of that killing in
some form, but it not proved to be murder in
the iirst degree, or from deliberate premeditated
malice. He could only say, as Brown said to him,
why should we shoot a negro; that was not our
OBJECT" He did not justify these men in staving
there and resisting the authority ofthe country,
put he said they were there protecting themselves
from arrest Guns were fired in all directions
and they fired, or intended to fire. only on armed
men: without excusing that conduct for
ment, he would remark that it refuted the idea of
premeditated malice They had not time for the
thought and reflection which the law contemplates
Not that he would say these should be allowed
TO come within the commonwealth of Virginia. per-
netrate these crimes, and go unwhpped of justice.
But charge and convict them according to their
own law. Virginia has laws and institutions suifi-
cient for her protection and she has thrown over
the lives OF her citizens every safeguard that she
deems necessary and essential. She has made laws
necessary for the protection Of property and the
punishment of those who deprive owners of IT, II
is the boast Of institutions that no man can he
punished beyond what the law requires. and if the
law Is not severe enough within the IauisIaturn
rests the proper remedy. Capt. Brown knew he
was committing offence against the laws for the
protection of slave property. He has repeatedly
confessed IT and is willing to abide the consequences
% put Helct MN Tor that offence, and dent convict
nm III ol an offence he never dreamed of committing
Nothlng In the circumstances surrounding this case
demands such course of procedure.
Inc public safety does not require him to be
punished contrary to law. If man of the indom-