Cleveland morning leader. [volume] (Cleveland [Ohio]) 1854-1865, 1859-05-16
statement Of the Oboriin Prisoners now in
Jail
CuyhuoeA County JAIL.
Nav 12 1859

IUNhHO0A AoNNIh JAIL
May 10, 1859. Il
no the People Of ihe Western RescrDsl
The undersigned, citizens Of Lorain 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
incarceration is quite generally misaPprehended,
and that this misapprehension is greatly preju-
dieinq their cause with the public .U !
It is to state the facts pertaining to the i'm
prisonment clearly aud correctly, and to defne
the present position Of the imprisoned, that this
article is offered to your consideration
To make the statement proposed ineligible
and complete, the narration must begin with
the arrest which brought us before the U. s.
Court. At the rising of the Grand Jury in De
cember last, Marshal johnson visited Obor lin,
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 a
given hour on the next day. The parties on
whom the notice was served proved their ap-
probation of the politeness OF the Marshal, in
dispensing with the usual forms Of arrest, and
ever charges the law might bring against them,
by appearing in Court at the time appointed,--
Being brought to the Bar, they declared them
selves ready and anxious for immediate
trial. The District Attorney, evidently
taken by surprise at the unexpected
promptness of the defence, asked de-
lay. The defence earnestly protested against
an adjournment of their cases. The Court,
however, granted the motion OF the District
Attorney; but, in consideration OF the fact that
the defendants had made prompt appearance,
and that they been refused trial, discharged
them on their personal recognzance, instead OF
putting them under bail as the Prosecutor had
asked them to do. The cases were set for trial
ON the second Tuesday of March. At the ap
proach of that time the District Attorney asked
lor further continuance Of the cases to the fifth
of April The delay although it put the defence
to 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 I'LL, pre-.
sented themselves at the bar of the Court nor
did any of them fail of daily attendance during
, the Bushnell trial without the express permis-
sion of the District Attorney.
! In the course OF the Bushnell trial it was made
clear to the defence that there was a desire on
the part of the Court to secure the conviction,
! and a 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 were so
, plain, that the defendants could not shut their
= es to them. They sfe't constrained, therefore
= to be on their guard and to be watchiul against
d, | emergencies which might involve them In last
;, ing injury and reproach. This purpose, how
=, ever, did not prevent their continuing the ful
compliance with the rules of the Courtand witt
the terms Of their recogniZances, which they haC
before rendered. -
!, Affairs being in this posture, the Governmen
a. evidently seeding opportunities for assault, ant
q the defence looking well to its means tor parry
: ing tue ass,ult,the Bushnell trial came to an end
m On the rendition of the verdict, conversation
,e arose between counsel on the two sides as L
r what case was to be tried next 1t was hnalll
d, determined by the Government that Langston'
case should be called on, and counsel fOr The DE
fence, which had previously said thatiI was no
ID ready to 90 on with that case, signihcd that /
tp would be ready by the time the jury WIS drawn
ne What was the surprise Of counsel at hearing til
court declare that the same Jury was 10 try al
the "rescue" cases-all of them, be it noted, in
volving the same material points. How thu
ed could jury just having risen from the consid
c. Grafton of one Of them, mpartiaLy address itsr
n. to the consideration of another! Against thl
lg remarkable order of Court the counsel for tn
az defence made earnest protest. and finally de
rs clared that ''under such a ruling, the cOur
IN might 90 with the cases as fast as it pleased
on the defendants would not stultify themselves b
lr either offering evidence or appearing by cour
sell" With this, the District Attorney move
that the defendants be ordered into custody
The Court replied-"The District Attorney
OF entitled to the order. Let the accused b
C. called"
ed The clerk then read the names Of the indicted
in and those present were directed to put them
ed selves under the control of the Marshal, VIII
'e cleared seats for them. While this was going on
G. Mr. Ralph Plumb, one of the indicted, whose cas-
I'd had previously been put over to the Novembc
ds term, went to Judge SPalding and asked if hi
We recognizance would not be taken up so that h
Ts could cast in his lot with his now imprisono
n, brethren. The Judge replied afiirmatvely, an
It, moved the Court in Mr., Plumb's behalf to car
el- eel his recognizance, and allow him to ioi
= those who had been put in custody The me
ton was granted, This occurrence called tn
attention of counsel to the recognizances
~ those who were now in the MarshaTs keepln!
40 and Judge Spalding arose and said-"HOJ
honor will of course direct the Clerk to canc
We the recognzances of all the gentlemen who haN
"i been put into custody. 1t would be imprap
eu that their recognzaEces should stand while the
n' are in prison." Certainly" replied JUDI
10 Wilson, "it will be done OF course
Int The Court and some OF It's officers seemed
or realize, at once that injustice had been done
ne the parties in custody, and that scme means f
en- escape from the odum which would be incu
go red by the order for imprisonment should
.ed found Accordingly the Marshal soon came
list the company in duress, and proposed that Il
eh whole paTty should 60 home, giving its pror
ith ise to return on the next Monday morning
ere The proposition wGs accompanied, hoWeyC
len with the distinct statement, repeated at lea
It's once, that Bushnell was not TO be included
len the ategory.') The Court also, in reply
ich a proposition from the District AttOrn
that ample security should he requir
Of the persons IN custody before thOy shOuld
tn, permitted to go at large, replied that if tb
anu chose, they should 90 out on the same terms
Of which they mad had liberty since their arrc
ing why giving personal recognizanBe III
-m ruling plainly implied that the procedure wh
ed had Tesulted in Tie commitment had oripinat
wa with the District Attorney aud Court totht
pm wise it would have been rehpked by change
the terms of bail; OF short that it was warrant
,rl by no wrong-doing coming on the part of t
a. persons lOmmitted and that it was regard
~ by the Court itself as being legally unjust.
= Confident that the cnmmitmentha had proceed
ma. from personal malice and determination
rty humble them on the part at the District Attl
: an ney, and az least Willingness to have the
mo driven to the wall on the pqrtni the Court, a
me feeling that they would enter most empha
protest against the insult aud legal iDjustit
which they had suffered by remaining in Gust
+Lo ly of the Marshal until the Court should anne