Saint Mary's beacon. [volume] (Leonard Town, Md.) 1867-1983, 1894-02-01

of any bubbles and frivolous points made
by lawyers and sustained by Courts, and
be il deprived Of life. Iflaw ID violated,
yet justice b certainly meeted ont TO the
criminal. II carried before the courts or
law and q fair trial Is had. the result would
be the same 70 him-deafh. Il is matter
Of some consideration. also, that the virtu-
Gus woman In the latter formal proceed
ings would have 70 appear As witness OF
the crime which would add to her agony.
So far o. the criminal II concerned, the
only difference IL, In manner aud form In
which he n deprived Of life. Conserva-
tive citizens, such as Douglass pretends to
be, may regret TO see the forms OF law
abandoned In arriving. at speedy justice 10
the criminal Theis regrets are useless.
Douglass will find that be might as well
attempt 10 dam up the Potomsc river with
wheat chat a. % stop it by eloquent essays
and addresses on the subject, illing them
as he may and does. with gross exaggera-
tons and falsehoods.
In his article In the North Americdn Re-
siew Of July, 1892, he thinks he win be able,
and seems to be anxious, 70 expose our
white women TO the "animadversions" Of
the visitors ofthe then approaching Worlds
Fair ut Chicago. His ambition, am con-
fident, was not gratifed. Did he suppose
for q moment that any Of the visitors to
that grand display could have their atten-
ton diverted from those wonderful scenes
TO listen TO his charge that negro was not
tried by Judge and jury who was guilty of
the most henicus of all crimes, and con-
demned by lynch law therefor TO be burnt
alive, and that white woman Of Arkansas
helped TO push up the fagots in order TO
inflict condign punishment What an abb
surd conceit II be had approached the
Princess Of Spain, who was visitor, and
presented a statement of the case. she would
naturally have inquired of him what the
mans offense was, and If he gave the true
history Of ii and Of his guilt, only pressing
the sole charge, however, that he was not
legally tried and condemned, her answer
would have been, SERVED him right; he
got justice, and as he was an Outldtc, he got
justice without troubling tie lawful tribu-
nails" Women are most apt 10 go crazy in
regard to those matters; they are the chief
sufferers. The woman alluded to in his
article might have been the mother or sis.
ter of the victim of the brute. Whatever
her relation she was woman.
The Arkansas woman, no doubt, was
guilty of being accessory to murder as de.
fined by law, and no doubt If tried for the
offence under instructions from the court
would have been found guilty OF the charge
and sentenced TO suffer the penalty which
the law infiicts. The forms of law, how
ever, being gratifled, the punishment should
be committed by the Governor TO five days
in the county Jail and she allowed TO enjoy
all the Injuries which her virtuous and
sympathizing female neighbors would fur
nish her How much more excusable Is
her impulse of vengeance upon this guilty
negro than the calm, considerate conduct
of Mrs. Mary Stearns, wife of George Stearns,
of Medford, Massachusetts,, both husband
and wife, being enthusiastic friends of that
mu rderous villain John Brown. They in
vited their co-abettors of John Brown to
an entertainment at their house, and dis
played for their admiration in their spa
cious hall Brackets marble bust of John
Brown crowned with flowers by Mary
Stearns." The guests deplored the failure
and fate of their idol and martyr. Who
were the guestss "Garrison, Wendell
Philips, Emerson, Alcot., DIR. L. g. Howe
and his poetical wife, Mrs. Childs, Moncure
Conway, +. B. Sanborn and many others
now dead and sundered." The host and
hostess and every one of these guests, no
doubt, were abettors of John Browns
raid; were accessories before the fac.
to the cowardly murders committed
by him and his followers, and as guilty
as they were, and if they had follow
ed him would have justly suffered the
same punishment Now, looking calmly
and fully over the deeds and consequences
that did and might have followed Browns
raid, which of the two women is the most
excusable-the Arkansas woman who, in
almost instant crazy impulse, helped to
administer condign punishment to guilty
brute, or the refined, enlightened, talented
and strong-nainded woman of Massachu-
sets, Mary Stearns, who gave aid and
countenance to Browns raid on the white
people Of Virginia and the whole South,
which, If successful, as she wished |. to be,
would have resulted in innumerable crimes,
and many such as that negro was burnt
for committing? There can be no doubt
as to what the answer would be.
f. B. Eanborn, one of John Browns
abettoTs and encourages. published in the
July, 1888, number of the Century Mdga-
zine, page 312, some historical facts which
l now quote. Speaking of the designs of
Brown and the men whoe names / will
insert he says: They knew that he meant
TO fortify himself some where In the noun
tains of Virginia or Tennessee, and from
that fastness with his bard of soldiers sally
forth and liberate slaves by force His
plan to this extent was known early In
1858 by Frederick Douglass, Garrett Smith,
Theodore Parker, DR.. s. g. Howe, George
L. Stearns, (the husband of that before
mentioned Mary Stearns). T. w. Hingin-
son and myself. and ne al raised money 70
AID BrcrR IN carrying has pan .Jorseard.
Browns general purpose of attacking ala.