holding that first conversation with Lowe! You see, then, how utterly unjust it is to claim that he was serving a double purpose; that he was communicating the information that he had derived up stairs from Lowe, and at the same time covertly advising the crowd not to follow those peaceful means, which he had himself all along recommended.

ures.

twenty minutes before the second, and that down to the last moment of the second, he believed that Langston was acting in good faith in his behalf, endeavoring to still the crowd and persuade them to the use of peaceable measures. And that he was induced to suspect Langston's honesty only by the observation he made as he was passing out of the room at the close of this second interview. He says that when Langston had urged him, in view of all the circumstances, to get himself out of what then seemed to be a dangerous position, by using his influence with Jennings who had declared himself to be the owner — to give up the negro, and Lowe had peremptorily declined making any such attempt, Langston rose up and passed out rapidly, and as he passed out, said, "Well, we'll have him, any way." Now I want you to compare this testimony of Lowe with that of Jennings and Davis. (Of Davis I know very little; but having been privileged with a longer acquaintance with Mr. Jennings, I think he could bring himself to believe almost any thing, particularly since he got that "jabble" on his head!)

Now, it is said that he and Patton came out about the same time or Barber, who swears to it, says he saw them coming from the direction of the back yard; that he, standing in the lane (see diagram), saw them coming along there, approaching him from the direction of the door leading up stairs; did n't know whether they came out of the door together; did n't know, in fact, as they came out of the door, either of them, at all at that time. What he does know, is that he saw them approaching him, moving outward toward the crowd in the street, Patton some fifteen feet ahead of Langston, and that Patton, addressing himself to the crowd, said, that the only legal way to inquire into the custody was by a writ of habeas corpus from Elyria, but it was too late then to go for one, Now, because Jennings testifies to a thing, I and they must do as they pleased. He says know there is no man on that Jury simple that Langston had nothing to do with this pro- enough to suppose that it must necessarily be clamation; does n't know as he even heard it, true. Not that Jennings, in telling his absurdior was near enough to hear it. That Langston ties, would always know that he was lying; he stopped some fifteen or eighteen feet back of might have some indistinct idea that he was doPatton, and went to talking with persons there, ing something not quite in keeping with the advising the use of peaceable and legal meas- Code of Honor down in Kentucky, but as to I shall not attempt to allude to all the lying, nothing is surer than that they never testimony on this point. Here you have Ben- taught him what that was in that Church of nett and Howk and Wheeler and Barber per- which he is such an exemplary member, down haps, and others who all swear to the unvaried there! [Laughter.] What possible plausibility tenor of Langston's conversation and conduct, is there for believing that Jennings and Davis as not only passively, but actually and positively heard Langston say to Lowe in the first interlaw-abiding. After having been absent some view and at no other conversation were they twenty minutes, he returned and called Lowe present-"I won't help you; but we'll have out into the little room at the head of the stairs. him any how?" Mitchell won't swear to any They went into that room and sat down on the such thing; he was brought here for the exbed together, and there they talked, no one be- press purpose of swearing, but you can't fetch side themselves being present. There was no him quite up to that! So that either Jennings conversation on this occasion in the room where and Davis testify to what was not true, or else the negro was, but all that was said was said Lowe testifies to what is not true. not true. And Lowe while they were alone together in the little room gives you the best reason in the world for beadjoining the stairway, and beyond the reach lieving him, for he declares that up to the time of the ears of those who were in the room with Langston left the room, at the close of that secJohn. Well, Mr. Lowe himself tells you what ond private interview, he had entire confidence transpired in this second (and besides the one that he was faithfully working for him. And already alluded to, during which the train how is it possible to suppose, for a moment, that passed, the only) conversation they had together he could have retained such an impression if that day. He tells you that Langston said to Langston had met his overtures in the first inhim, "I have been below, talking to the crowd, terview with such unqualified refusal and reendeavoring to influence them to take a legal pugnance as Jennings and Davis represent? course, but without success. They are deter-But I know very well how these good easy mined to take their own course." Was he then souls, and especially my old friend Jennings, playing false to Lowe? Not unless Bennett and Howk - and you all saw in Mr. Howk's honest face, at any rate, that he was a man that didn't know how to lie unless Jacob Wheeler swears false, he told Lowe the truth. Now, Lowe tells you that he saw Langston but twice that day; that the first interview broke up

after hearing Lowe tell of this remark of Langston in the second interview, might actually imagine that they heard it too; and Lowe, unfortunately, not having taken pains to impress upon them that it would n't do for them to swear to it, since he would have to swear that it was made in the second and private interview, at

which neither of them was present, nor near enough to be within possible earshot, they out with it before it could be stopped, and then there was nothing but the "jewel of consistency" left to them; so they stick to it. And now with so strong a reason for believing Lowe rather than Jennings and Davis, is n't your course a plain one, Gentlemen ?

the villains were forced to release their prey. There was reason enough, then, why this defendant should say, that that investigation before the magistrates ought to proceed, and that the crowd should be satisfied with nothing short of it. And even, Gentlemen, if, hearing that Lowe had a warrant - I am talking now about his action in reference to the service of this There are other witnesses upon whom the warrant, which, you will not forget, was immeprosecution rely to implicate Langston. In this diately after his arrival in the crowd, and before confusion of testimony it is next to impossible Lowe had sent for him to hold the first converto fix the time of the occurrences which are sation — if, I say, hearing that Lowe had a testified to. But it seems to be clear, that, dur-warrant, he was satisfied in his own mind; still, ing the earlier part of the time Langston was and none the less, for the satisfaction of the there, busied about the arrest of these men for crowd, and because he might be deceived himkidnapping, in order that their authority might self, and because the man's liberties were all at be subjected to official inspection, he was get-stake, was it not his unquestionable duty ---- did ting up or helping to get up a bond of indem- he not owe it to humanity and justice to do by nity for the constable, who, it seems, was a lit- that boy as you would have demanded of him tle tender-footed about serving the warrant that to do by you in like peril to press that official had been issued by Mr. Justice Bennett. It is investigation, and to rest satisfied with nothing said that Dickson drew up the bond, and Lang- short of it? I know the District-Attorney has ston circulated it. This was before Lowe sent said, and his associate may reiterate it, that it for him, it is important to remember; before he was not proper for the constable to obey the had any reliable intimation of the authority mandate of any such warrant, or to attempt under and by virtue of which they claimed to any such arrest. But suppose Langston honhold John. It was not Langston who swore estly thought the law authorized it, and acted out the warrant. The warrant had been sworn upon such honest belief, solely for the purpose out, and the constable had attempted to serve of securing the rights of all parties, and paving it long before Langston was seen anywhere in the way for the escape of the officer from the that crowd. On his arrival, he heard a dispute difficulties that environed him, if his papers about the legality of the custody. Patton, or were found to be right; — and if they were not others, may have expressed, in his hearing, a right, the District-Attorney would not be seen belief that the custody was legal; but here was standing up here to claim that that crowd ought a warrant already issued, and in the hands of to have allowed a case of kidnapping in their the constable, the service of which would insure midst! shall a man for such conduct be a satisfactory examination. Making use, there-branded by this Court as a violator of the pubfore, of that common sense, which, I take it lic peace and the rights of citizens? A man upon me to say, he showed himself to be pos- intending only a lawful course, and advising it sessed of in an enviable degree, he thought it only to prevent an outrage which was equally on all accounts best to have a legal investiga- liable to be perpetrated by either or both partion, that John might neither be rescued nor ties; coming between them as a peacemaker to carried off without any one knowing what sanc-adjust their difficulties according to law tion there might be for either course. He very properly told the constable, "You have no right to go behind the warrant in your hands, and inquire into the legality of its issue; your sole But this attempt to get the constable to arrest business is to serve it." Bring the men before failing, afterward you hear of him in that alley these magistrates, candid, honorable men as stating that a habeas corpus from Elyria might they are, and it will then appear whether the be obtained, and was, therefore, the next best custody of John is legal or not, and the decision legal and peaceable resort, and offering, if a of these magistrates will or ought to satisfy the horse and buggy were furnished him, to go for crowd. Suppose he did hear something about it. And is it not probable then, are you not a warrant, and perhaps even something of a bound to believe, that he was anxious that a power of attorney; The none the less justly legal course should be pursued; if not for his demanded a legal, official investigation. Why, own satisfaction, at least for the satisfaction of some of you must have heard of the case in the more turbulent portion of the crowd? Akron, where, a short time since, a colored As I have already said, I shall not attempt man was seized by certain scoundrels, under to go over in detail all the testimony that has the pretence that they were arresting him for been given as to what he said and what he did passing counterfeit money; they exhibited a in connection with this transaction. It has forged warrant, which purported to have been been accurately done by my associate, and issued by Minor, the Clerk of the U. S. Court; must be fresh in your recollection.. But I wish but some one happening to look at it, who knew to call your attention now to the conflict beMinor's handwriting, detected the fraud, and tween the testimony of the Government wit

shall

he be branded a felon, I say, and punished with the enormities of the provisions of this Fugitive Slave Act?

:

!

Lowe one hundred dollars, if he got the "nig ger," and pay his expenses from Columbus to Oberlin at any rate; that he made the same agreement with Davis; which latter statement

nesses upon several important points, for the purpose of reminding you that it must be with à great degree of caution that you give credit to what they say; that their testimony is such as plainly to show that they have either forgot-he afterwards explained by saying that it was ten what occurred, or else their inclination is such as to debar them from credit at your hands. For instance, you have had the testimony of Jennings and Bacon as to the arrangement under which Jennings came out here in pursuit of John. I frankly confess that I see nothing in the appearance of this man Bacon, to authorize me to asperse his character for truth and veracity, though I cannot but regret that he could not employ his valuable time to better advantage than in hiring some wretch to recapture the boy John, so ardently loving his own freedom; or in being here to carry on this prosecution against a man who sought only to keep and not to break the law. I know that it may be said that he is here as a witness under process; but I know, too, that if he be, as is alleged, the owner of the boy John, a wave of his hand would doubtless have prevented the indictment being found.

to be one hundred dollars for both. But Lowe comes up and swears roundly that there was no pecuniary arrangement whatever made but that he expected to charge his usual price, which is $2 a day and expenses; that Jennings indeed offered him a hundred dollars, but his incorruptible integrity spurned the bribe, and so there was no definite arrangement made. Davis says he never heard of the hundred dollars, and made no bargain; expected to charge his usual fees as deputy-sheriff. Isn't it rather unfortunate that there should be such a difference of opinion among these gentlemen, and especially that Mr. Jennings can't get any of his stories to jibe with anybody's else?

Now there is another witness for the government, one Sciples, who testifies that he saw the defendant twice on the afternoon of that day, and that the second time he saw him was on the floor of the second story with Watson, some time about the middle of the afternoon. Saw him only twice, and the second time he was with Watson on the second floor of the hotel, and this was about the middle of the afternoon. But when recalled to patch up a lame case, he swears that he saw him going up the stairs with Watson when the rush was. made, immediately-only a few moments before the rescue. An important addition to his reminiscences, and a little remarkable that he could'nt think of it before. So much for his consistency. And so with a large portion of all the witnesses for the Government.

Bacon swears that he promised Jennings, as the consideration for attempting the capture of the "nigger," $500, or one half what the "nigger" would sell for, provided he brought him safely back; and otherwise he was to have nothing. He says that this was an explicit agreement. Jennings swears that there was no arrangement whatever about compensation; that he undertook the return of this wayward youth as a neighborly duty, an act of pure benevolence; expected that his actual expenses would probably be paid-though for some reason they never have been yet- but had no idea of ever getting any thing more. But some one of them testifies that while Now why is it that these men, at the very Langston was circulating a bond of indemnity threshold of the first trial, cross each other's for the constable, he was told that the constapath in this way? Do they not impeach each ble would n't serve the writ, that he had reother, or, at least, one impeach the other? fused to do so, and he replied, "I do'nt care; What credit can they expect you to give them? we'll have him, any how." And of this the I verily believe Bacon, for he appears truthful, learned counsel for the Government are disand testifies to what is reasonable; but I am in-posed to make much handle. But is it fair to clined as strongly to distrust Jennings, because he appears any thing but truthful, and talks any thing but common sense. Why does Jennings disclaim the influence of any definite number of pieces of silver upon his pious and neighborly heart? Can it be that that gun penetrated so far into his head as to awaken to activity some latent moral perceptions of the reputableness of "nigger hunting" as compared with other walks of Christian usefulness? It is of course of no pertinence to the issue on trial what the terms of Mr. Jennings's engagements were; but it is of some importance to the government and to you, Gentlemen of the Jury, whether the chief witnesses for the Government can tell the truth when there is no possible inducement to lie!

do so? How impossible for any one hearing so equivocal and isolated a remark to fix positively upon its meaning; to say absolutely whether he meant that they would have Lowe, whose arrest was the sole object of his immediate attention, and who might be taken with this warrant by any one of numerous constables, other than Meacham, within a few minutes, call; or whether he meant John, whom he had as yet promised no relief, directly or indirectly, except by the hands of the proper officers of the law and through the operations of strictly legal processes? And it is really remarkable how this single phrase seems to have been heard by every one of a certain class of the Government's witnesses, up stairs, down stairs, out of doors, and everywhere, the echo seems to haunt them all; and yet nothing can be more flimsy than the statements in connection with which this

phrase is quoted by every one of them. Even Lowe gives the whole weight of his testimony against the probability of its use in his presence; and the others are either flatly contradicted or impeach themselves.

but a moment before the rescue took place. He says he saw that. Watson is brought to the stand, and swears straight out, with the emphasis and boldness of an intelligent and honest man, that he was only in that hallthat he only passed up those stairs-in company with Langston, once on that day, and that that was when he was sent by Lowe after Langston, and returned with him, which was immediately prior to the first interview between Lowe and Langston, during the continuance of which Lowe distinctly remembers that the train passed; and this, he says, was at least two hours before the rescue, and that the testimony of Sciples in reference to his going up with Langston immediately prior to the rescue, is utterly false.

It is said that Wheeler swears he also saw him pass up some time before the rescue, though he can't tell exactly when. But he also swears that he saw him going up those stairs with Watson only once, and Watson very clearly fixes the time and adds that they went up together only once. So Wheeler only corroborates Watson without particularly helping the Government. And as to Sciples, you, Gentlemen, heard the testimony that was given here as to his life-long reputation for truth and veracity, and it was of such a character that I need make no comments upon it- you cannot feel yourselves authorized to give his testimony the slightest weight.

I believe then, Gentlemen [Mr. GRISWOLD called off Mr. BACKUS's attention for a few moments.]

And now notice this remark and its connection, as Lowe says it was made to him alone, at the close of that second private interview, in the little room up at the head of the stairs. Until this moment, every word, look, and act of Langston had inspired Lowe with confidence that he had in Langston a friend who would, at least, labor against a forcible rescue. Even Langston's kind endeavors to get Lowe out of the scrape, by advising him to urge upon Jennings the expediency of parting with John voluntarily, rather than risk a defence against the excited and stubborn crowd, did not shake his confidence. He trusted him confidently until, at the last moment, when it became plain, as he says, that negotiations were wellnigh at an end, Langston rose, and striding rapidly out, said, "I don't care," or "well," or something of that sort -"we 'll have him any how." I need not dwell on this point, since my associate has done so; but you would be surprised if I passed over so important a point, without calling your attention urgently to it. The statement was not repeated; Lowe asked for no explanation; Langston went off, and did not return; Lowe says he did not come up with those who took John off; he neither saw nor heard any thing afterwards on that day, that would implicate him with the rescuers, any more than he did before this fatal word was let slip; so that the I am reminded, Gentlemen of the Jury, whole of his conduct that day, except in the may it please the Court, that before I close I use of this ONE WORD, was peaceful. Mr. should not pass over without comment a posiLowe, of course, though he can hardly tell day tion taken by the District-Attorney in his openfrom night on any other point, could not have ing remarks; and that was that any interfermisunderstood Langston, and thought he said ence with the parties having John in custody "WE," when in fact he repeated what he had whether by way of legal proceedings or otheralready said with impunity," THEY!" No; it wise was unwarrantable and inexcusable resissuits the purposes of the prosecution, Gentle-tance to the authority of the United States; men, that you believe in Mr. Lowe's infallibility that it was not in the power of any magistrate on this point, since his testimony in other to order an examination of them by arrest, or points does but help the defence, and on this in the power of a constable to serve a warrant point there is no one to contradict him but the if it were placed in his hands; and that whoever defendant. So that it appears, I say, that the advised such proceedings was equally criminal, whole of the defendant's conduct on that day, guilty, and chargeable with unlawfully particiexcept that ONE WORD, was that of a peace-pating in attempts to rescue, with those who maker and law-conservator. But Lowe comes appealed only to intimidation and force. It here into Court, and the anxious witnesses all seems to me that nothing farther need be said seeing what a ghostly chance the Government has left, and hearing Lowe fix up that little pronoun so nicely, scratch their heads and swear that they heard him say it too, and that he was saying it on all manner of impossible and improbable occasions. Now, Gentlemen of the Jury, can you lay your hands on your hearts and say there is NO ROOM FOR A REASONABLE DOUBT as to whether the word used by Langston was we," or "they?" One word more about Sciples's testimony, or that part of it in which he avers that he saw Langston passing up those stairs with Watson,

66

upon this point than was said by my associate. I cannot for one moment believe that any one will stand up here and say that a person thus acting in good faith to secure merely a legal investigation of the tenure going behind no paper presented-by which a presumptively free person is claimed to be held in close custody, under circumstances which not only justify but oblige the darkest suspicions, makes himself liable to, and is to be held primâ facie, as worthy of condign punishment as one who appeals only to physical violence! Certainly, I say, it cannot be that any gentleman who makes the

i

slightest pretensions to a knowledge of law will stand up here and risk his professional reputation upon so reckless a statement as that! "The gentleman cannot be serious. The indictment alleges no such resistance to authority, but resistance with "force and arms," and therefore if it be resistance, and be proven, it cannot come before you, Gentlemen, who sit here only to ascertain whether the allegations of the indictment are proven. And I take it, therefore, that the discussion of this point if a discussion could be seriously maintained!— must fall altogether outside the limits of this case.

And now, Gentlemen of the Jury, I know that there is a mass of testimony, which it has taken us some two weeks or more to draw out, that I have left untouched, even after so lengthý remarks as I have already made. But we will let all of that pass. I feel sure that you will not lay stress upon isolated scraps or garbled words and phrases in the testimony, especially such as run utterly counter to the entire drift of the whole. And that you will not do this is all I could wish to ask at your hands; for, unless you should do it, you must render the verdict most grateful to your own feelings, and which I am sure could not be unpleasant to my client or his counsel.

But if it were involved in the case, I should take it upon myself to say, as my associate has said, that if a person should procure such an Under the instructions of the Court, you will investigation, not for the purpose of honest and find, if those instructions shall be as I anticiimpartial investigation, but as a cover for other pate, that the power of attorney was fatally deand illegal proceedings, then the parties crimi- fective, and that all proceedings under it were nally and deceitfully acting under such cover incapable of laying a foundation for this charge. might be amenable to this statute. But even But if the Court shall differ with me here, and then, the movers in the matter acting with dis- you travel down to the next point, I am cerhonest and criminal motives, if any other per- tainly unable to see from what portion of the son in good faith should promote such issue and evidence you are to discover that the rescue service of process for the sole purpose of law- was, as the indictment alleges, from the cusful inquiry, in good faith and for the promotion tody of Anderson Jennings! But if, contrary of justice, and in ignorance of the true charac- to all my most confident expectations, under ter of the power under which the parties sought | the ruling of the Court, you are forbidden to to be arrested held their prisoner, can this investigate this point, and are forced on to the Court lay down such a rule of law as it is re- next, then I know that, on this question of quested to by the District-Attorney? that my fact- from the investigation of which you canclient, thus acting in good faith, for the sole pur- not be driven, I say, then, I know that you pose of ascertaining the truth, that he might gov- can never find-in my humble estimation ern himself by it, is amenable to the penalties of that the purpose of this defendant, in his cona criminal statute, and chargeable with "unlaw-nection with that crowd, was to make a breach fully, willingly, and knowingly," resisting compe- of the peace and to encourage an illegal restent legal authority? I know that the gentle-cue. You must find-unless you throw away man read an authority from McLean's Reports, all this testimony and manufacture for yourin a civil case for the recovery of the value of a slave, that it can make no difference what are the motives to interference so long as the injury to the plaintiff is the same; but where has it been laid down as a rule of law that a man can be guilty of crime when his motives are innocent and absolutely submissive to Law? I utterly repudiate the existence of such a doctrine, and I shall most assuredly take it for granted that no such rule will be laid down by this Court, till my own ears bring me the incredible proof. Why, who ever heard of an individual being And now, Gentlemen, I believe I have said convicted of larceny for going into your house all that I am warranted in saying upon this and taking an article under the honest impres- subject. I have endeavored to meet the issues sion that it was his own, while in fact it was presented fairly and squarely. Whatever may yours and not his all the time? Though an be my own views of the constitutionality and action for trespass undoubtedly would lie for propriety of the statute upon which this prosethe full value of the article thus abstracted. I cution is founded, I must, for the purposes of know that it may be necessary to invoke such this trial, regard it as constitutional and of full a rule of law for the purpose of procuring a force. But I do not wish to be misapprehended, conviction in this case, for certainly without its and to seem to occupy a position that I do not aid this Jury can never on their oaths find a occupy. And, therefore, I wish to say of that verdict of guilty; but I think I can risk noth- threat of the District-Attorney, that he hoped ing in saying that I know this Court will never the counsel for the defence would not be allay down such a rule as law, and that you will lowed unrebuked by your Honor to comment not take the talk of the District-Attorney as a upon the enormity of the statute itself, that I part of the Charge of the Court. hope you will do me the justice to believe that

selves-that he labored for peace and for peace only, for legal measures, and for legal measures only. And I know, too, that there is not a man among you who can lay his hand upon his heart and say that there is not ground for one reasonable doubt whether the allegations of the prosecution in this indictment are proven or not; so that, in the case of this defendant, let the character of the rescue itself be what it may have been, you will be forced to find a verdict of Not Guilty.