The North Star (Rochester)/1847/12/03/The interesting slave case of Mount Holly
THE INTERESTING SLAVE CASE OF MOUNT HOLLY.
We subjoin a brief statement of the facts of the arrest of three negroes at Mount Holly, under the plea that they were slaves. Independent of the natural abhorrence which exists among us against slavery, the trial has an interest, as being the first ever held in this country. We give the facts as narrated by a friend:
This highly interesting and important slave case took place in Mount Holly, New Jersey, and was very unexpectedly decided last evening. It was a claim made by Mr. John Roth, a slave holder, who resides in Cecil county, State of Maryland, to recover, as fugitive slaves, Perry Henson, Noah Henson, and Rachel Pine, three respectable colored citizens, who have been residing for several years in the neighborhood of Mont Holly—two of them being married and one having a family of children. These persons were seduced from their homes on Thursday last, on a pretended claim for taxes. On arriving at Mount Holly, in the evening, they were all seized as fugitives, by a warrant, and taken before Judge Hayward. Some of their friends, hearing of it that night, assembled very early in the morning, and employed for them as counsel Mr. R. D. Spencer, of Mount Holly, who went before the said judge, and demanded a trial by jury, under a recent law by the state of New Jersey; which was granted, and the hearing postponed until yesterday morning, when Messrs. Stratton and Moffit, of Mount Holly appeared as counsel for the claimants, and Mr. Spencer, assisted by Mr. Paul Brown of Philadelphia, for the defendants. At the onset of the case, Mr. Stratton attempted to prevent the exercise of peremptory challenge of three jurors, which however was overruled by the Court. Upon the jurors being called by Mr. Charles Collins, sheriff of Burlington County, it was found that he had returned twelve men, and no more; consequently, upon the defendants' counsel challenging three jurors, the panel was exhausted.
The claimant produced several witnesses from Maryland, who testified that they had known these alleged fugitives for several years, and believed that they had formerly belonged to Mr. John Roth, Sen., who as stated by one witness, died insolvent, and that they now considered them the property of the claimant, because they had seen them living with him. One witness testified that he was the administrator of John Roth, Jun., the present claimant, by orphan's court.
Upon these grounds the counsel for plaintiff rested their case.
Mr. Spencer then commenced his speech for the defendants, in which he most energetically appealed to the jury, as citizens of New Jersey, to stand by their own State laws, made for the defence of human liberty. He then stated that the plaintiffs had not made out their case according to the requirements of the laws of New Jersey, for the following reasons:
1st. Because they had not produced properly authenticated documentary evidence that Maryland was a slave state.
2d Because they had uot satisfactorily proved the title of the present claimant to these three persons either by bill or otherwise, and that either of these points being unsustained, must prove fatal to their cause. He proceeded by showing that under these views of the case, the jury must pause, before returning into hopeless bondage three respectable inhabitants of this district.—This speech was most ably delivered, and had a thrilling effect upon the large audience there assembled.
Mr. David Paul Brown then followed upon the same side, in a most emphatic manner, showing the great importantance of the present decision, on account of this being the first occurrence of the kind in this or any country. He then went into the legal merits of the case, which he handled in a masterly manner, and fully sustaining the views presented by his colleague, and urging the importance to the jury of keeping the claimants strictly to the laws, and not to infringe in the least upon the rights of these unfortunate persons, who stood charged with no crime, save that of color.
This most powerful appeal was listened to with the greatest attention, and appeared to produce great effect upon the court and jury, as well as all present.
Mr. Stratton then followed for the claimants, in which he acquitted himself with ability, but did not attempt to answer the objections on the other side.
Names of the Jury.—Charles Stratten, Benjamin Wilkins, Wm. C. Shinn, John Fairholm, Phinehas Kirkbright, Samuel Reed, James A. Powell, John C. Millvine, Wm. Pugh, T. Collins, Joseph W. Cole, name of the other not taken down.
The jury returned in about twenty minutes, with a verdict in favor of the plaintiffs; and as the officers were about removing the prisoners, one of their number made some resistance or an effort to escape, when he was seized, and the court was immediately cleared of colored persons, who retired without the least disposition being manifested by them to make a riot. Yet notwithstanding this, the sheriff drew his pistols, and threatened to shoot the citizens if they attempted to interfere. The slave-dealers and their allies also flourished pistols and dirks, and some with oaths threatened to shoot the first "nigger" they could find.
Ropes were called for, and the prissoners tied very securely. One of them was treated in a very barbarous manner, and the voices of s number of respectable inhabitants were raised, to beg of them to desist from such cruelty. While they were still lying upon the floor, with their hands pinioned behind them, and only a few of the citizens, in addition to the slaveholders and their allies around them, the military of the town who it seems had been called out, made their appearance.
They were then conducted to the prison by a military escort, and the people quietly dispersed. We understand that during the night military accompanied the slaveholders to secure to them safe custody of their human "property."
There was no reasonable pretext for this disgraceful proceeding of calling out the military. During the whole of the trial, although there was a large number of colored people present, they behaved with the utmost propriety; they were respectable in appearance, and made not the least demonstration of attempt at riot or rescue.
It is but proper to say that many of the respectable people of Mount Holly expressed themselves as deeply outraged by this transaction, and pronounce upon it the strongest censure.