History of Marietta and Washington County, Ohio, and representative citizens, Part 20

Author: Andrews, Martin Register, 1842-; Hathaway, Seymour J
Publication date: 1902
Publisher: Chicago : Biographical Pub. Co.
Number of Pages: 1490

USA > Ohio > Washington County > Marietta > History of Marietta and Washington County, Ohio, and representative citizens > Part 20

Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).

The editor of the Parkersburg Gasette has made a bitter personal attack upon the writer of an article in our paper of the 31st ult., to which the gentleman has replied : but as we do not wish to occupy our space with the two column article of the Gasette-which he wished to appear in connection with his reply-prin- cipally because we thought public attention ought not to be diverted from the original offense to a consider- ation of comparatively personal matters,-he has pub- lished it in the Buckeye. We annex some extracts from his commentary on the Gazette's article:

NOT TRUE

"It is not true that the citizens of Virginia. who made the capture, crossed the river for that purpose. or with that expectation. They went for the sole pur- pose of intercepting the slaves, as they had a perfect right to do; and until they had actually seized the whites supposed the whole were negroes."-Parkers- burg Gazette.

A "mighty" likely story that -- isn't it now? They expected the negroes were about to leave their homes in Virginia-but they could not think of stopping them there! No: they had a perfect right to invade Ohio. and they would do it-Ohio being their lawful hunting ground. The Parkersburg Gazette remembers to for- get a few items. These night hanters placed- them- selves in Ohio -- where they could watch, not the river, but the road from Decatur. They saw men pass in the night. but koul.In't suspect they were going to help the negroes! They heard the negroes answered from the Ohic shore-but thought 'twas negro answering negro! The Parkersburg Gazette says there was evidence (by these gentlemen ) that the prisoners assisted the negroes and their baggage from the canoe-but when they "seized the whites" they supposed them all negroes. | Now don't this make up a mighty likely story ?

139

AND REPRESENTATIVE CITIZENS.

MOST SURPRISINGLY SURPRISING.

"We have seen with much surprise in the Marietta Intelligencer, a communication entitled 'Invasion of Ohio.' %

* * We are surprised that the editor of that paper should have admitted such an article to his coluinns. * * * We must again express our surprise that any respectable journal should give it publicity."-Parkersburg Gazette.

The Parkersburg Gazette seems to disremember that Ohio is a Free State. There is so much freedom in Ohio that we dare to be fair and publish what the Gazette says against us-the like whereof we suppose the Parkerslig Gasette dares not do. We have be- come so far free in Ohio that even abolition lectures are now seldom molested. Pro-slavery lecturers have scarce ever been interrupted. The intimation of the Richmond Enquirer, that West Virginia was becoming free. is exceedingly grievous and surprising to the i'. Gazette.

A FINE CHANCE.

"If a fair trial can be had. the prisoners will have it. and. as heretofore, every indulgence will be extended to them which circumstances permit. We have heard no desire expressed that they should be convicted tin- less the law, as applied to the facts, fully warrants it." -P. Gazette.

Well. what by Virginia construction, is the law ? Why according to Mr. Van Winkle. "That Vir- ginia, or any other State has a right to pass a law de- claring the punishment of an offense committed against her citizens or their property although com- mitted out of her limits, and may punish the offender if brought before her tribunals, and that the law under which these men are prosecuted is such a law !"

We want to add a word : If this is a sound doctrine. why may not Ohio pass a law against slave-holding and under it arrest any Virginians who may be guilty of what she pronounces a crime? The Virginians ought to see that this may prove bad doctrine for them.

PUBLIC MEETING.

A meeting of the citizens of Washington County was held at the Court House in Mar- ietta, by adjournment, August 16, 1845. to take into consideration further measures for the liberation of Ohio citizens then in the Parkersburg Jail, and for the vindication of the rights of Ohio.

Nahum Ward, James Lawton, A. T. Nye, Judge Loring, and William West were ap- pointed a committee to report resolutions for the action of the meeting : the committee sub- mitted the following resolutions which were unanimously adopted :-

Resolved That the forcible abduction and detention in the Parkersburg Jail of our citizens. Creighton J.

Loraine. Peter M. Garner, and Mordecai E. Thomas, by Virginians, constitutes a most alarming trespass on the rights of Ohio.

Resolved, That in the opinion of this meeting. peaccable and legal measures should be adopted and pursued, with untiring enrgy, not merely for the libera- tion of the prisoners, but also security from similar assaults hereafter on the peace and dignity of Ohio.

Resolved, That application should be made in proper form to the Governor of Ohio, for his active in- terference in this case, to the utmost of his power and authority vested in him for the promotion of the wel- fare and vindication of the rights of Ohio.

Resolved. That it is highly expedient and essential to the peace of the States bordering on the Ohio River, that Ohio should assert and strenuously maintain her rights of State Jurisdiction to low water mark. as established in 1820 in the case of Handley's Lessee vs. Anthony, et al., by the Supreme Court of the United States.

Resolved, That it is highly expedient and essential that laws should he passed by the National Legislature securing to persons seized, carried away, and detained from their own territory. the privileges of the writ of Habeas Corpus, and the protection of the Federal Judiciary.

Resolved, That the following named citizens of Washington County be and they are hereby appointed a committee to carry the foregoing resolutions into effect, seven of whom shall be a quorum, and the citi- zens of this meeting shall sustain them in so doing: Nahum Ward, Caleb Emerson, Walter Curtis. G. W. Barker. Hiram Gard, Job S. King. Dr. G. N. Gilbert. James M. Amlin. R. K Ewart. John Collins. William R. Putnam. Jr .. A. T. Nye. J. D. Chamberlain. Daniel Davis, Ira Hill. Elisha Allen. Joseph Barker. William P. Cutler. Simeon Deming. Jr .. and William R. Brown- ing.

THE TRIAL. AT PARKERSBURG.

September. 1845 -

B. Gates, Esq .- On Monday. the Ist inst .. the Cir- cuit Superior Court of Virginia commenced its fall session in Wood County. A large number of the citi- zens of Washington County repaired hither to attend the 'rial of the three Ohio citizens confined in the Parkersburg Jail on the charge of aiding the escape of prisoners. As an eye-witness I proceed to give a sketch of the proceedings of the Court.

On Monday, the grand jury. having been em- panneled and sworn, retired to their chambers, and after a few hours deliberation, returned with an indict- ment jointly found against the prisoners. Peter M. Garner. Creighton J. Loraine and Mordecai E. Thom- as. charging them with enticing and assisting. in the county of Wood. six negroes, the property of Mr. Harwood. to escape into Ohio from servitude. The indictment contained four or five counts, each vary- ing the charge to suit the various sections of the statute At nine o'clock on Tuesday morning. the prisoners were brought within the bar of Court. and the indictment immediately read to them, to which each answered severally not guilty. Counsel for the prisoner -- Mesrs. Vinton. and C. H. Brough, of Ohio,

140

HISTORY OF MARIETTA AND WASHINGTON COUNTY,

and W. A. Harrison and J. G. Stringer, of Virginia. Mr. Jackson, the attorney for the Commonwealth, here stated to the Court that in consequence of an attack of the erysipelas he should be compelled, in following the advice of his physician. to decline the prosecution of the case-not without hope, however, that other members of the bar could be induced to fill his place ; but in case other attorneys should not be employed, he should be compelled to move the Court for a con- tinuance of the cause until the next term. The Court thereupon appointed Messrs. Fisher and Van Winkle. but the former of these gentlemen declined. The lat- ter consented to engage only on the condition that Mr. Fisher would lead the prosecution-this, however, Mr. Fisher peremptorily declined. The question then recurred upon the continuance of the case.

Mr. Vintom arose in opposition. He appeared (he said ) in the cause, not strictly as counsel for the prisoners, but at the request of the Executive of Ohio in defense of the rights of the State. It was of the highest importarce that no right. however great or small, should be violated between the sister States of Virginia and Ohio. Thus far two sovereignties had continued to flourish, one at the side of the other. and not an incident had transpired to war against the mutual amity and friend-hip which had ever existed between them. And feeling a conviction that if this cause should come to a speedy termination the intense excitement now existing in either State would at once, and quietly, subside. he could not but argue upon the Court the propriety of an immediate trial. Delay. he thought. would only heighten the unhappy excitement. Should the trial proceed. and the result be an ac- quittal of the prisoners, the people of Ohio would at once "rub out' all harsh and unfriendly feeling ; but should the result be otherwise and a continuance be had, he was sure that an indictment would be found at the next term of the Court of Washington County against the Virginia citizens who had seized and brought here the prisoners, and that a requisition upon the Virginia Executive would follow, and if a sur- render was made of these citizens. they would prob- ably be sentenced to the Ohio Penitentiary under the statute of the State to prevent kidnaping. It was im- possible to determine the extent of the difficulties that would eventually spring up under such a state of cir- cumstances. All interference by the people of Ohio with the property or rights of the citizens of Vir- ginia was to be deprecated and condemned as unwar- ranted and in violation of the good faith which should ever exist. under our admirable constitution, between the two sovereignties Laws had been enacted in Ohio against any such interference, but it being shown that Congress alone had the power of enacting laws rela- tive to fugitives from labor. the Ohio acts were re- pealed. He further alluded to the operation of the Constitution and laws of the United States, and also of the laws of Ohio and Virginia and urged the eiti- zens of both States to a strict and faithful observance of them. He appeared. he repeated, in behalf of the State of Ohio; but should it be ascertained that the prisoners had, at any time when in the commission of the crime charged. been within the jurisdiction of Virginia, he would immediately abandon the defense and leave them to rely upon other counsel.

Mr. Harrison thought that were the Court to take a recess, counsel for the prosecution might be obtained. Mr. Stringer made some remarks in a low tone which were not distinctly heard.

Ma. Jackson, further in support of the motion, said that the Commonwealth could not under the circum- stances be fairly represented in the cause, as other counsel than those assigned would act without prep- aration. The question of boundary he thought a high- ly important one and required an elaborate investi- gation in order to settle it fairly and firmly. It should not be settled in haste. He hoped the prisoners would have the fairest possible trial, and he should not ask their conviction unless they were proven clearly within the territory of Virginia at the time of the commis- sion of the acts charged. 'Twas true that much ex- citement existed on both sides of the river. but none but citizens of Virginia knew how to feel for the in- juries which their rights were daily sustaining. The prisoners he thought were guilty, and as they now had them in their power he hoped they would be pun- ished in an exemplary manner. The people of Vir- ginia had rights which should be sustained if possible.

The Court after the close of the arguments granted the motion and fixed upon the 17th of November next for a special session to try the issue. The prisoners were admitted to bail in $500 each, or were to stand committed until trial, in case no bail could be had. They will. however, probably be able to secure the necessary bail within a few days. It is much to be regretted that circumstances are such as to prevent the attendance of Mr. Vinton at the time fixed upon for the Special Court. Good feeling and harmony prevailed throughout. It is worthy of remark, per- haps. that the Court repeatedly expressed a deter- mination to afford the prisoners a fair and impartial trial. The only exceptional feature of the proceedings T observed was the degrading treatment shown the prisoners when taken to and from the jail. No one had a remote idea that any effort would be made to release them-yet each prisoner was collared by two self-important sub-officers and dragged along among it crowd of two or three hundred. as if they were the blackest criminals in Christendom. Yours, etc. an Ohioan.

"It is certainly a hard matter for the pris- oners to be dealt with thus. They were ready for trial. The prosecuting attorney has been out of health for some time, and it was under- stood weeks ago that he might not be able to conduct the case. In these circumstances no counsel, it appears, was secured to aid him. The prisoners must remain in jail more than two months longer, or give bail. Suppose Mr. Jackson is then sick, and there is the same neglect about assistance, or difficulty about procuring it, must these men be again sent to jail?

"There is one sigular fact in this case .-

14T

AND REPRESENTATIVE CITIZENS.

The ablest counsel in Virginia are willing to appear in behalf of the prisoners, but nobody but Mr. Jackson is desirous of appearing against them. If the State had a good case. there would probably be no difficulty of this kind .- Editor."

The Ohio State Journal, in an issue of September, 1845. after copying the account of the trial at Parkersburg as contained in the Marietta Intelligencer, comments as follows : * * * * "We are convinced that there is no probability of the conviction of the prison- ers, and that this is understood by those in the prosecution. But, as we intimated severai weeks since, the final discussion of the question on its merits, is put off, in order to punish the prisoners before they are tried. They have already been retained in prison for some time. and unless they should get the bail will be re- tained for a longer period. Even if they get bail, the rod will be held over their heads, and thus, it is supposed, others will be deterred from following the example set by them, in the matter with which they stand charged. If we are correct in this supposition there is cer- tainly just room for complaint against the course of proceedings. *

"We learn from gentlemen at Parkersburg that the very serious illness of Mr. Jackson. the prosecuting attorney for Virginia, did not prevent his attending to other business the whole week. It is not so much a matter of surprise that the grand jury should have found a bill as that they should have found it upon such additional testimony as was presented. It has been stated that the grand jury would not have found a bill but for new and impor- tant facts that came to their knowledge, in ad- dition to what were presented at the called court. And what were they? Why, a wit- ness testified that when the kidnaped Ohioans reached Virginia, it was found that they had water in their shoes, and as the boat in which they were taken over was dry, it was conclud- ed that they might have got their feet wet in Virginia water-probably when helping the negroes out of their boat when it reached this shore! Well, suppose they did get their feet

wet' there, they were not within the jurisdic- tion of Virginia. They had not been within five rods of low-water mark. and did not get there until carried by an armed force.

"A word about the bail: Bail was re- quired in Virginia. A number of citizens of Ohio, men of wealth and high character, of- fered to become responsible to any citizen of Virginia who would bail the prisoners. The indemnifying bond was signed by a large num- ber of our wealthy citizens, and besides this one of the signers offered to give his individ- ual note for the whole amount of the bail to a citizen of Virginia if he would enter into re- cognizance for their appearance. Two gentle- men of Virginia consented to give bonds if a third man could be obtained to engage jointly with them. A young gentleman of undoubted pecuniary responsibility voluntarily offered to do so, but as he was not a freeholder ( his property being, at least a portion of it, in bank stock ), he was refused. The sum total of the matter is, that after the most importunate en- treaties and although undoubted and abundant security was offered, bail in the sum of $1,500 could not be obtained in Virginia; and our citizens, kidnaped by lawless ruffians, must re- main in jail till the middle of November before they can be tried-for acts done in this State! Whether they will be tried even then, will probably depend on the health or disposition of the prosecuting attorney."

ADMITTED TO PAIL.

January, 1846 .-

"Judge McComas passed down the Ohio on Monday, on board the steamboat 'Colum- bia.' .A special term of the Court was held in Parkersburg yesterday, and Garner, Loraine and Thomas were admitted to bail in the sum of $100 each. Asa Harris of Harmar entered into recognizance for them all.

"We have now only space to make this an- nouncement, but may, at our leisure, have 'a word or two to say' about the amount of bail required at the term of the Court held in Sep- tember last-the impossibility of obtaining the

142

HISTORY OF MARIETTA AND WASHINGTON COUNTY,

kind of bail then required-the comparatively easy terms now offered, and sundry other mat- ters connected with the history of the affair.

HURRAH FOR GENERAL JACKSON.

"Not the General of New Orleans mem- ory, but Gen. John J. Jackson, the commander of the guard what shot the Parkersburg Town Bull-mistaking it for a posse of Ohioans! Just read this and tremble, all 'Ohio Aboli- tionists !'

"The Winchester (Va.) Republican says, 'That Gen. John J. Jackson, of Parkersburg. has applied to the Governor of Virginia for 300 stand of arms and authority to embody troops to repel and invasion the Ohio Aboli- tionists' may attempt !'

"Now then, 'Rub-a-dub-rub-a-dub-dub .- who'll enlist in the Parkersburg town guard?' It will be a bloodless one unless the town has bought another bull !

"Seriously, though, an attack upon Park- ersburg is already planned, and we advise the valorous gentlemen of 'the guard' to prepare themselves with three days' rations of bull- beef, scour up their guns, and be prepared 'to repel the invasion' -- for we hear that an 'In- dependent Company' of nearly 20 Ohio boys has been formed, and they have unanimously resolved to fill their pockets with buckeyes and hickory nuts, storm Parkersburg, pelt General Jackson to death, and drive the town guard out of Wood County!"

LATER VIEWS OF THE OHIO KIDNAPING CASE.

(From the Ohio Register. 1893.)-

"On the night of the 9th day of July, 1845, three citizens of Ohio-Creighton J. Loraine, Peter M. Garner, and Mordecai E. Thomas-were seized on the north bank of the Ohio River, just above the mouth of the Little Hocking, and forcibly carried across the river, and imprisoned in the jail of Wood County, Virginia, at Parkersburg, their cap- tors being citizens of Virginia and their of- fense, 'carrying away' the slaves six in number. of John Il. Harwood, a resident of Washing- ton Bottom, nearly opposite the scene of cap-

ture. Half a century hath wrought many changes, and few that witnessed the exciting scenes and incidents of that eventful period are left to relate to the younger generation the story of what transpired on the border of Ma- son and Dixon's Line in those early days.

"On the night named, certain citizens of Decatur township residing some four or five miles up the Little Hocking, met the slaves of Harwood at the river, and were assisting them in getting their scanty luggage out of the ca- noc and up the bank, when the three men above named were pounced upon by concealed Vir- ginians, who, in their eagerness to capture their Abolition foes, permitted the slaves to escape, and on the following day the six chat- tels were conveyed across the country in the vicinity of Plymouth in open wagons, with the stars and stripes proudly waving over the suddenly freed and happy people.

"The exasperated Virginians now had something tangible on which to wreak their vengeance, and the three prisoners were made to feel the wrath of an outraged and indignant people. They were denied all the ordinary comforts and conveniences of prison life in the Old Dominion. They were confined with the fugitive slaves, but denied even the meagre fare accorded to these, and when bail was prof- fered. they were indignantly denied their lib- erty on any terins.

"As may be supposed, excitement ran high on both sides of the river, and when the Governor of Virginia called out her State militia to defend her border and prevent the rescue of the prisoners, the people of Ohio were just as ready to march to the rescue at once, and Governor Bartley was appealed to in thunder tones to call out the militia or ac- cept volunteers and resent the insult, and re- dress the wrong, even if rivers of blood ran as a result. But wiser counsels prevailed, and the authorities determined to appeal to the courts, and to this end the Governor appointed Hon. Samuel F. Vinton, the ablest legal talent of the State. to present the claims of Ohio, while very able and eminent counsel appeared on behalf of the Commonwealth of Virginia.

143

AND REPRESENTATIVE CITIZENS.

"The case finally reached the State court of last resort at Richmond, Virginia, at the December session. 1845, and was so ably pre- sented and fairly discussed that the prisoners were discharged, and thus ended a most exict- ing and deeply interesting period in the State's history and to a person now looking back to the eventful time, it scarcely seems possible that bloodshed was averted and quiet restored. The question in the case, relied upon by Mr. Vinton, was whether these prisoners committed any offense against the laws of Virginia, as the canoe was some 50 feet within the shore from low-water mark, and hence within the borders of Ohio,and beyond the jurisdiction of Virginia courts.

"The State militia was vigilant and alert. and no human being, black or white, could evade the sentry's stern command to 'halt,' or enter the exicted village without a pass en- dorsed by men good and true to the interests of slavery. Even the town bull was reported to have lost his life by his persistent and bu !!- headed refusal to obey the command on a dark November night, when the unerring aim of a chivalrous guard laid him low in death. The militia were prone to add insult to injury, and soon after their occupation of the village, they ran out a brass field-piece to the river bank. with its business end threateningly pointed across the border toward Belpre, where many pesky Abolitionists were supposed to dwell."

Mr. Editor : The article in the Register of Aug. 30th on the Garner case is in error in stating that the prisoners were discharged by the Virginia Court, if it means that the Court decided the case. The fol- lowing letter written by Borden Stanton to William P. Cutler gives the facts. It is dated Little Hocking. April 22, 1836:

"The prisoners Loraine, Garner and Thomas are bailed in & bond of $1oo each. Asa Harris was taken for the three. No Virginia bail was asked; it is my opinior that Virginia never intends to decide the case. Judge McComas told a citizen of Ohio whom he thought trustworthy that he did not suppose that pris- oners ever would come back and if they did not their bond never would be sued: if they appeared at the March term and renewed their cognizance there, in that case the Court at Richmond in June would de- cide that the act was done in Virginia, and if they again appeared in September, sentence would be passed upon them. and a petition immediately got up for a reprieve, signed first by Judge MeComas and then

by all the influential men in Wood County and then to be sent to Ohio for signatures, and have them re- prieved before anything further can be done, and there they suppose the matter will rest. The men are ready to do anything that is thought best and wish your ad- vice whether to appear in March or not."

This appears to have been the end of the case which never reached a final decision. Mr. Vinton, m his argument in behalf of Garner. Thomas and Loraine. gave dve prominence to the fact that they were taken on the Ohio shore, "nfty feet within the shore from low-water mark," but that was not the point be re- lied on. He denied absolutely that Virginia had any jurisdiction beyond the middle of the Ohio River. Ile maintained this proposition in an argument which seems conclusive.

Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.

History of Marietta and Washington County, Ohio, and representative citizens, Part 20

Author: Andrews, Martin Register, 1842-; Hathaway, Seymour J Publication date: 1902 Publisher: Chicago : Biographical Pub. Co. Number of Pages: 1490

Author: Andrews, Martin Register, 1842-; Hathaway, Seymour J
Publication date: 1902
Publisher: Chicago : Biographical Pub. Co.
Number of Pages: 1490