The Cleveland Daily Herald

Cleveland, April 8, 1859

The Rescue Case.

Fourth Day.

      The examination now is getting to be very dull to spectators; they have heard the main sensation features of the case, and the repetition of them is not very entertaining. The crowd about maintains its size, but the permanent portion, for the most part, is composed of people from Lorain, and other non-residents. The town citizens drop in and out, but the trial lacks the excitement necessary to keep them long listening. Many colored people are deeply interested in the proceedings, and those who attend in the Court Room are of a class fully competent to comprehend the case and understand it in all its phases.

      The witness Mitchell, on his cross examination, displayed a good deal of Kentucky pride, and instructed the audience in the ways of the people “down where he lived,” where they don’t say “shilling,” and where they carry “Arkansas tooth-picks” and raise mulat(oes) that have not a “drop of white blood in them.” – This expedition for John makes his third into Ohio catching niggers.

      The prosecution now seem to be firing rather more at random than on the examination of their first witnesses. One witness was called, but did not know anything about Bushnell’s connection with the rescue, and was withdrawn. A good deal of testimony now seems to be in the way of “feeler” as to what part the different ones of the “37” took in the matter, and no doubt is for future use.

      There are no knotty law points raised between counsel, and no speeches for “buncombe,” hence everything moves smoothly.

      The testimony of Kinney was evidently unpalatable to the Prosecution; he was their witness but testified very positively as to the intentions of the crowd being to release John from what they supposed was an illegal capture by Southerners, and not from any legal capture.

      Mr. Wack got into an unpleasant dilemma on the start, and tried his hand at arguing the case as to his violation of a rule of the Court. Mr. Wack is what may be called a flippant witness – full of “supposition” – great on drawing “inferences” and evidently elated at his position in being the center of observation for the time of a full court room. He, however, disclaimed any wish to testify and said he had rather he had been ruled out of court.

      Mr. Wack was the landlord of the house patronized by the Kentuckians. Mr. Wack’s testimony covered a good deal of paper but was so thin in substance when boild down that it did not amount to much.