The Pennsylvania Riot - Was It Treason

TO THE EDITOR OF THE TRIBUNE: - The late Slave Case at Christiana, in Lancaster County, attracts much attention and is the subject of many comments in the public papers.
One class of writers assert that this case involves Treason and Rebellion against the United States Government; another declares that it is Murder in its most atrocious form - while a larger class denounce the affray in unmeasured terms, for the purpose of making political capital out of the occurrence.

It is a lamentable state of things when we see men who are intelligent, and good citizens in their private relations, ready to cry out against another class of their fellow-citizens and denounce them as traitors, murderers and felons, to gratify political ambition.
Innocent persons are accused, and public opinion, Judges and Juries, are to be forestalled to make judicial immolations for the purpose of satisfying the demands of a public frenzy.
This particular outcry has had many periodical spasms in its day. In earlier times we read that a certain High Priest once asked the multitude "Why, what harm hath he done? But they cried out more and more, Crucify him! Crucify him!" This same feeling is now rampant in certain high quarters in regard to the colored people, who defended themselves and their firesides at Christiana, against the lawless assaults and attacks of an armed party of negro hunters from the State of Maryland.

We have seen, in the case of Prigg against the Commonwealth, what judicial infatuation will do, and how much crime it will tolerate for political affect. That was a case where two free-born children, in the State of Pennsylvania, were kidnapped in the night-time, and taken from their father's house by an armed mob surrounding it. The two children were carried away into the State of Maryland and sold into perpetual slavery. Yet we find that a majority of the Judges of the Supreme Court of the United States adjudged and pronounced this act to be lawful.
Just so with the present case. We have very strong fears that innocent persons are to be judicially sacrificed on the trials of these cases to appease political clamors. We hope better things, but our hopes may be disappointed.

In a work of very high authority we read that every man's house is his castle: that he is entitled to defend the same against all unlawful intruders. - 3 Blackstone Com. p. 223.
"That in civil society the laws come into the assistance of the weaker party, and besides that, they leave him this natural right of killing the aggressor if he can; they also protect and avenge him in case the might of the assailant is too powerful. That the law of England has so particular and tender a regard to the immunity of a man's house that it styles it his castle and will never suffer it to be violated with impunity. For this reason no outward doors can be broken open to execute any civil process.

Now we are constantly told by the advocates of the Fugitive Slave law, that is a civil process which the Marshal or officer executes when he arrests the accused, and that the whole proceeding is one in relation to property, and therefore the Act of Congress on this subject must not be treated as a criminal statute, but must be regarded as not coming within that clause or prohibition of the Constitution wherein Congress are forbidden to pass ex post facto laws. This construction of the Fugitive Slave law we have no doubt is correct. Besides all this, the fourth amendment of the Constitution of the United States provides in express terms

"That the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched or things to be seized."

Testing the late homicide case at Christiana by the rights guarantied to the people by the Constitution of the United States, we find that the colored people were assailed, contrary to law, by a band of armed men, who had no warrant describing the place to be searched, who had no authority to assail and break open houses; that a private dwelling-house, in the peaceable occupation of its owner, was broken into by an armed mob without a warrant describing any place to be searched; that the assailants first drew their deadly weapons, fired their pistols upon the inhabitants and inmates of the house where the colored people were found, and after creating a riot and affray on their part, the claimant of the slave and his son were shot by the inmates of the house in self-defense.

We ask any sober-minded man whether this homicide is treason against the laws of the United States? Is it Murder? Is it an offense partaking of Felony? Certainly not.
The whole aspect of this case, on the facts made out by the story and conduct of the assailants, presents a very different state of things from that of Treason against the laws of the United States, Murder or Felony committed by the colored people who were assailed while peaceably assembled in their dwelling-houses, the advocates of the Slave powers and of the Fugitive Slave laws to the contrary notwithstanding.

I would by no means have it understood that I gave any sanction to the late violence in Lancaster County - I regret it as much as any man, but it is no more than might be expected from men who set a just estimate on Liberty and who have no scruples in relation to War.

ISAAC T. HOPPER.

NEW YORK, 9th Mo. 29th, 1851.