PHILADELPHIA, Wednesday, Oct. 5, 1853.
    Yesterday afternoon, just after the adjournment of the Court, a warrant of arrest was served upon John Jenkins and James Crozier, U. S. Deputies Marshal, charging them with a riot and an assault and battery on Bill Thomas, an alleged fugitive slave, with an attempt to kill him. The warrant was issued by a magistrate of Wilkesbarre, on the oath of a man named Gildersleeve, of that borough, and was served on the Deputies Marshal by the high constable of Wilkesbarre. The warrant also includes the name of George Wynkoop, upon whom it has not yet been served, Mr. Wynkoop being absent from the city.
    Mr. Jackson, for the high Constable of Wilkesbarre, read his answer to the Court, in which he admits that he held the Deputies Marshal in custody, but alleged that he did so by legal authority, having arrested them on a warrant issued by Gilbert Burrows, a magistrate of Wilkesbarre, on the action of Wm. C. Gildersleeve, a citizen of Wilkesbarre.
    Judge Grier, sternly--Who is Wm. C. Gildersleeve?
    Marshal Wynkoop--Your Honor, he is an Abolitionist of Wilkesbarre.
    Mr. Jackson--He is a respectable storekeeper of that borough.
    Judge Grier--Was the assault and battery committed on him?
    District-Attorney Ashmead--No, sir; he does not allege it.
    Judge Grier--Oh! oh?
    District Attorney Ashmead said he would now read the petition for the habeas corpus. The petition sets forth all the facts of the case from the moment the claim was laid before U. S. Commissioner Ingraham up to the arrest of the fugitive and the service of the warrant on the present occasion.
    Mr. Ashmead read from the 4th vol. of statutes at large, act of March 5th, 1833, which gives to a United States Judge the power to discharge on habeas corpus, when one of the United States officers is arrested. He therefore asked that the defendants be discharged.
    Mr. Jackson replied. He said that the law did not authorize the officers to execute their process in a riotous manner, as in this case.
    Judge Grier--I shall take the facts set forth in the petition to be true, unless the other side wish to offer testimony.
    Mr. Jackson then went on to argue that the act of Congress had no reference to acts committed against the laws of a State, nor could the United States interfere to prevent the execution of the laws of a State. He asked that the defendants be remanded to take their trial, or be required to give bail.
    D. P. Brown followed on the same side. He said that the question was a very simple one, and he felt pleasure in approaching it. The duties of the United States and the individual States were reciprocal, and a reciprocal confidence should be exhibited. There was little or no conflict in the case, which could not be easily reconciled.
    Judge Grier--I take it for granted that the facts set forth in the petition are true, and I shall rely upon them unless they are shown to be false.
    Mr.Brown--We rely upon the warrant of the magistrate, issued upon the oath of a citizen.
    Judge Grier--If you deny what is set forth in the petition, I will hear the facts in the case. I will not have the officers of the United States harassed at every step in the performance of their duties by every petty magistrate who chooses to harass them, or by any unprincipled interloper who chooses to make complaints against them--for I know something of the man who makes this complaint. The laws of the United States are binding upon me, and I will not take the warrant issued in this case as sufficient to hold these officers.
    Mr. Brown--Your Honor will perceive, that if murder had been committed, we could not prosecute in a United States court for it.
    Judge Grier--There has been no murder committed here. They were acting under a process of the United States, legally issued.
    District Attorney Ashmead said the case was free from difficulty. He called upon the Court to vindicate the laws of the United States and its own officers, who were constantly subjected to the most harassing conduct on the part of men disposed to set the Laws of the Union at defiance.
    Judge Grier--I shall act as if I had the evidence before me, unless the other side are prepared to deny the facts set forth in the petition. In that case, I shall put the matter off, to give them a chance to submit their testimony. The officers, I suppose, arrested the fugitive, and he resisted; they then used force, to hold him in custody.
    Mr. Brown--We deny this. We say that he did not resist, and that he was cruelly beaten. We shall show such a case of barbarity as will appeal you Honor.
    District Attorney Ashmead--They allege that the officers executed their duties in a riotous manner. They went to the borough, of course, to serve the process which was put in their hands by a U. S. Commissioner, upon the oath of a competent party, countersigned by a Judge of the U. S. Court. They executed the process, and were resisted by their prisoner even to the drawing of a knife upon them, which was put into his hands by one of the bystanders. They were compelled to use sufficient force to secure him, and this the opposite party call rioting. It is not Bill who sues here. They well know that he has fled beyond the jurisdiction of the court. To hold the officers to answer, there must be some excess of authority shown in what they did, and the proof is upon them. Every officer is prima facie supposed to act in a legal manner. Is every magistrate in the State, numbering probably two thousand, to have power to issue his warrant of arrest against the officers of the United States upon the intervention of any interloper who has the hardihood to swear that the officers exceeded their authority? If this is to be the case, the Marshal himself may be arrested under their warrant, for an alleged improper exercise of his duties, or even the Judges of the Court or the U. S. District Attorney may be subjected to the same annoyance.
    Mr. Brown--Your Honor, there was no resistance at all. We put our case upon the excess of authority on the part of the officers. If your Honor is determined to go behind the warrant of the magistrate, we ask to be permitted to show the facts in the case, which will be found to be of the most horrible character.
    District Attorney Ashmead asked that the officers be discharged from custody.
    Judge Grier--If this man Gildersleeve fails to make out the facts set forth in the warrant of arrest, I will request the Prosecuting Attorney of Luzerne County to prosecute him for perjury. I know that the United States have limited authority; but where they have it, it is clear, undoubted and conclusive, that theirs is the sovereign authority. If any tuppenny magistrate, or any unprincipled interloper can come in, and cause to be arrested, the officers of the United States, whenever they please, it is a sad state of affairs. After the man against whom the United States warrant was issued has run away, some fellow intervenes and runs to a State Judge for his interference, and has the United States officers arrested. There was a case recently of this kind, and to that I now allude. If habeas corpuses are to be taken out after that manner, I will have an indictment sent to the U. S. Grand Jury against the person who applies for the writ, or assists in getting it, the lawyer who defends it, and the sheriff who serves the writ, to see whether the United States officers are to be arrested and harassed, whenever they attempt to serve a process of the United States. I speak of what is daily done to thwart the United States in the exercise of her lawful authority. I will see that my officers are protected. When will you be ready with your proofs in this matter, Mr. Brown?
    Mr. Brown--This day one week.
    Judge Grier--Then upon that day I will hear your proof.
    The case then went over until that time.
    [Judge Grier, in this case, seems disposed to sustain the view that was suggested by District Attorney Ashmead in the recent case of Bill Fisher, when the U. S. Marshal was arrested.]

Source:

Unknown, "Wilkes-Barre Slave Case," The Luzerne Union, Wilkes-Barre, Pa., Wednesday, 12 October 1853, page 2, col. 2.