Face it, it was Curtis and not Taney who was known in Boston as the "slave-catcher judge." Surely you remember when abolitionists tried to rescue the fugitive slave Anthony Burns. In 1854, Benjamin Curtis supported the indictment of the abolitionists. In the 1836 case of
a master brought his negro property to Massachusetts. Curtis argued that Massachusetts should not free a slave accompanying a visiting master. Curtis supported the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850. There is your "slave-catcher judge."
Mr. Taney opened the case to the jury, on the part of the Rev. Mr. Gruber. The statement, he said, made by the District Attorney, had informed the jury, of the interesting principles involved in the trial then pending before them. It was, indeed, an important case, in which the community, as well as the accused, had a deep interest. The prosecution, said Mr. Taney, is without precedent in the judicial proceedings of Maryland, and as the jury are the judges of the law, as well as the fact; it becomes my duty, not only to state the evidence we are about to offer, but to shew you the grounds on which we mean to rest the defence.
I need not, continued Mr. Taney, tell you, that [33] by the liberal and happy institutions of this state, the rights of conscience and the freedom of speech, are fully protected. No man can be prosecuted for preaching the articles of his religious creed; unless, indeed, his doctrine is immoral, and calculated to disturb the peace and order of society. And on subjects of national policy may, at all times, be freely and fully discussed in the pulpit, or elsewhere, without limitation or restraint. Therefore, the Reverend gentleman, whose cause I am now advocating, cannot be liable to prosecution in any form of proceeding, for the sermon mentioned by the District Attorney, unless his doctrines were immoral, and calculated to disturb the peace and order of society. The sermon, in itself, could in no other way be an offence against the laws. If his doctrines were not immoral, if the principles he maintained were not contrary to the peace and good order of society, he had an undoubted right to preach them, and to clothe them in such language, and to enforce them by such facts and arguments, as to him seemed proper. It would be nothing to the purpose, to say, that he offended or that he alarmed some, or all of his hearers. Their feelings, or their fears, would not alter the character of his doctrine, or take from him a right secured to him by the constitution and laws of the state.
But, in this case, he is not accused of preaching immoral, or dangerous doctrine. It is not the charge contained in the indictment. The preaching of such a sermon, is not laid as the offence. He is accused of [34] an attempt to excite insubordination and insurrection among our slaves: and the intention of the preacher is the essence of the crime. On this indictment, no matter what doctrines he preached; no matter what language he used; yet his doctrines, or his language could not amount to the crime now charged against him. They would be evidence, I admit, to shew his intention; but they would be nothing more than evidence, and could not constitute the offence itself.
(Mr. Taney then read, and explained to the jury, the different counts contained in the indictment.) You will perceive, continued Mr. Taney, by the explanation I have given you, that the intent of the accused, is the great object of your enquiry. The charge is a grave and serious one. It is necessary, in order to support the prosecution, that the wicked intention, charged in the indictment, should be made out by proof. The guilty design is the crime imputed to him. You must be satisfied, before you can say he is guilty, that such was his intent; such the object he wished to accomplish; and that such were the purposes for which his sermon was preached. For it is upon this sermon alone that this prosecution is founded.
It is true, said Mr. Taney, that the words used by him, are evidence of his intentions. But they are not conclusive evidence: nor are they the only evidence, from which the intent is to be gathered. His language is a circumstance, from which you may infer [35] his design. It is nothing more. And there are a variety of other circumstances, equally entitled to weight, and equally proper for the consideration of the jury. For, when it is alledged, on the part of the prosecution, that a clergyman of a Christian society, while professing to be engaged in the high and solemn duties of religion, was, in truth, seeking to produce insubordination and insurrection among the slaves, and a detached part of his sermon, is relied upon as the proof of his guilt; the party accused, has a right to refer you, in proof of his innocence, to the general scope and object of his sermon: to the other topics introduced and discussed: to the occasion on which it was preached: to the character of the congregation to whom it was addressed: to the opinions known to be held by the society to which he belongs: and above all, to the history of his own life, which, in this instance, would, of itself, be abundantly sufficient, to repel such a charge, bottomed on such evidence. Upon all of these circumstances Mr. Gruber relies for his defence; and I now proceed more particularly to state them, as you will by and by hear them in proof.
You have already been told, that Mr. Gruber is a minister of the Methodist Episcopal Church. And it is not necessary to tell you, that the religious society to which he belongs, is nearly as numerous as any other society of Christians in this state; and the equal of any other, in the general order and decorum of their behaviour, in their moral deportment, and in [36] their habits of obedience to the laws. It was, at a very early period of his life, that Mr. Gruber became a member of this society, and took upon himself, the duties of a minister of the gospel. In this vocation, he has faithfully laboured, for more than twenty years; and he now fills a post of high rank, and great confidence, in his church; the reward of his fervent piety and unwearied zeal. We shall also prove to you by a most respectable witness, a minister of the same church, whose duty it has often been, according to the discipline of that society, to examine into the conduct and character of the accused, that during the whole course of his ministry, the Reverend gentleman who is now on his trial, has sustained a character of spotless integrity.
It is well known, that the gradual and peaceable abolition of slavery in these states, is one of the objects, which the Methodist society have steadily in view. No slave-holder is allowed to be a minister of that church. Their preachers are accustomed, in their sermons, to speak of the injustice and oppressions of slavery. The opinion of Mr. Gruber on this subject, nobody could doubt. And if any slave-holder believed it dangerous to himself, his family, or the community, to suffer his slaves to learn, that all slavery is injust and oppressive; and persuade himself, that they would not of themselves, be able to make the discovery: it was in his power to prevent them from attending the assemblies, where such doctrines were likely to be preached. Mr. Gruber [37] did not go to the slaves: they came to him. They could not have come, if their masters had chosen to prevent them.
In August, 1818, a Camp-meeting of the Methodist society was held in Washington county. At this meeting, it was the duty of Mr. Gruber to attend. He did attend, and from his official station in the society, the general superintendance, and direction of the meeting, was in his hands. On one of the days of the meeting, when the usual hour of evening preaching had arrived, the gentleman who had been depended upon to fulfil that duty, was prevented by indisposition. It was the duty of Mr. Gruber, to provide for this unexpected emergency. He applied to several of his brethren, and requested them to address the congregation. But it so happened, that from different causes, not now material to be stated, he was unsuccessful in all his applications: and as nobody else could be found to supply the place of the sick brother, Mr. Gruber was compelled to do it himself. He undertook the task without preparation, without time for reflection, and upon the sudden and unexpected call of the moment. I state, said Mr. Taney, these facts, so much in detail, because this sermon, is the sole foundation of the charge against him. The language used on that occasion, is the only fact, relied upon to prove him guilty of the wicked intention of raising an insurrection among the slaves: and converting this peaceful and flourishing state into a horrible scene of rapine and murder.
[38] At the time this sermon was preached there were present about three thousand persons, of whom only about four hundred were people of colour, as they are now generally called. These were separated from the whites, according to the custom on such occasions, and placed together, behind the stand, from which the preacher addressed the congregation. Many of the most respectable gentlemen of Washington county, and many of the principal slave-holders were there, when the sermon in question was delivered. Yet it is at this meeting, thus constituted, that he is accused of conspiring against the peace of this state. It is, in his public address, to this assembly, that he is said to have developed his profligate designs. If he did mean to stir up the slaves to insurrection, it must, at least, be admitted, that he at the same time put the masters on their guard.
The address of Mr. Gruber, occupied rather more than one hour. His subject was national sin; and after enumerating and rebuking some offences which, he supposed, the people of this country to be but too prone to commit, he, in the conclusion of his discourse, spoke about fifteen minutes and no more, on slavery, and the treatment of slaves. It is not alledged, that he said any thing in the preceding part of his sermon, calculated, in any degree, to support the prosecution. During all that time, he made no allusion to the condition of master or slave. And in the latter part of his discourse, when he did speak of them, and used the language on which this prosecution [39] is founded, he addressed himself particularly to the masters. His appeal to his hearers, on this subject, was directed exclusively to the whites. The impression was intended to be made on them. And when the language used by him, shall be detailed to you by the witnesses, you will find, that he could not have designed, in that part of his discourse, to influence the conduct of the slaves, but was obviously, and clearly, seeking to reform the hearts of the masters.
There may, and probably will be, a difference among the witnesses, as to the words used on this occasion, by the Reverend preacher. There will always be this difference, where there are many hearers. For some will be negligent, while others are attentive: some hear only detached parts: others hear the whole: some are roused to attention, only when the angry passions are inflamed by an expected attack on some favourite opinion; and others, listen to the whole discourse, in the spirit of soberness and humility, for the purpose of receiving and profiting by the instruction. And in this case, a difference is more especially to be looked for, because the sermon produced a good deal of excitement, and much warm conversation among different persons, even on the ground: so that the remarks of irritated individuals, became intimately blended in the mind, with the language of the preacher, and make it difficult, after the lapse of some months, for those who had listened carelessly, to separate the one from the other. But [40]we shall be able to fix, beyond doubt, the language actually used by him. For we shall produce a most respectable witness, who listened attentively to the whole discourse, who was near the preacher during the whole time, and who, on the day afterwards, while it was yet fresh in his mind, wrote down the heads of the discourse, and wrote out, in full, what may be termed the offensive part of it. His statement too, will be corroborated by the testimony of a multitude of other witnesses, concurring with him in all the material parts. We shall, therefore, confidently rely on it, as containing truly and accurately the words delivered. And from such a sermon, as the witness will detail, preached by such a man, on such an occasion, and under such circumstances, without any other act of his life, to aid the prosecution: I must be allowed to say, continued Mr. Taney, that no intelligent mind, free from the influence of passion and prejudice, can infer the guilty design charged in this indictment.
The learned District Attorney has said, that the language of Mr. Gruber was injudicious: that it was not calculated to do good: that it would necessarily irritate and offend the masters, and make the slaves more dissatisfied with their unhappy condition. And it may, in the progress of this trial, be argued on the part of the prosecution, that, his principles on the subject of slavery, were wrong; that the assertion of his opinions, to a congregation mixed, like the one to which he was speaking, was impolitic and dangerous, [41] and likely to produce insubordination and disturbance among the slaves. Now, if all this could be truly said of this memorable sermon; if the Reverend preacher merited all these reproaches, yet, if you should believe that his motives were pure, if you think him innocent of any design to produce this mischief, he would, still, be entitled to a verdict of acquittal. For he is not now on trial, for preaching doctrines calculated to disturb the peace and order of society. That is not the offence charged in this indictment; and you are well aware, that a man indicted for one offence, cannot, on his trial, on that indictment, be convicted of another and a different offence. And if the learned attorney for the state, shall be able to satisfy you that the opinions of Mr. Gruber on slavery, and the treatment of slaves, are unsound: that his arguments were injudicious and impolitic: that his language was inflamatory, and calculated to produce evil: still he will not have advanced one step towards the accomplishment of his object, until he can prove to you, that these opinions were uttered, these arguments were used, and this language employed, with the criminal intention, and for the wicked purpose laid in this indictment. I might, therefore, safely rest the defence on this ground, and yield to the attorney for the state all the advantage, he can derive, from placing my client, in this respect, in the wrong. For the circumstances I have before stated, will, in my humble judgment, put the integrity of his motives, beyond all question. And whatever may be thought, or said, of the intemperance of his zeal, no [42] body, who listens to the proof, will be able to doubt the sincerity of his heart.
But the Reverend gentleman, continued Mr. Taney, merits a defence on very different principles. The counsel, to whom he has confided his cause, cannot content themselves with a cold and reluctant acquittal, and abandon Mr. Gruber, without defence, to all the obloquy and reproach, which his enemies have industriously, and most unjustly heaped upon him. We cannot consent to buy his safety by yielding to passion, prejudice, and avarice, the control of future discussions, on this great and important question. He must not surrender up the civil and religious rights, secured to him in common with others, by the constitution of this most favoured nation. Mr. Gruber feels, that it is due to his own character; to the station he fills; to the respectable society of Christians in which he is a minister of the gospel, not only to defend himself from this prosecution, but also to avow, and to vindicate here, the principles he maintained in his sermon. There is no law that forbids us to speak of slavery as we think of it. Any man has a right to publish his opinions on that subject whenever he pleases. It is a subject of national concern, and may at all times be freely discussed. Mr. Gruber did quote the language of our great act of national independence, and insisted on the principles contained in that venerated instrument. He did rebuke those masters, who, in the exercise of power, are deaf to the calls of humanity; and he warned them of [43] the evils they might bring upon themselves. He did speak with abhorrence of those reptiles, who live by trading in human flesh, and enrich themselves by tearing the husband from the wife -- the infant from the bosom of the mother: and this I am instructed was the head and front of his offending. Shall I content myself, continued Mr. Taney, with saying he had a right to say this? that there is no law to punish him? So far is he from being the object of punishment in any form of proceeding, that we are prepared to maintain the same principles, and to use, if necessary, the same language here in the temple of justice, and in the presence of those who are the ministers of the law. A hard necessity, indeed, compels us to endure the evil of slavery for a time. It was imposed upon us by another nation, while we were yet in a state of colonial vassalage. It cannot be easily, or suddenly removed. Yet while it continues, it is a blot on our national character, and every real lover of freedom, confidently hopes that it will be effectually, though it must be gradually, wiped away; and earnestly looks for the means, by which this necessary object may be best attained. And until it shall be accomplished: until the time shall come when we can point without a blush, to the language held in the declaration of independence, every friend of humanity will seek to lighten the galling chain of slavery, and better, to the utmost of his power, the wretched condition of the slave. Such was Mr. Gruber's object in that part of his sermon, of which I am now speaking. Those who have complained of him, [44] and reproached him, will not find it easy to answer him: unless complaints, reproaches and persecution shall be considered an answer.
I have now done, continued Mr. Taney, with stating the testimony we are about to offer, and marking out the grounds on which our defence will be taken. But there is one other topic, on which it may be proper to remark, before I conclude the opening of the case.
The sermon in question, was preached in Washington county, and this indictment was found by the Grand Jury for that county. The cause has been removed to Frederick, upon the application of the accused. This circumstance, sometimes creates suspicions unfavourable to the character and standing of the party who applies for the removal. If he has been long an inhabitant of the county in which he is indicted, there may be some ground for these suspicions: but even then, they cannot be allowed, in the least degree, to affect the verdict. In this case, however, Mr. Gruber was as much a stranger in Washington, as he is in Frederick. He never resided in that county, and therefore, has not shunned the decision of the men who knew him. He has removed his cause from one body of strangers, to be decided, indeed, by another body of men, who are equally unacquainted with him. His motive for doing so, I will briefly explain to you. Mr. Gruber, as I have already told you, was a [45] stranger in Washington, and consequently incapable of deciding how far, a fair and impartial trial, could be there expected. He, of course, submitted himself on this point, to the decision of his counsel, and formed his own opinion upon the advice and information derived from them. I am by no means prepared to say, that if he had gone to trial in Washington, his cause would not have been patiently heard, and impartially decided, by a jury of that county. But it was well known that great pains had been taken to inflame the public mind against him. The Grand Jury of that county had found this indictment to be true: and on that jury were men of high standing and great influence in the county. Many of the members of that body, I know personally, and respect highly. They are incapable, I am sure, of wilfully doing wrong. Yet they are like the rest of us, but men! frail men! and liable to be influenced by the impulse of passion or prejudice without being aware of it. Knowing, as I did, all the circumstances of this case and being firmly convinced that there was no just cause for instituting this prosecution, the finding of this indictment, by a body of men so respectable as the Grand Jury, was of itself sufficient evidence to my mind, that the liberty and reputation of Mr. Gruber, ought not to be hazarded on a trial there. I so advised him, said Mr. Taney, in the strongest terms; and if blame is to rest upon any one, for the removal of the cause, I acknowledge that to me, and not to Mr. Gruber it ought to be imputed. Yet, I cannot think, that the exercise of a constitutional right can be [46] matter of censure against the client or his counsel: nor can it be a reproach to any one, that he is willing to abide the verdict of a jury of Frederick county.
