have done it? Might they not have gone without being
enticed at all? We wished to call the slaves themselves
as witnesses, but the law shuts up their mouths. Can
you, without any evidence, say that Drayton enticed
them, and that by no other means could they come
onboard? Presumptive evidence, as laid down in the
book--an acknowledged and unquestioned authority--from
which I have read, ought to be equally strong with the
evidence of one unimpeached witness swearing positively
to the fact. Are you as sure that Drayton enticed those
slaves as if that fact had been positively sworn to by
one witness, testifying that he stood by and saw and
heard it? If you are not, then, under the law as laid
down by the court, you can not find him guilty.

"_Thursday, Aug_. 13.

"_Carlisle_, for the prisoner.--The sun under which we
draw our breath, the soil we tottle over, in childhood,
the air we breathe, the objects that earliest attract
our attention, the whole system of things with which our
youth is surrounded, impress firmly upon us ideas and
sentiments which cling to us to our latest breath, and
modify all our views. I trust I am man enough always to
remember this, when I hear opinions expressed and views
maintained by men educated under a system different from
that prevailing here, no matter how contrary those views
and opinions may be to my own.

"It may surprise those of you who know me,--the moral