Chapter III: Part 3

About three o'clock application was made to Judge Burgoyne
for a writ of _habeas corpus_, to bring the slaves before
him. This was put in the hands of Deputy Sheriff Buckingham
to serve, who, accompanied by several assistants, proceeded
to Hammond Street station-house, where the slaves were
lodged. Mr. Bennett, Deputy United States Marshal, was
unwilling to give them up, and a long time was spent
parleying between the marshal and the sheriff's officers. The
sheriff being determined that the writ should be executed,
Mr. Bennett went out to take counsel with his friends.
Finally, through the advice of Mayor Faran, Mr. Bennett
agreed to lodge the slaves in the jail, ready to be taken out
at the order of Judge Burgoyne. Mr. Buckingham obtained the
complete control of the slaves.

On the morning of the 29th, Sheriff Brashears, being advised
by lawyers that Judge Burgoyne had no right to issue his writ
for the slaves, and remembering Judge McLean's decision in
the Rosetta case, made a return on the writ of _habeas
corpus_, that the slaves were in the custody of the United
States Marshal, and, therefore, without his jurisdiction.
This returned the slaves to the custody of the Marshal. By
agreement, the parties permitted the slaves to remain in the
county jail during that day, with the understanding that
their examination should commence the next morning, before
Commissioner Pendery. An inquest had been held on the body of
the child which was killed, and a verdict was found by the
jury charging the death of the child upon the mother, who it
was said would be held under the laws of Ohio to answer the
charge of murder. An examination took place on Wednesday,
before the United States Commissioner. Time was allowed their
counsel to obtain evidence to show that they had been brought
into the State at former times by their masters. A meeting of
citizens was held on Thursday evening, to express sympathy
with the alleged fugitives.

The _Cincinnati Commercial_ of January 30, said:--The mother
is of an interesting appearance, a mulatto of considerable
intelligence of manner, and with a good address. In reply to
a gentleman who yesterday complimented her upon the looks of
her little boy, she said, "You should have seen my little
girl that--that--[she did not like to say, was killed]--that
died, that was the bird."

The _Cincinnati Gazette_, of January 30, said:--We learn that
the mother of the dead child acknowledges that she had killed
it, and that her determination was to have killed all the
children, and then destroy herself, rather than return to
slavery. She and the others complain of cruel treatment on
the part of their master, and allege that as the cause of
their attempted escape.

The coroner's jury, after examining the citizens present at
the time of the arrest, went to the jail last evening, and
examined the grandmother of the child--one of the slaves. She
testified that the mother, when she saw they would be
captured, caught a butcher knife and ran to the children,
saying she would kill them rather than to have them return to
slavery, and cut the throat of the child, calling on the
grandmother to help her kill them. The grandmother said she
would not do it, and hid under a bed.

The jury gave a verdict as follows:--That said child was
killed by its mother, Margaret Garner, with a butcher knife,
with which she cut its throat.

Two of the jurors also find that the two men arrested as
fugitives were accessories to the murder.

"The murdered child was almost white, and was a little girl
of rare beauty."

The examination of witnesses was continued until Monday,
February 4, when the commissioner listened to the arguments
of counsel until February 7th. Messrs. Jolliffe and Gitchell
appeared for the fugitives, and Colonel Chambers, of
Cincinnati, and Mr. Finnell, of Covington, Kentucky, for the
claimants of the slaves. A great number of assistants,
(amounting very nearly to five hundred,) were employed by the
United States Marshal, H.H. Robinson, from the first, making
the expenses to the United States Government very large; for
their twenty-eight days' service alone, at $2.00 per day,
amounting to over $22,000. February 8th, the case was closed,
so far as related to the three slaves of Mr. Marshall, but
the decision was postponed. The examination in regard to
MARGARET and her children was farther continued. It was
publicly stated that Commissioner Pendery had declared that
he "would not send the woman back into slavery while a charge
or indictment for murder lay against her." Colonel Chambers,
counsel for the slave-claimants, in his argument, "read
long extracts from a pamphlet entitled, 'A Northern
Presbyter's Second Letter to Ministers of the Gospel of all
Denominations, on Slavery, by Nathan Lord, of Dartmouth
College,' approving and recommending Dr. Lord's views."
Colonel Chambers having alluded, in his remarks, to Mrs. Lucy
Stone Blackwell, and said that she had sought to give a knife
to Margaret Garner, the Court gave permission to Mrs.
Blackwell to reply to Colonel C. Mrs. B. preferred not to
speak at the bar, but addressed the crowded court-room
directly after the adjournment. Her eloquent remarks will be
found in the papers of the day. At the close of the hearing,
February 14th, the commissioner adjourned his court to the
21st, afterwards to the 26th, when, he said, he would give
his decision.

Meantime the case was making some progress in the State
courts. Sheriff Brashears having made return to the Common
Pleas Court that the fugitives were in the custody of the
United States Marshal, Judge Carter said this could not be
received as a true return, as they were in the County jail,
under the sheriff's control. The sheriff then amended his
return, so as to state that the prisoners were in his
custody, as required in the writ, and this was received by
the Court. The fugitives now came fully into the charge of
the State authorities. The sheriff held them "by virtue of a
_capias_ issued on an indictment by the grand jury for
murder."

The slaves declared they would go dancing to the gallows
rather than to be sent back into slavery.

On the 26th February, Commissioner Pendery gave his decision.
First, he refused to discharge Margaret and three others from
the custody of the United States Marshal and deliver them to
the Sheriff of Hamilton County, although held to answer,
under the laws of Ohio, to the charge of murder. He then
proceeded to consider the claim of Marshall to three of the
slaves, decided it to be valid, and ordered them into
Marshall's custody. He then considered Gaines's claim to
Margaret and her three surviving children, decided that also
to be good and valid, and ordered them to be delivered into
the possession of said Gaines.

The case of the rightful custody, as between the United
States Marshal and the Ohio Sheriff also came on, February
26th before Judge Leavitt, of the United States District
Court, and was argued by counsel on both sides. On the 28th,
Judge Leavitt decided that the custody was with the United
States Marshal. The substance of Judge L.'s argument and
decision is found in the following extract.

"Judge McLean says: 'Neither this nor any other Court of the
United States, nor Judge thereof, can issue a _habeas corpus_
to bring up a prisoner who is in custody under the sentence
or execution of a State Court, for any other purpose than to
be used as a witness. And it is immaterial whether the
imprisonment be under _civil or criminal process_.' If it be
true, as there asserted, that no Federal Court can interfere
with the exercise of the proper jurisdiction of a State
Court, either in a civil or criminal case, the converse of
the proposition is equally true. And it results that a State
Court cannot take from an officer of the United States, even
on a criminal charge, the custody of a person in execution on
a civil case.

"It is said in argument that if these persons cannot be held
by the arrest of the Sheriff under the State process, the
rights and dignity of Ohio are invaded without the
possibility of redress. I cannot concur in this view. The
Constitution and laws of the United States provide for a
reclamation of these persons, by a demand on the Executive of
Kentucky. It is true, if now remanded to the claimant and
taken back to Kentucky as slaves, they cannot be said to have
fled from justice in Ohio; but it would clearly be a case
within the spirit and intention of the Constitution and the
Act of Congress, and I trust nothing would be hazarded by the
prediction that upon demand properly made upon the Governor
of Kentucky, he would order them to be surrendered to the
authorities of Ohio to answer to its violated law. I am sure
it is not going too far to say that if the strictness of the
law did not require this, an appeal to comity would not be in
vain."

Mr. Chambers said his client, Mr. Gaines, authorized him to
say that he would hold the woman Margaret, who had killed her
child, subject to the requisition of the Governor of Ohio, to
answer for any crime she might have committed in Ohio.

Judge Leavitt's decision covered the cases of the four adult
fugitives. Another legal process was going on, at the same
time, before Judge Burgoyne, of the Probate Court, viz.--a
hearing under a writ of _habeas corpus_ allowed by Judge
Burgoyne, alleging the illegal detention, by the United
States Marshal, of the three negro children, Samuel, Thomas,
and Silla Garner, which took place in the Probate Court,
before Judge B., on the afternoon of February 27.

Mr. Jolliffe said he represented the infants at the request
of their father and mother, who had solicited him to save the
children, if possible.

Messrs. Headington and Ketchum appeared for the United States
Marshal.

Judge Burgoyne intimated that, in view of the serious and
important questions involved, he should require some time to
render a decision. He intimated, however, that a majority of
the Judges of the Supreme Court having passed on the
constitutionality of the Fugitive Slave Law was no reason why
he should not take up the Constitution and read it for
himself, being sworn to support the Constitution of the
United States and the Constitution of the State of Ohio.

Mr. Ketchum suggested that his Honor was as much bound in
conscience to regard the decision of the majority of the
Judges of the United States Courts as the express provisions
of the Constitution itself.

Judge Burgoyne said, that however the decisions of the Judges
of the United States Courts might aid him in coming to a
conclusion, where the obligations of his conscience were
involved, he could not screen himself behind a decision made
by somebody else.

Judge Burgoyne subsequently decided that, in as far as the
Fugitive Slave Law was intended to suspend the writ of
_habeas corpus_--and he believed that it was so intended--it
clearly transcended the limits prescribed by the
Constitution, and is "utterly void." Judge B. required the
United States Marshal to answer to the writ on the following
Friday; and on his neglect to do so, fined and imprisoned
him. Judge Leavitt, of the United States Court, soon released
the Marshal from prison.

The _Cincinnati Columbian_, of February 29, gave the
following account:--The last act of the drama of the
fugitives was yesterday performed by the rendition of the
seven persons whose advent into the city, under the bloody
auspices of murder, caused such a sensation in the community.
After the decision of Judge Leavitt, Sheriff Brashears
surrendered the four fugitives in his custody, under a
_capias_ from an Ohio court, to United States Marshal
Robinson. An omnibus was brought to the jail, and the
fugitives were led into it--a crowd of spectators looking on.

Margaret was in custody of Deputy-Marshal Brown. She appeared
greatly depressed and dispirited. The little infant, Silla,
was carried by Pfc. Russell, the door-keeper of the United
States Court, and was crying violently. Pollock, the reporter
of the proceedings in the United States Court, conducted
another of the fugitives, and all were safely lodged in the
omnibus, which drove down to the Covington ferry-boat; but,
although a large crowd followed it, no hootings or other
signs of excitement or disapprobation were shown.

On arriving at the Kentucky shore, a large crowd was in
attendance, which expressed its pleasure at the termination
of the long proceedings in this city by triumphant shouts.
The fugitives were escorted to the jail, where they were
safely incarcerated, and the crowd moved off to the Magnolia
Hotel, where several toasts were given and drank. The crowd
outside were addressed from the balcony by H.H. Robinson,
Esq., United States Marshal for the Southern District of
Ohio, who declared that he had done his duty and no more, and
that it was a pleasure to him to perform an act that added
another link to the glorious chain that bound the Union.
[What a _Union_! For what "glorious" purposes!]

Mr. Finnell, attorney for the claimants, said he never loved
the Union so dearly as now. It was proved to be a substantial
reality.

Judge Flinn also addressed to the crowd one of his peculiar
orations; and was followed by Mr. Gaines, owner of Margaret
and the children. After hearty cheering the crowd dispersed.

Further to signalize their triumph, the slaveholders set on
the Covington mob to attack Mr. Babb, reporter for one of the
Cincinnati papers, on the charge of being an abolitionist,
and that gentleman was knocked down, kicked, trampled on,
and would undoubtedly have been murdered, but for the
interference of some of the United States Deputy Marshals.

A legal irregularity on the part of the Sheriff was brought
to the notice of Judge Carter on the morning of February 29.
It was passed over lightly.

On the Sunday after the delivery of the slaves, they were
visited in the Covington jail by Rev. P.C. Bassett, whose
account of his interview, especially with Margaret, was
published in the _American Baptist_, and may also be found in
the _National Antislavery Standard_ of March 15, 1850.
Margaret confessed that she had killed the child. "I
inquired," says Mr. Bassett, "if she were not excited almost
to madness when she committed the act! 'No,' she replied, 'I
was as cool as I now am; and would much rather kill them at
once, and thus end their sufferings, than have them taken
back to slavery and be murdered by piece-meal.' She then told
the story of her wrongs. She spoke of her days of suffering,
of her nights of unmitigated toil, while the bitter tears
coursed their way down her cheeks."

Governor Chase, of Ohio, made a requisition upon Governor
Morehead, of Kentucky, for the surrender of Margaret Garner,
charged with murder. The requisition was taken by Joseph
Cooper, Esq. to Gov. Morehead, at Frankfort, on the _6th of
March_--an unpardonable delay in the circumstances. Gov.
Morehead issued an order for the surrender of Margaret. On
taking it to Louisville, Mr. Cooper found that Margaret, with
her infant child, and the rest of Mr. Gaines's slaves had
been sent down the river in the steamboat Henry Lewis, to be
sold in Arkansas. Thus it was that Gaines kept his pledged
word that Margaret should be surrendered upon the requisition
of the Governor of Ohio! On the passage down the Ohio, the
steamboat, in which the slaves were embarked, came in
collision with another boat, and so violently that Margaret
and her child, with many others, were thrown into the water.
About twenty-five persons perished. A colored man seized
Margaret and drew her back to the boat, but her babe was
drowned! "The mother," says a correspondent of the
_Louisville Courier_, "exhibited no other feeling than joy at
the loss of her child." So closed another act of this
terrible tragedy. The slaves were transferred to another
boat, and taken to their destination. (_See_ Mr. Cooper's
letter to Gov. Chase, dated Columbus, March 11, 1856.) Almost
immediately on the above tragic news, followed the tidings
that Gaines had determined to bring Margaret back to
Covington, Kentucky, and hold her subject to the requisition
of the Governor of Ohio. Evidently he could not stand up
under the infamy of his conduct. Margaret was brought back,
and placed in Covington jail, to await a requisition. On
Wednesday, Mr. Cox, the prosecuting-attorney, received the
necessary papers from Gov. Chase, and the next day
(Thursday), two of the Sheriffs deputies went over to
Covington for Margaret, but did not find her, as she had been
taken away from the jail the night before. The jailor said he
had given her up on Wednesday night, to a man who came there
with a written order from her master, Gaines, but could not
tell where she had been taken. The officers came back and
made a return 'not found.'

The _Cincinnati Gazette_ said,--"On Friday our sheriff
received information which induced him to believe that she
had been sent on the railroad to Lexington, thence via
Frankfort to Louisville, there to be shipped off to the New
Orleans slave market.

He immediately telegraphed to the sheriff at Louisville (who
holds the original warrant from Gov. Morehead, granted on the
requisition of Gov. Chase,) to arrest her there, and had a
deputy in readiness to go down for her. But he has received
no reply to his dispatch. As she was taken out on Wednesday
night, there is reason to apprehend that she has already
passed Louisville, and is now on her way to New Orleans.

Why Mr. Gaines brought Margaret back at all, we cannot
comprehend. If it was to vindicate his character, he was most
unfortunate in the means he selected, for his duplicity has
now placed this in a worse light than ever before, and kept
before the public the miserable spectacle of his dishonor.

We have learned now, by experience, what is that boasted
comity of Kentucky on which Judge Leavitt so earnestly
advised Ohio to rely."

The assertion of the _Louisville Journal_, that Margaret was
kept in Covington jail "ten days," and that the Ohio
authorities had been notified of the same, is pronounced to
be untrue in both particulars by the _Cincinnati Gazette_,
which paper also declares that prompt action was taken by the
governor of Ohio, and the attorney and sheriff of Hamilton
County, as soon as the fact was known.

Here we must leave MARGARET, a noble woman indeed, whose
heroic spirit and daring have won the willing, and extorted
the unwilling, admiration of hundreds of thousands. Alas for
her! after so terrible a struggle, so bloody a sacrifice, so
near to deliverance once, twice, and even a third time, to
be, by the villainy and lying or her "respectable" white
owner again engulphed in the abyss of Slavery! What her fate
is to be, it is not hard to conjecture. But friendless,
heart-stricken, robbed of her children, outraged as she has
been, not wholly without friends,

"Yea, three firm friends, more sure than day and night,
Herself, her Maker, and the angel Death."

* * * * *

Extract from a sermon recently delivered in Cleveland, Ohio, by Rev. H. BUSHNELL, from the following text: "And it was so, that all that saw it, said, There was no such deed done nor seen from the day that the children of Israel came up out of the land of Egypt unto this day: CONSIDER OF IT, TAKE ADVICE, AND SPEAK YOUR MINDS."--JUDGES XIX: 30.

A few weeks ago, just at dawn of day, might be seen a company
of strangers crossing the winter bridge over the Ohio River,
from the State of Kentucky, into the great city of our own
State, whose hundred church-spires point to heaven, telling
the travellers that in this place the God of Abraham was
worshipped, and that here Jesus the Messiah was known, and
his religion of love taught and believed. And yet, no one
asked them in or offered them any hospitality, or sympathy,
or assistance. After wandering from street to street, a poor
laboring man gave them the shelter of his humble cabin, for
they were strangers and in distress. Soon it was known abroad
that this poor man had offered them the hospitalities of his
home, and a rude and ferocious rabble soon gathered around
his dwelling, demanding his guests. With loud clamor and
horrid threatening they broke down his doors, and rushed upon
the strangers. They were an old man and his wife, their
daughter and her husband with four children; and they were of
the tribe of slaves fleeing from a bondage which was worse
than death. There was now no escape--the tribes of Israel had
banded against them. On the side of the oppressor there is
power. And the young wife and mother, into whose very soul
the iron had entered, hearing the cry of the master: "Now
we'll have you all!" turning from the side of her husband and
father, with whom she had stood to repel the foe, seized a
knife, and with a single blow nearly severed the head from
the body of her darling daughter, and throwing its bloody
corpse at his feet, exclaimed, "Yes, you _shall_ have us all!
take that!" and with another blow inflicted a ghastly wound
upon the head of her beautiful son, repeating, "Yes, you
_shall_ have us all--take that!" meanwhile calling upon her
old mother to help her in the quick work of emancipation--for
there were two more. But the pious old grandmother could not
do it, and it was now too late--the rescuers had subdued and
bound them. They were on their way back to the house of their
bondage--a life more bitter than death! On their way through
that city of churches whose hundred spires told of Jesus and
the good Father above; on their way amid the throng of
Christian men, whose noble sires had said and sung, "Give me
_liberty_, or give me _death_."

But they all tarried in the great Queen City of the West--in
chains, and in a felon's cell. There our preacher visited
them again and again. There he saw the old grandfather and
his aged companion, whose weary pilgrimage of unrequited toil
and tears was nearly at its end. And there stood the young
father and the heroic wife "Margaret." Said the preacher,
"Margaret, why did you kill your child?" "It was my own," she
said, "given me of God, to do the best a mother could in its
behalf. _I have done the best I could!_ I would have done
more and better for the rest! I knew it was better for them
to go home to God than back to slavery." "But why did you not
trust in God--why not wait and hope?" "I did wait, and then
we dared to do, and fled in fear, but in hope; hope fled--God
did not appear to save--_I did the best I could!"_

And who was this woman? A noble, womanly, amiable,
_affectionate mother_. "But was she not deranged?" Not at
all--calm, intelligent, but resolute and determined. "But was
she not fiendish, or beside herself with passion?" No, she
was most tender and affectionate, and all her passion was
that of a _mother's fondest love_. I reasoned with her, said
the preacher; tried to awaken a sense of guilt, and lead her
to repentance and to Christ. But there was no remorse, no
desire of pardon, no reception of Christ or his religion. To
her it was a religion of _slavery_, more cruel than death.
And where had she lived? where thus taught? Not down among
the rice swamps of Georgia, or on the banks of Red River. No,
but within sixteen miles of the Queen City of the West! In a
nominally Christian family--whose master was most liberal in
support of the Gospel, and whose mistress was a communicant
at the Lord's table, and a professed follower of Christ!
Here, in this family, where slavery is found in its mildest
form, she had been kept in ignorance of God's will and word,
and learned to know that the mildest form of American
slavery, at this day of Christian civilization and Democratic
liberty, was worse than death itself! She had learned by an
experience of many years, that it was so bad she had rather
take the life of her own dearest child, without the hope of
Heaven for herself, than that _it_ should experience its
unutterable agonies, which were to be found even in a
Christian family! But here are her two little boys, of eight
and ten years of age. Taking the eldest boy by the hand, the
preacher said to him, kindly and gently, "Come here, my boy;
what is your name?" "Tom, sir." "Yes, _Thomas_." "No sir,
_Tom_." "Well, Tom, how old are you?" "Three _months_." "And
how old is your little brother?" "Six _months_, sir!" "And
have you no other name but Tom?" "No." "What is your father's
name?" "Haven't got any!" "Who made you, Tom?" "Nobody!" "Did
you ever hear of God or Jesus Christ?" "No, sir." And this
was slavery in its best estate. By and by the aged couple,
and the young man and his wife, the remaining children, with
the master, and the dead body of the little one, were
escorted through the streets of the Queen City of the West by
a _national guard of armed men_, back to the great and
chivalrous State of old Kentucky and away to the shambles of
the South--back to a life-long servitude of hopeless despair.
It was a long, sad, silent procession down to the banks of
the Ohio; and as it passed, the death-knell of freedom tolled
heavily. The sovereignty of Ohio trailed in the dust beneath
the oppressor's foot, and the great confederacy of the tribes
of modern Israel attended the funeral obsequies, and made
ample provision for the necessary expenses! "And it was so,
that all that saw it, said, _There was no such deed done, nor
seen from the day that the children of Israel came up out of
the land of Egypt unto this day_; CONSIDER OF IT, TAKE
ADVICE, AND SPEAK YOUR MINDS!"

* * * * *

With the sad case of MARGARET GARNER we close, for the present, the record of the Fugitive Slave Law, as its history has been daily writing itself in our country's annals. Enactment of hell! which has marked every step of its progress over the land by suffering and by crimes,--crimes of the bloodiest dye, groanings which cannot fully be uttered; which is tracked by the dripping blood of its victims, by their terrors and by their despair; against which, and against that Wicked Nation which enacted it, and which suffers it still to stand as their LAW, the cries of the down-trodden poor go up continually into the ears of God,--cries of bitterest anguish, mingled with fiercest execrations--thousands of Rachels weeping for their children, and will not be comforted, because they _are not_.

Reader, is your patriotism of the kind which believes, with the supporters of old monarchies, that the Sovereign Power can do no wrong? Consider the long record which has been laid before you, and say if your country has not enacted a most wicked, cruel, and shameful law, which merits only the condemnation and abhorrence of every heart. Consider that this law was aimed at the life, liberty, and happiness of the poor and least-privileged portion of our people--a class whom the laws should befriend, protect, and raise up. What is the true character of a law, whose working, whose fruits are such as this meagre outline of its history shows? Is it fit that such deeds and such a law should have your sanction and support? Will you remain in a moment's doubt whether to be a friend or a foe to such a law? Will you countenance or support the man, in the church or in the state, who is not its open and out-spoken opponent? Will you not, rather, yourself trample it under foot, as alike the disgrace of your country, the enemy of humanity, and the enemy of God? And nobly join, with heart and hand, every honest man who seeks to load with the opprobrium they deserve, the law itself and everything that justifies and upholds it?

In this tract no mention is made of that great company of slaves who, flying from their intolerable wrongs and burdens, are overtaken before reaching the Free States--(alas, that we should mock ourselves with this empty name of _free_!)--and carried back into a more remote and hopeless slavery; nor of the thousands who, having fled in former years, and established themselves in industry and comfort in the Northern States, were compelled again to become fugitives, leaving their little all behind them, into a still more Northern land where, under British law, they find at last a resting-place and protection; nor to any great extent of the numerous cases of white citizens, prosecuted, fined, harassed in every way, for the _crime_ of giving shelter and succor to the hunted wanderers. To have included these--all emphatically _victims_ of the Fugitive Slave Law--would swell our tract into a volume. What a testimony against our land and our people is given by their accumulated weight! EVERY LIVING MAN AND WOMAN is GUILTY OF THIS GREAT SIN, WHO EITHER BY APOLOGY, OR BY SILENCE, LENDS IT THE LEAST SUPPORT.

--> In a record like the foregoing, dealing so largely with facts and dates, perfect accuracy is not to be expected, although much pains have been taken to make it strictly correct. Any information, on good authority, which will help to make the record more exact, or more complete, will be very gratefully received. It should be addressed to SAMUEL MAY, JR., No. 21 Cornhill, Boston, Mass.

* * * * *

Published at the office of the AMERICAN ANTI-SLAVERY SOCIETY, No. 138 Nassau Street, New York. Also to be had at the Anti-Slavery Offices, No. 21 Cornhill, Boston, and No. 31 North Fifth Street, Philadelphia; of JOEL McMILLAN, Salem, Columbiana Co., Ohio, and of JACOB WALTON, Jr., Adrian, Michigan.

[Transcriber's note: The following remain as in the original: Pittsburg, Pennsylvania; Los Angelos; Pittsburgh Saturday Visiter.]