same person; she belonged to the same church,
Ebenezer. I know the brothers Cornish, and have whipped them many a
time. I lived with Latta myself, and the Cornish, who is now a minister,
lived there; he lived there before I did, and so did the alleged
fugitive. I was then between twenty-three and twenty-five years old; she
was a strip of a girl; she was not in the family way when she came
there.

Cross-examined.--I have not seen her since 1826, until I saw her here in
the court-room; I recognized her when I first saw her here without
anybody pointing her out, and she recognized me; I have reason to know
her, because she has the same sort of a scar on her forehead that I
have; we used to make fun of each other about the marks; she went by the
name of Fanny Coates. I know nothing about her husband; she did not do
the work of a woman in 1826; she washed dishes, scrubbed, etc. I heard
her say her father and mother were dead, and that they lived somewhere
in that neighborhood; she at that time made her home with a family named
Amos.

The Judge asked to see the scar on the witness' forehead and that on the
forehead of the respondent. They were brought near the bench, and the
marks inspected, which were plainly seen on both. During this time the
infant of the respondent was entrusted to another colored woman. The
child, who, up to this time, had been quiet, raised a piteous cry and
would not be pacified. The whole scene excited a great sensation.

* * * * *

Mr. Brown then rose in reply to the plaintiff's counsel, and said: If I
consulted my own views, I should not say one syllable, in answer to the
arguments of the learned counsel upon the other side, and relying as I
do upon the evidence, and out of respect to the convenience of your
honor, I shall say very little as it is. The views of the counsel it
appears to me, are most extraordinary indeed. He seems to take it for
granted that everything that is said on the part of the witnesses for
the claimant is gospel, and that what is said on the part of the
witnesses for the respondent, is to be considered matter of suspicion.
Now I rate no man by his size, color, or position, but I appeal to you
in looking at the testimony that has been produced here, on the
different sides of the question, and judging it by its intrinsic worth,
whether there is the slightest possible comparison between the witnesses
on the part of the plaintiff, and those