Background: The Albany Freeholder, an anti-rent newspaper, was published between 1845-1854. No page numbers were used.

AFFAIRS IN DELAWARE COUNTY

South Kortright, May 2, 1845.

.
Dear Sir—I was in Delhi on Friday of last week, and after all the noise that has been made in this county of “Indian wars and Indian outrages,’ they have been able to find bills against four, only—viz.: Tompkins, Kelly, Knapp, and Burrell—the latter is only 16 years old. These were among the number who were taken by the posse who visited Roxbury first—the rest who were in jail were immediately liberated; among the latter was the widow Crosby’s son, about 16 years of age—surely the mother’s prayers have not been made in vain to the widow’s God. There was not sufficient testimony to find bills against any of the rest who were taken. Now, for a moment, look back on the whole affair. What an expense and noise there has been made in this county, —how it has been heralded through the press all over the state and Union. A posse kept up for many weeks of from 50 to four hundred men, and for what ? Aye, for what ?—there is the mystery. Four men have been guilty of an offence that subjects them to the state prison, if the Judge sees fit to send them. And that he has done with three; and the fourth equally guilty, was fined 250 dollars. The excuse made for not sending Kelly was the he plead guilty; the whole would have plead guilty if the counsel had not advised them not to do so. The jury recommended young Burrell to the mercy of the court, a lad only 16 years old, and one whose private character was above reproach, who has certificates of good character, and wise management of schools for two years, even so young. Yet there was no mercy from the court even for him, but could that court have known beforehand the feelings of sympathy that were every where shown towards the poor fellows while on their way from Delhi, I think he, were his heart not stone, would have hesitated. Every where whole families could be seen wiping their tears as they passed along guarded still by the posse. The associate counsel of the District Attorney was uncommonly severe in his comments in summing up; he seemed to be engaged heart and soul in these trials, and violently and bitterly did he prosecute them. He is a Landlord’s agent, which may account for it. I verily believe that not one of these men would have been sent to the state prison if the enormous expense had not been made. Something had to be done to sound abroad for an excuse. And what real excuse can be made ? The offence was bailable. Ample bail was offered and refused. In fact no “Anti-Renter” would be taken as bail by them. And, now, will the Comptroller audit and allow such an enormous account under the circumstances. In looking over the special act for this case it seems it is the necessary expense that the Comptroller is to audit and pay—who is to say how much of this expense was necessarily made. The people will be astonished when they come to know that no crime was committed but what was bailable. And if the authorities had admitted them to bail, they surely cannot say that the posse were needed for another moment. It is easily to be seen why the sheriff’s counselors dare not trust the supervisors to audit their accounts. They knew well that they would not be allowed by those who have watched and seen their course.

Yours, truly, T.

Transcribed for this website by Terri Nan Ahrens.