“I have great respect for you,” rejoined the officer.  “I should be sorry to search your house by virtue of the warrant.  I hope you will consent to my doing so without.”

“There is no need of delicacy on this occasion,” replied Friend Hopper.  “Thou hadst better proceed to the extent of thy authority.”

“You give your consent, do you?” inquired the officer.

He answered, “No, I do not.  If thou hast a warrant, of course my consent is not necessary.  Proceed to the full extent of thy authority.  But if thou goest one inch beyond, thou wilt have reason to repent of it.”

The party left the house utterly discomfited.  He afterward learned that they had applied for a search-warrant, but could not procure one.

The first step in the process of securing the lad’s freedom was to obtain proof that he had been in Philadelphia six months.  The landlord of the hotel where the master lodged, refused to say anything on the subject, being unwilling to offend his lodger.  But the servants were under no such prudential restraint; and from them Friend Hopper obtained testimony sufficient for his purpose.  He then wrote a note to the alderman that he would be at his office with the lad at nine o’clock next morning, and requesting him to inform the claimant.  In the mean time, he procured a writ of habeas corpus, to have it in readiness in case circumstances required it.  The claimant made his appearance at the appointed hour, and stated how he had come to Philadelphia on a visit, and brought a slave to attend upon him.  He descanted quite largely upon the courtesy due from citizens of one state to those of another state.

Friend Hopper was about to reply, when the magistrate interrupted him by saying, “I shall not interfere with the citizens of other states.  I shall surrender the boy to his master.  If he thinks he has a legal claim to his freedom, let him prosecute it in New-Jersey.”

Friend Hopper said nothing, but gave a signal to have the writ served.  The magistrate was highly offended, and asked in an angry tone, “What was your object in procuring a writ of habeas corpus?”

Friend Hopper replied, “From my knowledge of thee, I anticipated the result that has just occurred; and I determined to remove the case to a tribunal where I had confidence that justice would be done in the premises.”

The Court of Common Pleas was then in session.  The case was brought before it the next day, and after the examination of two or three witnesses, the lad was declared free.

A SLAVE HUNTER DEFEATED.