[813] For the first trial (1845), see 3 _McLean's Reports_, 631; _s. c. 5 Western Law Journal_, 25; 7 _Federal Cases_, 1100; for the second trial (1847), see 10 _Law Reporter_, 395; _s. c._ 5 _Western Law Journal_, 206; 7 _Federal Cases_, 1093; for the third trial (1849), see 5 _McLean's Reports_, 64; _s. c._ 7 _Western Law Journal_, 222; 7 _Federal Cases_, 1095. See also _The Firelands Pioneer_, July, 1888, pp. 41, 42. It will have been noticed that the Van Zandt and Parish cases were in litigation for about five years each. A famous Illinois case, that of Dr. Richard Eells, occupied the attention of the courts and of the public more or less during an entire decade. The incidents that gave rise to this case occurred in Adams County, Illinois, in 1842. In that year Mr. Eells was indicted for secreting a slave owing service to Chauncey Durkee, of Missouri, and was convicted and sentenced to pay a fine of $400 and the costs of the prosecution. The case was taken on writ of error first to the Supreme Court of the state, and after the death of Mr. Eells to the Supreme Court of the United States. In both instances the judgment of the original tribunal was confirmed. The decision of the federal court was reached at its December term for 1852.[814] [814] 5 _Illinois Reports_, 498-518; 14 _Howard's Reports_, 13, 14. It was sometimes made clear in the courts that the defendants in cases arising under the Fugitive Slave laws were persons in the habit of evading the requirements of these laws. This is true of the case of Ray _vs._ Donnell and Hamilton, which was tried before the United States Circuit Court in Indiana, at the May term, 1849. A slave woman, Caroline, and her four children fled from Kemble County, Kentucky, and found shelter in a barn near Clarksburg, Indiana. Here they were discovered by Woodson Clark, a farmer living in the neighborhood, who took measures immediately to inform their master, while the slaves were removed to a fodder-house for safe-keeping. In some way Messrs. Donnell and Hamilton learned of the capture of the negroes by Mr. Clark, and secured a writ of habeas corpus in their behalf; but, if the testimony of Mr. Clark's son, supported by certain circumstantial evidence, is to be credited, the blacks were released from custody by the personal efforts of the defendants, and not by legal process. Considerable evidence conflicting with that just mentioned appears to have had little weight with the jury, for it gave a verdict for the claimant and assessed his damages at $1,500.[815] [815] 4 _McLean's Reports_, 504-515.