the "Yankees" were for slavery, especially in states closer to what became the Confederacy, such as Pennsylvania, Ohio and Delaware. Riot There were more than a few abolitionists in Pennsylvania and Enos Hawley, a Quaker citizen of Muncy, was one of the most prominent abolitionists in Lycoming County. Hawley, a tanner by trade, was, like most Quakers, a strong supporter of the abolition of slavery. Hawley invited a speaker (whose name is now unknown) to come to Muncy to speak against slavery. This speaker and his speech set off a tremendous riot that lead to the near destruction of a local schoolhouse and the controversial pardoning of the rioters by Pennsylvania Governor David R. Porter. The abolitionist speaker gave his speech at a one-room school in Muncy in April 1842. During the course of the speech eighteen men gathered outside the schoolhouse. They began throwing rocks and other debris at the school, breaking all of the windows. Enos Hawley and the guest speaker were both injured in the assault. Upon fleeing the school, the abolitionists were pelted with eggs. The rioters followed Hawley and his guest to Hawley's home at the corner of High and Main Streets in Muncy. They continued the assault on Hawley's home until after midnight, when the local law enforcement officers were able to quell the riot and arrest the rioters. Trial and pardons The rioters were indicted in September and went to trial in October, when thirteen of the eighteen rioters were found guilty as charged. The jury's deliberation was quite a long process. Abraham Updegraff was a member of the jury who was the driving force that led to the conviction of the rioters. Updegraff, an ardent abolitionist who was a vital member of the Underground Railroad in Lycoming County, was able to convince his peers that the rioters deserved to be punished. The first jury vote was eleven to one in favor of acquittal, with Updegraff being the lone dissenter finding the men guilty. Updegraff argued that "we have been sworn to try this case according to the law and the evidence presented and that if no contradictory evidence offered by the defendants than we could do nothing more than to convict them." He was also able to make his argument in German, which was the native tongue of three other jurors. The second vote was nine finding the men "guilty" to three