The Pennsylvania packet, or, The general advertiser — Lancaster, Pa.;Philadelphia, Pa., 1779-05-13 00:00:00, page 2

For tiie PENIN I. YLVAKIA PACKET.
BY feme Iste publications a queHion has come before
thepubY? o: u very feiious nature—That is, whether
tue good people of Pennfyivaaia than ever dare to enquire
^to the condua of Juried ? So much heat and passion ap
pear to have inhaled the writers,' ,who resent end threaten
io punish an inquiry into the principles and circumstances
on which the verdict was founded. Which gave rife to tue
quvflion at this time, text one would suppose the verdicts
of Juries ta have been never before diluted ; whereas the
.reverfe is tr^e.
, If the enraged gentleman, who calls himfelf a Juror,
has fofar recovered' his temper as to recoup, or to have,
been vbing.io inform hiuhvlf, he will be sensible that
juries have t;sn in some inftaaces sent out of Court again
to amend &ad alter their verbid ; that in other cases new
Juries have beta ordered to try causes again; and that
the law net only supposes Jurors may be under undue in
fluence or error, but has provided ppnifhments for cor
rupt, parti;!, and influenced Jurors. '
with refpeH to that confidence which the public ought
tofiave in the verdict of a Jury, it is happy When tuey
can repose the moll implicit; but many circumfiarices
raay prevent this. In a country diDrafted by a party spi
rit, which may have infested the minds of the people ge
nerally, or where that is ^ot tne cafe,if by art, address, and
management, a Jury Ihould happen to be conftitiited of a
number of well meaning perfdos+of an easy temper,and
disposition, not much versed in law proceedings and liti
gations, but having with them two or three artful men,
haughty in their sentiments, and loquacious loud and tur
bulent of tongtie, it is evident these tew have it much in
their power to effed an unlawful end, to gratify a pre-con
ceived refe^tment, or accomplish a crabbed purpose; and
so far as the public fee a Jury thus composed, and fufpe&
any of the members of an undue influence or disposition,
so far will tfieir confidence in the verdict of that Jury be
abated.
In general, unless a Jury must be supposed to swallow
infallibility with their oaths, it may be supposed they can
err. They may be confeientious, and yet may not (peak
the truth. Even in matters of fa&, which is their peculi
ar province, though^hey seldom err, yet it may forge
times be the case. When they travel into the law, there
is more danger. As to the case now agitated, the sass
was not disputed; that Franks did write the letter, and
fend it clandestinely by fomeof the British pefoners, was
not denied; it was Acknowledged oa all Sides. But the
Jury r ound, jn direst contradictor to the opinion and
charge of the Judges, that for an inhabitant of this State
taking advantage of a public tribi to give information of
©Ur public affairs, in terms opprobrious and /nfulting to
he pcoole, is not a misdemeanor, which is the lowed of
fence in law.
The letter ha, been before the public, who will now
judge for themlives. If the opinion of the Jury is their
opinion, till hi *cll. If they are diffatisfied with the ver
dift, they nave a right to fay so. Aad to prevent ill con
sequences of a bad precedent or principle being efiablifli
ed, they have a right t& expose cither the mistaken, falla
cious, or wicked circwmftances which they suppose may
have had an influence, although the Jury are on their
oaths, with as much freedom, though not with that viru
lence and indecency, as the Juror or others use to the
Judges, Attorney-General, Members of Affably, and
other Officers of Government, who are also on their oaths.
And it may be of fervipe that this and every Jury should
know, that when the great trust of preserving the law in
its course free from any undue paffiqn or influence, is de
posited in their hands, every man will judge now far they
acquit themselves a free, independent, and well informed
fudges 1 l^ccth? ?% the government, and the people.
iv. .to :ne person who Signs hemfelf A Juror
:1 vaperbiThurfdaylaft.
•id 'on co: kc^ , "ir, that Franks 'was taken up and'
r n^id b< Cofrifs, and :y them turned ever to this
hi to be V-efcired? Y^ ^ then is the candor or
\)%.oi' r /r" :oi v^" ; ^ to ha v e been
marital in tee cro^cubuh?
Bid ^rc^t was Mr. :*.'mans, the Attorney
'. ocpublhhc.i Fz-nk^s letter and the remarks?
Cr Yer. h^i you rot g^ teafon to behave it was not
^? \%J;.:kl is the candor or honefly of holding him
MO to the public ^s tfce author?
'Su pose the Atto:ney-Gro^d, from a knowledge of .
charters Ind difeofitions, formed his ppinift th^ Lie
verdict would be contrary to the true principle and inte
rest of Government, and 'to the directiotaof the Judges,
and did fay so; does this caff a fnadd on his character ?
Or rather, dQ ?ef the event prove that he had reason for
his apprehensions ?
You ask the Attorney-Genera!, if he^cc to fay whe
ther any twelve h@nek men on th^ir oaths, could, confif.
tent with their confidences, find Franks guilty on th,e in
diament. If you, Sir, were on that Jury, you must re
member that the Judges were clear not only that you
could, but that you osght, and directed you accordingly.
Tram the flight circumstances on which you confefs you
raise your belief, and ground what you suppose heavy
charges againfl the Attorney-General, and from the want
es candor" (to fay the least) in your publication, what
credit ought to be given to any suggestions or assertions in
it> However, having pledged yourfelf to punifa the pub
lifljer of the letter and remarks, you yet have it in your
power by attempting it, so far to evince that though you
may be deceived, you will not deceive. X.
For the PENNSYLVANIA PACKET.
Mr. DUNLAP,
„n F * ex^Cron of any measures affefting the pub
-1 lie fab # d mb/efis, is toe important to be relin
olifhel tL\ih^.^.fedifr^bthe:^^
those who M : A be ^ o^G of fech djftfes. We
'4ve seen hie deft coara^te in me ^om jv?!./, ^nd men
the G.M: i in is A^don, the ,ry there
fore in Mr. Franks' case cc: o~ reasonably oft to such
company. They were^hA %on to Ado. gea pub
lic duty, under the fancied of an oath,—the question is,
whether they have done it faithfully. Is n% tins the case
01 all folk officers ? are they: -not also sworn and under
„q ua l farters ? Why may not they therefore claim e
ml eraroptions from enquiry and cenfare ? Jurymen
test expt like all other men, a^ing on public occasions,
% Gand or fell in the public opinion, by the rectitude and
^4^ of their decisions, Tney have no other protection
frbm'tbe centre of doing «ron@ than by doing right.
What other protection would a re.tfenable man in a free
country desire ? There is no magick in the letters which
compose the word Jury, that Should charm or awe men
into silence; they have the common right of all men, and
specially when called to public office to be treated with
decency and candour, but their' title extends no farther.
The Juryman, therefore, in a late paper, will do ifl] to
confider that paEi,n and resentment always prejudice a
man in the eye of the public; and that an argument may
by that means be made,worfe, but can never be made bet
ter. Ashe therefore juflifies the verdi&, I shall confider
hia reasons, and though they are not very accurately,
or intelligibly expressed, they are reducible to the fol
lowing.
Firfl. That Mr. Franks did riot intend to convey any
intelligence to New-York, but to his brother in Lon
don.
Secondly. That there was no law ; and eonfequehtly no
transgression.,
Thirdly. That the letter was innocent in itfelf, as being
a letter of negotiation for private emoluments—not to in
jure tee Antes.
In answer to the firft. The crime wasj corrcfr>ondin^
with the enemies of the United States, th® guilt ^ which
cannot depend upon the foot of the enemy's country, where
they happen to reside ; a letter wrote to a Secretary of Rate
in London, would be equally criminal as to Sir Henry
Clinton in New-York, in many instances more so. But
there is not til least excuse, even on this ground, because
this letter was to be sent to New-York, to a Refugee offi
cer in arms against his country. By this means the paper
and its contents were to be conveyed to the enemy, liable
to be made use of against us, and whether the letter was
sealed, or not, is ofno consequence to the writer or fender,
either in law or reason, as the malignity of the letter can
not depend upan its being fealroi or not, any more than
the quality ofmerchandize dependsupen the fiore in which
it is kept, being locked or open. Tne plain fall was, that
the letter wls enclcfed to HR enemy in New-York, to be
forwarded to an enemy (Muses Franks) in London, a
contractor ; wrote by his Brother, also a contractor, and
both engaged to feed and suppl, the British troops, while
they are employed in the conquer and duftru&ioß of this
Country. It is laid, that it appears from the letter that
David " did not intend it ftculd be known in New-
Y erk, as it would have defeated his intention of advancing
the ration,” this is paying a wretched Compliment to
Franks's honesty, as it supposes he intended to deceive his
employers, by concealing the price of provisions frem those
in this country, who might be presumed to know better,
and so obtain an unfair advance in England. But whoever
reads the letter will fee, that Mr. Franks grounds his ex
pe&ations of this advance on the real price of previsions,
and as a proof tells what the French then gave for flour,
and meat in proportion, so that it was not his design to
conceal the faft, from those in New-York. Do Franks's
intentions appear that the contents of tire letter should not
be known in New-York, by not fending it there ? No,
for it was found on a person going there, enclosed in a let
ter to Thomas Moore, retiring there, and he desired to
forward it. Why then these harmless intentions must ap
pear frora his sealing the letter. And did the Jury think
a seal so sacred a thing in time of war, and ground their
verdict thereupon ? The fuppefition would affront them,
unless they resign all pretentions to common sense. But it
is alked why he did not fend the prices to Moore ? I au
fwer, he gave the letter which contained them, and by that
metre enabled him to know what they were. It will per
haps be said, this was in order to conceal them from the
people in New-York ; I confefs I have nothing to fay to
such reasoning. But I aflein turn, who is Meses Franks,
and. where does he reside ? to him the letter was directed,
and he had an unqueflionable right to break this sacred,
this hallowed wax. Why, if it was not otherwise known,
the letter describes him to be an officer in the enemy's ser
vice, of course an enemy refilling in the capital of the grea
ter en^my America has on earth, George the Third,
Kig of Greet Britain, and telling bis brother such fads
as would afford and does afford the greatest encouragement
th* enemy have to carry on the war, by enumerating the
current high prices of the principal articles sad convenien
ces es life. But it fe&.ms to be forgot that London was m
the enemy's country, and that Mosts Ffenks-was a fubjeH
of that coy<:ry ; and if future Juries can forget it too, any
one may write what he pleases to London, by way of
New-York, and all that hs has to do is to take care to seal
the letter.
Now as to the fecoud point. That there is no law against
it; this I totally deny. There is every law against it.
The law of reason ; the law of felf preservation, the law
of nations, and the law of the land. But as the latter is
the law, I suppose referred to, I fliall prove that there was
law fufScient. It is evident the priCene/s Council thought
fp, or they would have demurred to the indictment, and
brought the quefijon of law before the Court in a proper
manner, but they knew better. They knew the ground
would fail them. And it must be remembered that the
Court laid down the law clearly and fully that it was a
misdemeanor, punishable by fine and imprisonment ' Black
stone, page .119, speaking of misprisions of treason, fays,
that a Riifprifion is contained in every treason whatever,
ind that iftho King so please, the offender may be pro
ceeded against for the misprision only. And that every mis
prision contains a misdemeanor, upon which the delinquent
may be cenfurej, as happened in the case of the Earl of
Rutland, &C.
If the Jury had no reason to doubt the integrity and abi
lities', of the Court, why did they not give their opinion
its due weight, in a point to which they from their law
knowledge must be deemed rnore competent ? Or why
did they not find a fpecml verd>&, declaring the falls, and
putting it ®„a the Court to pronounce the law ? This
would have mfeJ their judgements, and put the matter
upon a prof looting ; as if it had been possible for the
Court to Gay, that tixre was no law againfr eorrefponding
with an enemy in time of war. There would have been
then Some ground for the Legillature to have framed one.
But if such a law was to be now proposed, whatever the
gentlemen of the profeffion might thinle it n^ceffary and
convenient to fay at the bar, those in the hpufe would hold
a different language, and tell them there was law enough,
if Juries would do their duty.
The last point, and which probably was a governing
one, is of the utmost importance to us, and therefore de
ferv^s to be seriously cenfidered. The Jury in this case
kern (0 have held an opinion, til rsrrefpendences between
(objects'of different nations, in time*o: war, may be in
ifocent, and that this w? 3 1% Both portions arc erroneous.
By the cu ftoms and laws adopted amen,7 all civilized na
tions in time of war, all interceurfe with the enemy, but
under the fanfticn of public cur ority, is illegal and un
ju finable. And thesis highly reatonnble, for if it was
otherwise, every person holding such imcrcmurfe must be
the judge of what would or would not be prejudicial, Npw
in many cases information apparently innocent, might be
. of the most fatal kind, befits, that being contrary in its
nature to a Gate of war, it would open'a door to all manner
of dangers and abuses. Hence it has been adopted asa ge
neral rule, that all iatcrcourfo with an enemy, 'but by spe
cial permission, is improper, and therefore letters of the
mofi, private kind, and unnterefting to the public are
tranfmitfed open, and pass thro' the hand^ of persons in
authority. So that the Court were fully jufiified in faying
that all correspondence with an enemy, but by special li
cence, is improper and illegal.
Wim relpccl to this particular letter, it is really doing
violence to the common reason and understanding of man
kind, to call it an innocent letter, and only wr3te for pri
vate emolument. It appears in the firfl place toha+ebeen
designed to be conveyed by Health. It informs what pri
ces our allies were then giving for four for their support.
1 hen a falfe and infamous reLction upon the government
and people of the slate, “ that people are taken up and
“ confined at the picture of every Scoundrel." Then fol
lows a lift of prices, holding forth an idea either of a
great neceftity and scarcity , er a depreciation of our ixoney,
wnicb tho' true, ho one has a right to communicate, as
either will naturally prove powerful inducements to our
enemy, to prolong the war. Yetas it is said, this was a
letter of private emolument, Talk what reference had the
"'; '"° n on '^ c ^verument, or the price of broad cloth
and linens t» his emolument, or how could such informa
tion tend to promote it ? Tkey might fnew a (editions fpi
rit, and difeiofe our wants and diftreffis, but how they
could promote Mr. Franks's interest, remains to be lhewn.
A "'! >™ we "' to '4 not ,enly gravely but angrily; that
all this is innocent, and can do our country and cause no
harm.—Fie upon it!
And now my fellow-citizens and countrymen, permit
me to address a few lines toyed. The happiness and fafe
ty of government immediately depend upon a just and
faithful execution of the laws. You are called frequently
as Jurymen to perform an important part of this dutyr
Be not eager to decide too much ; where you can have
Confidence in the Judges, repose it—refpe& their opinions
in points of law ; they are sworn to assist you in matters'
of law, you to assist them in matters of fa^s; and though
you have a power to engross both, you fliould confider
that in so doing you Hand responsible to God and the
world; and that ignorance is a miserable plea for errors
you may thus commit. Yourofhce, though ngt sacred as
some seem to wish, is highly refpefiqble, awd it depends
upon you to make it more fa by caution in your decisions,
and chastity in your recommendations for mercy. The
frequency of such applications has very much leffehed
their weight, and even you yourselves must he convinced,
that had pardons been as frequently granted, as they have
been asked and solicited, neither your lives, liberties cr
properties would have been equally fecurCd. Confider
also that you are carrying on a war with a bitter and im
placable nation, that we have many intestine enemies wh®
earnestly with and pray for their success, and give them all
the assistance and intelligence that they dare. Confider
that you have allies who look with ah attentive eye upon
every tranfadion which affeds the common i;>terefts of the
war. Confider that you have a brave and gallant army
exposing themselves to danger and death, that these expert
from you vigilance and jealousy to gu^rd, and justice to
punish traitors at home, while they are meeting open force
abroad ; and they have an equal claim upon you to gpard
them against the secret machinations es the common ene
my, as you have to expert their brave and eptn exertions
in the field.
The issue of the trial on which I have made these ob-,
fervitions, has given great and general diffatisfaaion; I
trust they will have some weight in future. For it is
plain as the face of day itfelf, that we must either give up
the war, or pursue the necegary means to close it with suc
cess, one of which is the'dete^tion and punishment of such
pra&ic6s.'CATO.
^^x^^^iocx^
HE Members of the Library Company of
A Philadelphia, who arc in arrears, are requested
to make immediate payment to Samuel Sansom,
Tre&lurer, to prevent a forfeiture of their (hares, agree
able to the laws of the Company.
Zy order of the Differs.
Philadelphia, May 11, 1779.
F OR SA L- E,
At BATCHFL ER' s Store-cellar, at the corner of
Walnut and Front. Greets, (underneath Mr. John
Reynold's)
EXCELLENT bottled Cyder, by the groce or
dozen, much preferable to any low wines, and he
will engage it to keep in any climate. Also fine bottled
Beer, and good Vinegar, &c. &c.
N. 3. Merchants and Captains of vessels may be Ap
plied with any quantity on the fhorte@ notice.
Philadelphia, Ma, to.
WAS TAKEN UP, out of the Glou
cester meadows, on this fide of Hollanders Creek,
the ninth of this instant, a light bay H OR$ E, thirteen
hands high, between eight and nine years old, branded
HT. whoever has loft the said borie may have him
again by applying at the lign of the Battle of Monmouth,
in Market-street, near Seventh ftrect, proving property
and paying charges.
t =^.—=o^=_____„,___&___fttoteotp. ^rtoQMtemc&reti&
WA S taken up adrift some time ago, be
low Fort Mifflin, a large Mos„ built BOAT,
with her stern broken, and full of mud and wr^—
Whoever has loft said Boat is desired to 39, ly to the
Commanding Officer on board the Hancock U^ky, now
lying at Fort Mifflin, prove property, pay dtv,^ ar^
take her away, otherwise she will be difpofej o-'