The Massachusetts spy. [volume] (Boston [Mass.]) 1770-1772, 1772-04-30
7 HURST DAY, APRIL 80, I772.

IN u'd BY no means be deiayed And if any
of our judges be found wreltIng the Law 10
free court turn, they are peJRrfd as vel
as uniuf
Beiides the acts Of one term ceafe with that
term, and are not transferred but by express
reference, and on record. The hra CONT
1uance was legal, viz. to have the motion
Of auef on judgment argued, and this mo-
ton was recorded. This was argued and
determined. Here the priloner was in GGfa
qns. And believe there cannot be found on
record, ANY continuance or ground for con-
tinuance, after this determination. If this
is true, The continuance was not only
founded in the legal reiources mentioned by
Backbone, and therefore was done arbffrG-
riiy and aufb0rifafi0fly, but was an act that
did MT ebujs 10 appear even on the record.
his take 10 be fact. IL am .miltaken
and properly proved to be 70, will recant.
Before quit this head, will.look into
paGage of Judge Foaer, quoted by Cunning
ham, which think confirms Judge Black
itcne, and proves that the determinations OF a
court ought not to be Jeeyrfy and merely By
authority, but only in the legal method above.
mentioned. q 1t would be very improper IN
them 70 to do, (viz. to find eontrary 10 the
opinion of the judge For if their verdict
lhould be that the offender is guilty, he who
is not in the spinisn of the judge guilty OF
murder, qUOaD be liable TO infer death as
murderer. And # their verdict ihouId be
hat the offender is guilty, he who is not IN
he opinion of The judge guilty Of felony
zoenld not Be liable to forfeiture Of his goods"
Now il appears to me this psiiage OF Judge
FoRer is perfectly superficial, admitting the
opinion Of CauGdicus TO be Law. For how
could the prlfoner be liable 10 Jl6r death as
murdrrf,, fit is in the power OF the Judge by
bis e1vn authority to arref judgment. This
he could ezhly do, and it he was upright
wouli certainly do 70, as he would be In
Auenced BY regard to juitice and the I'M
pulfe of his own confidence. Whereas adj
hitting nv fenfe of the Law, theie words
appear pertinent. The priloner in this cafe
would be EotI, becaufe, if there lhould be
nation for arreiiing judgment in his favour,
here might be chance that this motion
would not prevail. For although the opinion
Of the Judge might be, that the pliloner was
not guilty of mmdtr, and he might 70 dirta
The Jury, yet as they had an RnahenablF right
to exercfe their Gun judgment, and it they
pealed fnd him guilty OF murder, the mere
initiating with the judges opinion could not
warrant a new trial. And this was actually
the faSt with the cafe a, bar. On the whole,
from all that | find in the books, and can col
lect from the conversation of others, can
not think thar the count are warranted to
(ufoend judgment, Jfrrffy, arbitrarily, and
mrrely BY their o1Un authority, but if there Is
any thing favourable in the prfoner's cafe
the llgoI method is Eetsled, and the law has
dire6fed how thcfe circumstances may appear
You next proceed to fall foul of my au
thorites, which you fay are not pertinent
whether they are, or are not, comes now ~
courCe 10 be coniidered. My firf authority
is from Trials Per Pals, 6 II matter Of faG7
and matter of record, are 70 intermlxt lhai
they cannot be divided, the 10boif fhall be
uied BY tie country" This you think does
not E7mat az the point. What may be your
intention in ifaEEoizg the word "Jqainf," or
whether it was manly or pnerit | fhall not
conGder. An authority may fometimes
Is fare" a point in full view as well as only
6ninf at il. But the man who will declare
that be has BY sng frOiee formed bis Jaeft0
laugh at 6hyBing, may well condeicsnd to 10
low an attack. The only obierVatlon you
make on this authority worthy notice is,
(" What is more determined h.re than that