The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1805-07-19


niihable with death, 0lall afterwards procur
bail, and there be no Judge of The United States
IN the cri6t 70 take The fame, il nav be taxi,
by, any judge Of the fu preine or foperior cour
OF law Of Gich fate"
Here it is expreisly authorized that Judge O
the circuit court NAV order a procefs fc- tn.
aryr9 of the accented for any crime or offence
againtt the United States, agreeablv to the uf,a
mode of procefs of arre1 aganf offenders IL
the itatc where the court is holden, and he of.
fence committed. a luminous is not authorif.
ed by the fetti"n, becanfe fumGrons is no. !
process of 0ryeR. call upon the learned ma
nagers TO point out any other procefs BY which
peron can be arrefed, even in Virginia. ex
cept by capias. In England, in Virginia, in
Maryland, in every rate, the procefs of ar;eG is
+ by capias.
! There is another fa.ute of Conerefs on The
;iuhiett of procefs, which pa:lts, on the fecond
OF March, 1893. i. contains eight c,Sions. and
relates as well to criminal AS c;s,H matters. The
ifvrn'h fe6tion is in the words following. "that
i','hali he lawful for The fevera courts Of tie
! United States, from time to time, AS location
NAV reqnire, TO make rules and orders for tho If
/ reinec3ivc courts, directing the returning az
! writs and procefIes, the filing &c declarations 4,
other headings, the taking ofrules, the entering
m judgement by default, and other matters in
; the vacation, and otherwif- in a manner not re-
puenant to the laws of The United States, TO ,e-
gulatethe practice of the fad courts reflective
'v. as !hall be ft and neceffdrv for the ADVANCE
ment OF nitice. and e(tecioliy IN tbt esd ~ a.e-
I cent DELAYS III broreedyngJ'
1 know not what language can convey a more
complete power to the court over its procefs,
! than IS given hy the paGages fro n. the itatutes
which have beea cited. An uniform rule in the
courts Of the U.States is very defraele, that Of
Tenders and criminals may be brought 10 trial
| by TIE Ike forms in every Rate, for violations
OF the fatutes Of Concrefa. To allow one kind
! Of prccefs IN Virginia, and different one in
! Maryland for the fame offence, would be an he
teroeeneous and uneuus' mode Of administering
iiuftiCe., A contribution ought not to be given
Itotfe Rafrtes of ConPreis, which admits of fuch
afyhem. If il may pofiibly be avoided Shall il
4 he fld th:t m tne Gate man who puh'ifhes
I l;hel fall be arrefed Immediately and brought
TO trial and puniihed, while IN another ftate a
J uothrr merton who has committed the fame Of
fence. Nail hr ferved with procefs thar l,,ll
he notice 70 him 70 make his ei.ape and ihall
III he fait that f'ch rule fialI be applied 70
] cafes where i,'prifonment is part of the puniih-
I ment II has heen in proof that in MARYLAND
II Us ufiai to arref by capas in cafes of rnifle-
reanor md 10 try the traverer at the GAME term
! at which he appears. Are the courts of The IT.
/ States, if fitting on one Gde of the Potomac, to
I he governed by one rule and, if fitting on -
mother iide OF the fame river, 70 he governed Nv
another rule, in cafes of crime or offence ,oain6
'he laws and contribution of the Upited States
! II caa revsr have heen the intention of Ccpcrefs
| that 9nv fuch variety Of proceeding tf7curd he
allowed in practice, or That the procefs NhouId
he a-v where a f'mnons, in cafes Of offences
which were 70 he runifhed by imprisonment.
| This can he further rffrsted bv attention RI
7 . IL e n %
/ certain crimes paied in the year 1900 y. f,r ner
] Jury, for bribery, for obnrutfing Nv force the
: !rrvicr Of legal proreis, for imDortino naves
from foreign parts, for violence to an ambaGa.
! dor, ard for other offences relative 70 anbaf:,
'ors. the puniHnnent is 6ue and irpriCorner.
See II vol. laws Of the ". States. pace IN
The procefs in all thefe cafes is 70 be IRE fsne
II caDas IS proper in one It is froper in al or
IT 2 iunmons is necefary in ore, it is necefiarv
in ali.
Snnpofe in regard TO a. amhahsdor who has
applied 10 our tccretary Of fate for the purirh
nent of IN individual, who may have done vi
offence TO his pcrfnn or TO one of his family that
lafnmmors ball ave been iiIued 10 the oFtnd-
er who ihou'd abfcond or remove himfif T.
would be deemed very ffrqnge, perhaDs incre.
dih'e 70 the amha1ador, if he fFlouId he told nv
orr fecretarv Of fate, that the offence h4ing
committed inVirginia, it was necenafy to fIr-
! mon the nartv 20 appear before the court, and
in'fead of obeying the luminous, he Lad renov
ed himfelf entirely, bnt If the fame matter had
been r7rofecG'ed in Marylaod. the offender
might have been inRantv arrehed and nurin,.
ed the PRECEDENT of the United States regretted
that the offender had efcaped with irnDunitv.
nut the etcape was according to Inv. Wonld
not fuch an explanation be apt TO be conceived
an aHront to the understanding Of the ambafIa-
dor?
On former location read 4 rule of,he In
preme court made in Augut I7oa, hy which
the Judges declared, "that they coniidered the
practice ofthe courts Of kings bench in Eng
as ahordinp outlines for the praelc. of dis
court. and that they will from tmo TO time
make fuch alterations therein as circumstances
may render neceiIary :" and on the fame occa-
ron reference WIS had to the PRACTICE of the
kings bench, 70 fhew that capias was ! pro-
n"r and Ciusl proce(s. Bu' it is neither neceE
iarv nor correct 70 admit that the rule of the
king bench IN England is ahfoutelv rule
tor the circuit conr-s of the United States. II
furnilhes good outline Of practice. The true
petition Is, that neither 'he kings bench nor
the tate laws furnih rules TO the federal courto
~ regard 10 prOcefs which are boftivev bindiro
ON them, but theft courts are 10 eG abiin IN If
own rules Under The directions and confront of
the fat0fes ofthe u. States
IL rs known and undfDused maxim. that tl,e