Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1805-02-27


wards sworn on.tiie Jury.
L Aud, lastly, II was then his opinion, and
istill is, that il is the duty Of every court
of this country, and was his duty on the
trial nav underconsiJrrstion, TO guard the
jury sgainst siiispsessionsrcspeet-
; log the Ia~s OF the land. he well knows,
! that It is the right. of jurics in criminal
cases, 10 give a general ssrviict oil acqui'-
tai. ~hIch cannot be set aside or account
: lof its being contrary TO .lsS, ana 'nSS
: hence results thc power of jar,cs, to de- !
/, eide on The Law as sch as on che facss,
; | IN ali criminal cases. This power ne |
holds 10 De sacred part OF our legal prs'
: ,;icees, which be never has attempted, I!
xnd never wiz aitemept to sbridge or TO
obs,uct. Eu, he also knows, that ~ the
Eexercise Of his po~er, tits The duty of the
.iery 10 govern ,heniseisesbs the laws ofthe
land, over which they have no disps using
poxer; and sher right 20 expel aud re-
ceive from he cSurt, ali she assistance
| which it can give, for rightly understands
ing the law. To withhold this ASSISTANCE,
IN any manner Whatever TO forbear to
give it in that way. which ma, be most ef-
ieetpai for preserving the jury from error
and mistake would be an absDdonment
or forgetfulness OF duty, WHICH no Judge
could Justify his conscience or TO the
laws. In this case, therefore, where the.
4 question Of law arising the indictment,
lhad Seen finally settled by authoritative
decisions,it was the duty ofthe Court, and
! especially al this respondent as presiding
!, Judge, early ia spp.ize the counsel and the
(. jury ofthese decisions, aud their effect, so
, as 10 save The former from the danger OF
!. tmakigg an improper attempt, to inislead
9 the JURY ina mater of Law, and the jury
= from having their minds pre-occupied by
D erroneous impressions.
{ IL was for these reasons, that, on the
: s2d day of April, 1900, when the said John
5 Fries vas branSht into court, and placed
: IN the prisoners box for trial, bul before
) The petit Jury vas i,npaane lied To ICY hin,
this respo'ri.;i,t informed The above e:en-
Il toned WIii'ln lie Wis, one oi his counsel,
me aforesaid AieYsE5cr lanes Daiizs not
beng then in court, "a that the Court had
( deliberately Considered The u,dittmenra
gaiDst John Fries far treason, and the
4 .hreo several overt-scls' of treason stated
therein: That the crime Of treason vas
| defined By the stiiuiion oG the United
NJ hes That as tiie federal legislature had
The poser to make, alter. or repeal laws,
SO the Judiciary only had the power, and
I IL vas their da,y. 10 declare, expound and
interpret the CONSTITUTION and laws Of the
Uuited a;es Tast ), vas the duty of The
court, in all criminal cases, TO state 10 the
| petit Jury, their opinion OF The law arising
on the facts 6u, the Jury in all CRIMINAL
Caves were 30 beside both The law and the
facts, on . Consideration ofthc whole case:
That there must be soRe LOT, ,tructive ex-
position of the terms used In Inc coasu-
4 tuition, ''i.vylng war against the Uared
STATES" fhs, the question:, THAT zcts A.
Ha@nt~d 10 ievying war agsin., the u 4
: nited States OF he government thereof,
, vssa gacsuon es law aud had been de-
) clded b, Judges Patterson and Peters. in
! lbscas of Vigpi and Mitchell. And by
Judges iredei' and Pcte6s, in The case oi
lcs,t. Fries, prisoner Al The bar, IN Apfn,
: '799 Fhat Judge Peters remained of the
y same op'ni.n, wh,ch he had lwicc before
> delivered. and he. his respondent, On
long and great consideration, concerned
? la the cpiliion OF Judges Patterson, iredeh,
ard Peters: That To pre- vent unnecessa-
, ~ delay. add To save time on ,ihe trial OF
, John Fries, and I'D prevent DELAY of jus
tce in the great pumber of ctvi causes
depending ioI trial at that term, the conr,
mad drawn up 10 writing, their opinion Of
the law scisIng on the overt-aces, stated
in toe indictment sgsins, John Fries aud
had directed David Caldwell their clerk,
TO make oot three copies Of their opinion.
| one 10 BE- delivered to the attorney OF the
district, oue TO the counsel for the prison.
er, and one 10 the petit jury, sfier they
should have been,impsndeiled and heard
the Indictment read to them b, the clerk,
and after The district attorney should have
stated to them the law on the oveft-acls
sIledged IN the indictment, as II appeared
to him."
Alter these observations, this rcspon-
dent delivered one OF the aforementioned
copies TO the aforesaid William Lewis,
then attending ss one Of the prisoners
consei; who read part of il. add then laid
II dawn on the table before hun Some
observations were then made on the sub.
Ject, ny him and che above mentioned A.
iexander lanes Dallas, who had then
: come nto court; bat this respondent doth
! not nov recolle9 those observations, and