The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1807-01-15

fuch military expedition or ctterprizc, o. to
procure any infurredion, nnlawfu' aiIcn'bly, or
combination, Cor fueh pnrpofe
Under the words of the fecond feefion il is
provided that the trial Of thefe offences may be
had in any of the dinrtas, orterritories, where
any of the acts contributing the offence fhal
have been committed, and all the acts confti-
tuting the offence may be brought in evidence
on iuch trial, in whatever part of the u. 5. or
the territoriesthereof. they may have been COM
mtted.
Now fuppofe, under this ACT, a certain fet of
men fha form confp!racy in Warrington,
0ha council or attempt ~ fet it on foot in
Kentucky, fhall prepare the means for its exc
cution in Indians, and fhall procure an infur.
reeton in the Orleans territory. Under this
fiction a man may be feizcdin Orleans and tried
in Wafl,ine. IF the f.t,ion were fufceptible of
this contribution it ought to be Rruck out.
If It were not liable 70 this contribution, the
words ought to be 70 modified as to render the
meaning more explicit. One ofthe mon va,u-
able privileges fscured by the contribution was
the trial by a jury of the vicinage. Were this
proviiion retained it would be in the power of
the government to opprefs and ruin any man
charged with the offences enumerated in the
ACT. 1t would be eafy for it to go into diftant
territories, and hunt up circumstances on
which to found criminal charges but how was
It poiiible for the individual accufed to collect
information to repel them?
Mr. Dawfon faid the contribution given by
his colleague to this fiction was the true one {:
ontthat without the power given by this fecti-
nit would he impof1ible TO punifl the crimes
enumerated in the bill. A man NAV fet fucb
project agoing in Pennsylvania, and then re-
move to diitance, and thus commit one att
IN one rate land one in another was it not
right and juft that he mould be brought before
court where the whole ct theIe atfs could be
couhdered The proviion was by no means
new. 1t would be feen by examin alton of the
laws relative to the po& Office department that
bad been long Rnce adopted by the United
, States.
!. MIR. BidwelI faid he UNDERWOOD the ideas Of
The gentleman from Virginia as going further
than the sbill warranted. The frf lection fpe.
cited certain acts either of which were punifh,.
bic, and not all of them collectively. Several
OF thete offences were complex in their nature.-.
for inftance,a combination or coufpiracy, con.
lifting of acts, part of which might be COM
United in one Fate and part In another. The
circumstances, whole union was reoui6te TO
form a confpiracy, often took place in feveraI
counties in the fame fate; in which cafe the
principle adopted in every Fate made the crime
triahle in either county otherwife it would be
impraaicable to take into confederation the
whole of the offences which contributed the
crime for which the individual was charged.
The cafe was the fame in the prefcnt inffance. ),
Some part of the offence may be committed in
one Gate, and fome part of it in another
Thefe offences might either he confdered &c.
paratelY, and then man would be cxpofed to
more than one trial, or collectively as contributing
one offence, in which cafe there would be but
one trial. For irRance, one offence NAV be
in part committed in Ohio, and part in Ken.
lucky. UnIefs this offence were tried in col.
le6tive view, it would be impofible to take a
full view OF the whole evidence, or to punil
the crime agrecab!y to the aggravation of the
offence. Mr.. B. concluded by obfervine that
they were only in this bill declaring in relation
10 the different diaritts of the United States,
what agreeably to the common law took place
in the different counties of the fame fate and
that this proyi6on 70 far from being reprehen.
lib!e, appeared. to him efcntial to the bill.
Mr. Eppes faid he believed there were no occa-
fs,ns on which Legislative bodies ought to pro-
coed with 70 much caution as when they were
about to make any changes in the criminal
code. 1t too often happened, when they pat.
fed law for particular location, that they loft
fight Of the rights of the citizen, and eftablifb
ed dangerous precedept. 1t was his win al.
,-7vsto !cgiilatc on general principles, and not
Tor pafticr,n, Qcca6ons; and that they fhould
cor.Gne themfelves to the iafiage of fuch Iaws
as might be fafely administered at all times as
the laws Oh IKE hC oSbticIhdIt- UOUl
Mass had confined his obfervations to the lat
fer part of the obje dions he had made to the
fiction, viz. the tefimony to he addrced.
But he would ak whether as candid man he
could obvistc the frft objection he hac fated
ia man committed different acts in fifty differ
snt feetions Of the union, he might, under this
provGon, be taken in any one of them, and be
tried and punifhed where it would be impofIi-
bic for him to get teffimony, and where he
would he borne down by the arm of power.
The language Of the fiction 10, the trial may be
had in any of the dnri6ts, where any of tie al,
contributing the offence ihail have been commit
ted. What are thefe acts ? The frft is the
beginning or fetting on foot military exped;-
ton-this is one dittinet act ; the forming con-
foracy or combination this is another act
and 60 Of all the other acts recited in the bill
under which man may be feized and dragged
here for trial, provided any one of the offences
syas committed here, though all the ref were
committed ellewhere.
Mr.. Eppes iaid he lad another objection to
this proviiion. 1t gave the officers a right to
fsiSe man, and try him in that diltri6t mott
preiudiced sgainf him. In one diGrtf he may
be very odUus: in another highly popular.
lie believed this was very much the cafe at pre-
TENT. Would this be fair II gentlemen are
,lifpofei to aet properly, ls! the offence be tri-
cd in the dtriGt where it is committed. lie;
them adhere to the principles os the couAitu-
ton.