Alexandria daily advertiser. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1803-1808, 1807-09-24
OPINION
9f Me Conyf on the notion to arrest tHe
sviasnce. Delivered on & !.
iosDav, August 81,
TcoNrINuEDsJ,

y charged tnOse cOSdgSu ~ ssss ~ SIS.
considering the overt act as the ueasou q
whereas il ought 70 be considered soieiy as
! .the ev;dsnre Of The reason; but the eoun,
al for the prosecution seem themselves
not 70 have. sufficiently adsefsed TO THIS
clear principls. that shougA the overt ACT
may no. be itself the treason, il is the sole
actof that treaaon which can produce con-
vic,ion. Il is the; sole point al issue be
tweeo the parties. And the only DIVISION 'l1 2.
of that point, if ahe expression be allowed,
,.hich lac conri is now examining, - the
construcsive presence of the prisoner on
the fact charged.
To return then to the application OF she
cases.
Had the prisoner set out With the party
from Beaver 10 Elannerhasscst's island, or
re,haps had set cut for that place, though
nos from Beaver, aud arrived 10 the lsland
he would have been preseat AZ the tact -
had he not arrived 10 the island bur taken
poaition near enough TO cooperate with
those on the island, 10 assis, them 10 any
{ act Of hostility, or 20 aid them It attacked,
the question whether he was ronssfuc.'yety
3 prx sent would be aoession compounded
oflaw and tact, which would be decided oys
shr iury, With ahe aid Of the couri 50 Tar as
ressecied the Law. In thiscase the accused
would have bsen OF the particular party as.
sembled on. the. island, aod wopld nave
been associated NTH them in the particular
act ofievying warsaid to.hsye been com
mitied on the Island,
Bur if he was noswish the party at any
time before they reached the island !; II ne
did not ioin them there OF INTEND 20 join
chem there ifhis personal co operation 10
the general plan was 10 be offered elsewhere
ar a great distance 10 asdifferens state II
the overt acts OF eTeasou 70 be performed
by him were to be distinct overt acts tnen
he was not of the particular party Assem-.
bled AZ Blannerhassett's island, ADD was
NOT coDs,ruc,ively present, aiding and as
sis,iog 10 the particular actwhich was there
committed.
The testimony on this point so far. as Il
has been deliveredis not equivocai ! here
i, net ouly 90 evidence that the accused
was of the particular party which assem-.
b.ed on Blaunesbassett's island, but the
whole evidence shows he was not OF that
party.
TN felony then admitting the crime to
have been completed on the isiaud, aud to
have been advised, procuredor command
ed bv the accused, hewould have been 10 Il
coo,estibIy accessory but not q PFlne''
pal.
s But ia treason il 10 said the law IS other
wise because the theasre ofacsion Is more
extensive.
The reasoning applies as strongly 70
( England as 10 ,he United States. Wn'le
in rs & rs the 1aanaly Of S'sart fought 70
regain the crown they had forfeited, the
struggle was for the whole kingdom; yet
no MAJ was ever considered as legally
present at one place when actually AZ 40.
other /: or as aiding IN one transaction
while actually employed 10 another. Is.
With the perfect knowledge thai the
whole na.ion may be theatre OF action. the
English books unite 10 declaring, that ne
who cosnsels procures or aidsueason. IS
!. guilty accr ssorily aud solely inviT.ue OF the
commou Law principle, that VIA. will make
: man an accessory in fsiony makes him
principal in treason. So tar from consl.
derior q man a. constructively preaens at
every over, act of the general treason 10
which he may have been concerned, the
whole doctrine of the books limits the
proof against him 20 ,hosespalticular overt
acts. Of iesying war With which he is charg.
!. cd.
What would be the effect of q different
/ doctrine Clearly sshat which has ssbeeu
stated. If a person levyiug war nKensucky
may be said TO be constsuctively present
and assembled with a party carrying or
war in Virginia Of agreat distance frcm
him; then he is Prcseot as-every overt sc'
performed any where. and may be tried u