Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1807-09-16
~ 10 Gents SiiHt2e. :

ne offered 20 connect the prisoner With .l,&b
Iassenlblagte, or to prove the ntenGab bs
those who assembled together at jncS
lplace. This poiil;, however,, il no: 70 -
understood as decided u will, p,ij,eps
constitute an Essential enquiry in aDtt.iea
case
Before leaving the opininf Of .He s;.s
premc court entirely on tbe question cf ths
nature of the assenbage which viii COTS
st'tute an act Of !evyiaS war, this c0trS
Cannot torbear To ask, why IS an assert.
| blage absolutely required! Is Il hot 81
Judge III some measure Of the end tty ing
proportion which the means bear 10 ,h8
end Why IS il that single armed itRi.
ytd,Gii, entering bo9t antl sailing dove, .i,S
lOElo, tor the aVbwed rui pose vi attscsir,y
New Orleans cCu.d hot DC said To NV
war Is it not that he is apparently roe
IN condition to levy war If this Ire sts
ought NOT the assemblage TO ihrnish sofne
evidence w its intention ana capacity ID
IieVy war before it can aTlotnt to leyyin.S
war! And ought not the supreme court,
when speaking OF AN assealblape for ,ES
purpose of effecting Unreasonable object BIZ
force, be understood to indicate an usseiris
IbiaEe exhibiting the appearance OF force:
the definition OF the Attorney .Or the -
lnted States, deserves notice III tnis ress
Ipect. 1t Is - when there is an ASSEMBLE q
OF men, convened Tor the purpose Of efFsct,-
ing by force reasonable object, which
force IS meant TO he employed before ths
lassemblage disperses, tins is treasoh'i
10 reso tins definition without adyttEs.
ng TO the argument, We shCHid infer that
the asSembl"ge was itself to eject By fo,ca
he reasonable object, not u join itsc!f -
some other bodies OF men and then 20 az, sc
he OBJECT by their Combined force UrdeT
rt,.,t,~s ,xy.f - i I.
appearance of the assemhldge wo.ld tH+,l
some proportion to the object a,,a would
indicate the intention TT any rate th.t q
| would he an assent age in force. JhiE
construction ~ most certainly not that Thtln
vas intended, but It serves to show thar rss
Eera! phrases must always be understDoG
~ reference to tie subject matter, aid ID
| he general principles of law.
On that aIvIsicn Of the sub ctt whicis
| lspects tie merits OF the case corrected
VITA the pica;nmgs, Two Points are ass
| made
LIT. That this indictment having oKafksH
the prisoner withlevyng war On B.anncr-
assets island and containing no other OK
,ert act, cannot be supported u, fro1. thas
var was icvieo ar that place " o;hef pera
DDS, IN che abseace ct DC pr.soher, even
| limiting those ,.erSuns to t oinr{. RI
|
ylracy.
2il". That admitting such an indictment
could ts supported BY sucn evidence, the
pre.ious conviction %, s"ne perzon who
comnl..ted the act winch is sajd ainbupt
| 20 levying war, rs indispensable 10 the con-
Victicn Of person who advised or DrocLs
red hat acJ.
AS TO tbs FIRST point, The indictrasTs cons
rams Two counts, one vi which ohs Tges that
INC p. lfoner W til "a number CT persons uu-
known levied war Oh b.anutrhaSse 4 isl&
and, IN the county OF Wood III the distr.ct
! OF Virginia, and the ether auds tn. cirru,t-
s,ancc oi their proceeding fiOm that island
down The river for tllc pun pose oi seiz Sc
| New-OrieAns by ioice.
| In point OF fact, the pr sofier was hcs
IN Bi"nncrhasset's island nor IN the coun-
| q of Wond, hor in tire district Of Nire!.
Inia.
| in considering this point the court Is led
ilrsi to enquire whether all Indictment tor;
| eyyinS war must specify an overt act or.
"ould he Snihclent II merely charged the
prisoner III general tera.s with Ea,iag
| tFycd "Ai, Omitung the Oppression OF
lpidCe or circumstance
The place IN which crime was CONS
United rs eS3entia! o. an 1aDt inlrnt wcrs
!, only to show the jQrisd,cti. of he court:
a IS u So Is entail iUr ,ur purpose Of en-
llIlnE tue prisoner 90 r.r!e rs a e.cs=-s
That, al conn iaw;an inGi .tment would
have .ctH detective ~iuCn nd uot rnenticn
,ht p tce liz winch the crime was commitS
Itcd, can scarcely be doubted. r. this, il
sail'c cnt to refer 10 BaVk.ns 3 9, CHI.
25, sect RI ana ch. 90, sect. 81 This re-
lcesslty IS rendered thy s. ronrer rs the con<
'ttut 5aai provision tn.t tne OF ugrr
- shall l'e tried in The state ard d.s;T CT
l"hcrc!n Che crime shah have c,-ui,t,d -
ma ny the act Ct Congress VIII On ttcu.res
hat twelve perry jurors At icsst shan Ba
unmcntd iroU tle county @htie tire of
.,nve was cemmjttCd.
A description Of the Particular manner
Which thC Nar was i.yItd. seems ,,so1
SscnIsl 90 enable .hc aUCuscd 10 nlaEclfS
cicnse. Tie iaW DOES cot zb,ct
% be prepared 70 defend every act ~ ..is
re which may DC suddenly aid yi,tsrr
ln"icc alleged aGdnst l.m ln c.,.,, .,.,,
justice the particular {. q via wti,h be ig
"a rgea ought TO be stated, end stated IN
G,h G,auuer as 10 aG.id icasora.,Is
I~crtdnty q the nature OF TIC .ccy,a,iob,
/ nd the CiTCuW stances Nh Oh wif BE .ddtt-
ed against hlm Tie general aCLtr.be an
ne subject cf r1c'r'mcn's ~ flt To- ttis
INT. lDs!er p: 9, kinruf the treas
n.' composing he Kings dc ,h, 3ayk
! l;nm what has been sgd it. follower
bat 10 every Indictment ior tips species hf
90. son, ana indeed for levy ing 1..r and oJ=
Inerug to thc kings enemies ,vcrt CT