Alexandria daily gazette, commercial & political. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1808-1812, 1811-04-19

Them At some port or place Within tn' ~,
C,a,es II this be the true explanation Oh inc
go, i follows irresistibly, that goods !anued
~ one Of cur ports ON the Sd or 4th OF Ntarch
.. ~ have been iuhuted i'll violation OF this
law because they mast have been s1-Atfd o.
,ss ~, hzy tassed. fla ship loaded with En-
,.,;sh noods, had left Liverpool on the ooth
ef Ianuary, and arrived of Sandy HOOK on Tue
,s, of March, and there waited Tor WIND UNI
III the Sd, and then proceeded to the haroor OF
NewYork, such, cargo could not De haoie 70
seizure under this law, because the sooos
would not have been IMPORTED from port u
MAC. situated in Great.Brtain, Stree the fss:-
iyr the dsy. The mere ar'roal OF goods is
not the importation Of goods. 10 bring such
Goods within the act, they must have been
sbipped since the I'd Of March, as wei! as lard
ed since that day and all goods shipped be-
fore that day, having been SO shipped without
the breach of any law, cannot fall within the
provisions Of law made while they were Oh
the passage. The importation having oeen
lawfully begun, may lawfully be ended, not
withstanding any intervening statute.
A different doctrine, as has been already re-
marked, will make this an er tost Jaete lar,
and, OF course, directly against the constitution.
All er post .facto laws is denned by BLACK
stone thus" when after al action indifferent
in ilsei0 is committed, the Legislature then Tor
the first tine declares it to have been crime,
and inficts punishment on the persontwho
has committed it. Here it is Impossible that
the party could foresee that an action, .nno-
cent when it was done, should be afterwards
converted to guilt BY subsequent law he
had therefore no cause to abstain from II {: and
all punishment for not absthnlng must OF
consequence be cruel and unjust" This IS
English doctrine on this subject, and 1t is to DC
hoped, that we are lot more prone to this spe-
cies o. injustice than the people and govern
ment Ct that country. The latc excellent
judy Patterson, when sitting OH the bench OF
the supreme court Of the United St..ies, or
which he was a distinguished ornament, and
giving construction 20 this very article CT the
constitution, after quoting and adopting the
above definition from Blackstone, says,---
The historic page a!'undans!y evinces tfat
the power Of passing such laws should be
withheld from Legislators asst IS a dangerous
instrument IN the han,is OF i:old, unprinclpicd,
aspiring, an1 party men, and has been too often
the effect OF the most detestabie purposes.
Another member Of the same court, III sta
ting what laws be considers 10 be CT hoItjaetc,
among others, gives the following as one de-
scriptoD included i'll the general dehnhon---
Every law that makes an action done before
the passing OF the law, and which WAS inno-
cent when done, criminal ard Furnishes SUCH
action."---T { application of these definitions
to the present case Cannot be denied
There was no law Of the United States be-
fore the Cd of March, prohibiting our citizens
from Importing goods from Great-Britailn- it
was rot criminal in them, therefore to do SO,
and the rigat of bringing home their property
must follow the right Of shipping IT, But II
the law passed On that day, torteits the goods
that were innocentle purchased and shipped
before the law passed, and takes them from
the owner as a reilaItv for bringing them
home, that law must be ex post facto, and is
certainly cruel and unjust.
We have heretofore made some remarks on
one provision in this law, to which we have
not much to add. We alludc to the second
section, in which it is dcclarcd--that when U.
Britain shall revoke or modify her edicts, tne
president Shall declare the fact BY procia'ns-
tion--and no other evidence except such pro
clam ton shall be admitted in any suit or pro-
sccution under this law, Of such revocation or
modification. Let it be admitted, that the re-
vocation should in fact be made, and the pro-
clama:ion not issue, if the law is enforced II
will be not only tyrannica!ly unjust. but we he
sitate not TO say, the courts woulc. be bound
to disregard such provision Nothing can
be more unconstitutional, thar to punish an
innocent man. Nothing is more certain, than
that this law will not be broken. if the British
DEGREES are, in fact reyoked, whether the pro-
c!amatien issue or not. II the DEGREES should
be revoked, and the proclamation should nc,
issue, man prosecuted for importing goods
after such revocation Shall have happened.
must be punished, although he has broken no
Law, unless the court sllll. admit other evil
dence of the fact of revocation. How far one
unconstitutional provision ina statute, affects
the whole act, i. a question worthy of conside-
ration.
If the remarks we have made upon the vari-
Gus parts of this non- Intercourse law are well
founded, it is clear, that goods imported be-
fore the Goth May next, arc not liable to for
feiture---but most clearly will it follow, that