Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1829-06-02
DOMESTIC.
CASE OF DIR. TOBIAS WATKINS.
Circuit Court offhe United Siafssjer Wash
ingion County, ID. c.

-
CASE OF DIR. TOBIAS WATKINS.
Circuit Court Of the United Siafssfor JYash.
ingiOn County, ID. c.
MAY &c, 1899.
This day came on to be beard an argument on
la g@'eraf demurrer to two indictments found
by the Grand Jury at the present term against
Tobias Waikios, Tor misjemeanors, at common
law.
One OF these Indictments charges that the said
Tobias Watkins, being at the time Fourth Auditor
OF the Treasury of the United States, "and being
AN evil-disposed person, and desiring and intend
ing fraudulently and unjustly 10 obtain & acquire
sor himself, and for his own private use, divers
sums of money Of the United States, with force
and arms, Sc. falsely and fraudulentiy wrote and
addressed and caused to be sent TO certain j. r.
faniding, then Navy Agent Of the United States
atthe City Of New York, letter, Sc and made
and executed draft On the said J. X. Paulding,
Navy Agent, as aforesaid, SC. and received there.
TOR (troin broker five hundred dollars, and dis
posed OF the said money for his own nse." There
are other recitations of particulars, and Of other
like transactions in the Indictment (part Of which
were with Mr.. Harris, Navy Agent at Boston)
which concludes with the genera ayerrnent that
the several papers referred 10 were, and each Of
them, written, drawn, Sc. "without any authority
therefor, and not for, or on account of the public
service but for the private gain and bene6t Of the
said Tobias Watkins, and with intent to defrauS
the said United States. and AZ false pretences to
enable him 10 obtain to his use and benefit the
said lsnms Of money! and that by means Of the
said several false pretenccs the said Tobias At.
kins did, at the time and times aforesaid, ,efraud
the said United States of the said sums and s'dis-
pose OF the same to his own and benefit TO the
great damage ofthe United States, and against the
peace and government thereof
Thomas Swami aud Francis 8. Kew. ATTORNEYS
Sor the United States, and Wa.ter Jones and Rich
ard S. Coke. for the accused.
This is a case which has attracted so much Of
, the public attention as to demand q more particu-
lar report Of il than il has been the custom to max.
| oil the Proceedings in before our Court IL
was by mere accident that we became aware of
this case coming up in any shape to-day in Court,
and, LOT want oil time and room, report must
be abbreviated far within the limits to which our
notes would have enabled us to extend it.
The pleadinss were opened, against the indict-
ment, by Mr.. Jones who occupied the whsle re-
Inainder of the days sitting. In this brief eich
| no attempt will be made TO follow his law argu-
ment but with faint outline, reservng IL for fl-
ture publication, If called for. The current only
OF his observations will be hastily traced
MIR. Jones began by saying that The counsel for
the accused were. in the present stage and shape
Oh the proceedings, laboring under great disaLvan-
tages, in proceeding to submit 10 the Court what
they considered a very important ouastiou--im-
porian in its bearing not only towards the individ-
ual concerned, but to the whole people whose
rights were implicated in it. The accused in the
present case, he said, had been subjected to what
he considered very high-handed attempt to con.
|
Its proper direction for the purpose Of making its
operation penal upon an individual Who, il every
thing alleged in the accusation against him was
admitted to he true, was only properly .subiectto
civil prosecution for the breach OF civil
trust. The evil attempted TO be redresscd nv
! this prosecution was one which. il il existed a,
all III the present case, has existed at different
Tines III every country In which civil government
exists. There was scarcely government in Eu.
rope, or America, in which cases OF breach oG
N frIras had ~ boo. 20
ais, by the appropriation TO their personal use of
governmental funds which came into their hand,
in trust, or were diverted from their proper OBJ
Jects to individual uses. In the governments of
the United States, both Federal and State, many
SUCH cases had occurred. But this wss the yerv
first instance that had occurred in which mere
naked accusation OF mis-appropriation OF public
money by individual had been made on thc
ground of indictment, unless under some partic-
ular statute making it criminal. Such mis-. appro-
priaon oil public money never had been I'D to this
day, considered an offence per Sc against the fun
damentai law of the land which Is designated az
the Common Law.
In the present case, moreover, Mr.. ]. said the
accused not only had to encounter this novel and
unprecedented torm Of prosecution, but he Hal
| 10 meet it when urged against him in the rnost on
pressive form and vesture in which ii was possible
| Tor power to array it against him. He had, in
ruin, whether innocent or guilty of the facts J.
ieged In the indictment, in various forms already
could desire. He had suffered not upon convjc.
ton, but upon accusation, ill-sustained, AID. in
some particulars false on the face of it, IL seem
! ed, he said that this gentleman after an absence
oil some time from home; after the way had been
prepared for every species of obIouuy and pre;u.
dice in the public mind against him. by accuse.
tons OF flight from justice, -yas upon his return
homewards, when, instead Of pursuing him 10 the
utmost limits OF refuge, waiting for him until the
very time arrived, when, by his conduct, he fai-
Iaf fed - A.
4 turning to his family, he was, by refinement 81
petty tyranny, seized late at night, and dragged
in the direction he was voluntarily going
(Ibe Court here inrrposed, and suggested tt
the Counsel the expediency of combining himself
to the question Of Iu,D before the Court 10 which
ms present course OF remarks did not appear Il
have any necessary connexion.)
MIR. Jones said 1t appeared 10 him no more than
Just to his Client who had already been subjected
70 much obloquy, and was likely to be subjected
tomore, to place his fairly before the Court He
proceeded TO say that hepresumed IL would be per.
tecty admissible for him TO state that it was maj.
ter OF the highest Importance to the good of the
country, and to the security Of the rights of the
BODY oil the People, that the criminal law of the
country should be precisely understood and psnc-
rally known; and that the counsel for the accused
were dischargiDg nothing but 4 duty of the pro.
| lesion TO the Public, whose servants thew i'm
some degree were, when they brought 10 the test
OF the law, every accusation which wentt 10 place
| In peril the life or liberty of the citizen
MIR. J. then proceeded TO argue the question Of
demurrer upon the ground, first Of the essence of
the offence; maintaining that, giving every Ia,i.
tude to the averments in The indictments tina,
was possible. moulding them int the most uneY.
cepttonable form, and admitting them all 10 he
proved. there was no ground for charging the &C.
cused, az now indicted, with any offence aoains,
the common law. After which ne proposed "a
look into the indictments themselves, and soc
whether they were not still further from snv do.
nnition OF the criminal offence than even the DO
nulsr understanding OF the charge contained In