Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1829-05-29


called for The only of his observations will
be hastily traced.
Mr.. JONES began BY saying that the counsel for
the accused WERE IN the present stage and shape Of
the proce dngs' ahorng under great disadvantages,
in proceeding to submit to the Court what thcy con-
sidered very important Question--important in ts
bearing not only towards the, individual concerned
but to the whole people whose rights were implicated
III It, Inc accused, IN the present case he said, had
been subjected to what lie considered very high
handed attempt to convert tho criminal udicature of
the country IRON It's proper direction for the purpose
OF making ITS operation penal upon individual who
every thing ai'edged III the accusation against him.
was admitted to be true, only properly subject to
. civil prosecution for the breach of q civil tr,,st
The evil attempted to be rcdressed by this proscc,-
ton was one which, it existed at all i'm the pre-
sent case, has existed at different times in every
country III which civil government exists There
was scarcely government in Europe or America
IN which cases OF breach of public trust had not been
committed by individuals, by the appropriation To
their personal use OF governmental funds which came
into their hands trust were diverted from their
proper objects TO individual uses. In the govern.
mefits Of the United States, both Federal and State
many such cases had occurred. But this was tho
rst instance that had occurred in which mere ma
ked accusation of Misrepresentation Of public money
by Individual had been made the ground osindirf
arcn', uess under particular statute making II
criminal. Such misappropriation of public money
never had been up to this day, considered an offence
per Sc agaist tho fundamental law of he land which
is designated rs he Common Law.
In the present case, moreover, Mr. J. said the ac
cused not Only had TO encounter this novel and IN
precedented form of prosecution, but he had to meet
II when urged against mn III the most oppressive
foim and vc5Vre i'll which it was possible for power
to array it against linn. He had in truth whether
innocent guilty fthe facts al!cdeed in the indct-
ment IN various inras already suffered all that the
most vindIctTve prosecutor could desire He had sf
ercd not upon conviction, but upon accusation i'll
sustained and, in particulars false on the face
IT. 1t seen cd, he said that this gentleman after
an absence OF some time from home; after the wav
had been prepared for every species of oblouuv and
prejudice II the public mind against him. by accusa
tons ot light from justice, upon his return home
wards when, instead of pursuing him to the utmost
limits OF refuge waiting for him until the very time
arrived, when. by his conduct, he falsfe, the occo
saon of flying from Justice by returning to his FAM
y he was, by refinement Of petty iyrannv seized
late al night, aud dragged in the DIRECTION he was yo
unfairly going--
FsE CoURT here interpreted and suggested TO the
counsel the expectancy of combining himself To TIL,
question Of lr1r, before the court to which his
sent course of remarks did not appear to have any
necessary connection.
Mn. JONES said it appeared to him no more than inst
70 his client, who had already been subjected to much
obioquy, and was likely to be subjected TO more TO
place his case fairly before the court. He proceed
ed to say, that he presumed it would be perfectly nd
mlsslbe for him that il WAS matter Of tho
highest importance to the good of the country and to
the security of the rights of the body of the people
that the criminal law of the country should be prec;sn
y understood and generally known; and that the coun-
sci fcs the accused discharging nothing but a
duty OF the profession to the public, whose servants
theg N Eoe degree were, when they brought to the
te - e icaP oycgg atccusaion svhirs wspt-,o pianc
i'-;es.t he s'so or liberty Of the citizen
NH then proceeded to argue he question af IL,
demurrer the ground, OF the essence of the
Offences nHlnteaing that giving every latitude ia the
avernents IN the indictments tfst was ,,,es;bl
MOULDING them INTO the most unexc$pt;orab bic form
nd ad,nutnE them all 10 be prove.9 there vas no
EToF-I,.s'iEe t,clssod. as us I'd ,rI
any offence asginst the comfaon Itts Atter ~
re ioosed GO look into ciIe acsnl., tIteulseires
ope s whether they not still .i:ser from, a.,
deSE:tioIOf she etiu7no' eficDca than 5g,, t,,, nc
Fai HrScrstnuag OF the Charge coIitaira,J n, fs
4 lI9 assumed, WIS ~ undertook to de ,,onst,,t g
the terms OF the maictn3arts themselves that tbe
W0"'e amount OF the charges 20 be psoved 10 thei,
btiost extent, was the case OF InisappruprjaI,a, b
I m officer of tie government to his Bfivate ,sr ~
moneys o. the GoFernmeat-hrnging him Wi bin the
deer Pt'''l o. What sras commonly called r,hI1c
deiauter. me Question for the court, then, was
whether the numerous clasR OF caos conI;n7 ,,.rJ,
tbs DESCRIPTION, does constitute an offence cooniy,
Bile b. the common lay of the land On tbcnort =
ms c}eat ant"fPubc justice, lie maintained thai tbs
was h:t case fer the common law: that it was moi
so III principle, it in authority
Mr. J. here went iate an ANALYSIS of the n,,,l;,
offences, 10 siew that eHbczzement Of pabiic ,1onoy
unless made crisne by statutory law ,yas not fbs
sHJeat OF criminal Iudicaene, upless effected nv
:, means tending y,r. general public OWL. lint =;
ny s"ch nedrs as forgery, counte -feilinr OF seals
uslGg false weights &c. &c. and referred 10 r,,,
laht6oTiiies 10 shPW such to lavo hecn the unifrn,
lc59rse Of decisions in the English courts &c SC.
ne oiigheH c1cFgcd >, the indictments, ne said was
es1.oidsi-g OF certa!a SIMS of money, amounting
from geo 10 4, 600 dollars and if proved
li9thf '' cSteht, being accompanied bv no fais;gea
; ~ saFrepltoIs use OF any of t;aose tokens or
- ynch INVITE public confidence, not eorstl.
4 - g n, offence az common law.
, I2sirg argued a{ iaree the general 9asstion Of
tls iaty o applicable 10 the case NFr T. rr,-ca.,oi
20 ooe INTO the indictments, which he treatcd wiz
IVY htt!e ceremony as to their contents thoyrb
| "ithPerject decorum to their authors. we have
NOV room to gEs even Synopsis Of his argument on
lie said that III che first place NE indictment ina
l'if N his hand, land b6th 'vcraearly i'm the same
form contained no definite or inteqiBle charoe #
false Prctencesat all. Il was true eot it hesped IN
number OF deia1naory words; hut, in the angus 0e
OF Lord Holt; to which he referred more tbon on
] n rnnLrna snrnnthin1r LL.-- - --,