Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1829-06-30


Mr. JoNxs stated, that if there was my season
for these instructions, in an earlier stare of
the proceedings. The law had acGuicsced i'm the
dccision OF the Jury, ignoring the bill for forgery.
! he Counsel for the United states, i'll comparing
the Two indictments, came TO the conclusion that
Inc Jury were convinced that the facts averred had
been proved and that they did amount in their
to forgery, but that, through mistake of the law,
they refused to find forgery. lie commended that
inns was not lair statement. Alter the bill rh1rrinr
forgery was returned ignornmns, the Counsel for
the United States admitted that new bill was. in
Il Jew minutes sent mp To the Jury, without word
of explanation. IF there had been metake of
the INV, That was the time TO usk that the error
should be corrected.
lfthe Courtshould determine to go into these mi
mute details on the merits the law ani the facts
winch IS comrnon in charging 1cta Jury. the Coun
sci Tor the accused would ha, some crave objections tn
oficr jin they would restrain themselves until they
are convinced that such course would be pursued
MT. JONES discairncd any idea of arguing whether
certain facts amount to forgery or not because he
considered that question non jadice at pre-
sent and one which could only be discussed as ncas
ci''i2', or er grain. His whole argument was dircc
ted to the alleged mistake OF the law by the Grant
dnty. lie would ask, however, if the atcIatio os
an abstract or account current vas necessarily for
gerry Ihc COUNSEL for the United States had them
selves abandoned this ground for Charge of
forgery They had also annexed further u,,utca.
lions IN their arguments against the demurre 3,
winch would how make against those arguments by
which they now attempted to sustain the motion for
instructions The Counsel on the other side had
been repeatedly called OH to show in what respects
! and how, the United States might be icfrauded and
they had only replied by reference to extraueous cir
cnnistance+. They had not shown how the fra,.lu-
lent intent was possible. An Indictment was sent
up, winch neither makes out forgery or fraud. Tie
Grand Jary had Hot been convinced hut were CON
vnccd OF the contrary, that the alterations of this alb
stract dId not amount TO forgery The error of the
U'ahd Jury hai not been III rejecting one indict-
nent but i'll finding any Indictment of tho eight.
There had not been single which was accom-
panied By any evidence whatever. With the eyccp--
ton cthc first, not hal been founded on any pre-
ccdcnt presantnicat bu: had been returned on bills
sent CO oicio by the United States Attorneys TO the
Grand Jury.
All the evidence hear say upon which
the Counsel 10: the United States, their clerks
iau prepared tho averments. Considering this to
De an abuse in the criminal practice of the Court
he called upon the Conrt to lay its hand upon it. He
referred to the swearing of the witnesses who had
appeared IN the original indictment, by which they
were sworn not to give evidence any specific char
yes, but merely To give evidence againat Tobias
Watkins The accu: cd had been commit cd for tr-
al and witnesses summoned against him. not one Of
these witnesses had been sworn lie had been in
laIl two months ard eight Indictments had brcIl found
IN which perjury might have been hcaped upon per-
jury, without any remedy from az human tribunal
Judge Fhruston asked hoy- the counsel kncw those
facts.
aIr. Jones said he had ascrrtanc,l it Officially be
applying day by day to the clerks table, to know
what Witnesses had been sworn against the accused
lie referred to the old practice ofarking the names
OF the witnesses the back of the Indictment. and
swc airing them they ycre sent 10 the iury That
practice was now departed from, and the only oath
which had been i'll any administered, was IN
! un'uwtui oath, to give true evidence before the
brand jury. On such testimony the or three
present ments first made founded; and all tie
indictments presented since, had even no such
! foundation as TINT. He then entered his protest
against the practice amounting to an abuse which
was direct violation Of the Maryland law. ON
which it WAS said 20 BE- founded--aud if So a more
infamous contrahand had never been introduced
INTO the practice here, and it ought to be coudsnn-
cd to he burnt by the common hanpnnr--tIlat
witnesses are to be generally, and indefinite
" and on their general and indefinite TESTIMONY
Grand Jhrcs are tn BE- left TO make any present.
ents they please, ecctino even the life of an indi
vdunl When doctrines thus dcnvinr first nrinci-
PIES overtunng the laws Of social order are ting
pFopounded by the counsel OH the other side it is
necessary to recur to first principles. He then re-
cited from Gritty the forms of Practice in order tn
show the departure which had taken place in the
present case, IN which the Grand Jury had been left
TO proceed an HbRfJn to any enquiries they NAV seq
mt to go into, instead Of being confined to a specific
enquiry They might present physician for not be-
ing good physician, lecturer for not being rood
lecturer court for not doing business fast enough
or Legislature tor not crrcling sufficient laws.
lie also ohi"eed to the rf responsible sccuser;
Emu me Subs ution for such of the Gad jury who fon
their breasts inst the accused
'f tho pr asonI Practice sd! be tolerated, aid 80 or 90
witnesses may nc Sworn generally give evidence there
''Sf'"S'o''y Nneies Dut the them
selves may swear what they please witnout exposing
"e'eTe TO the 1rnaii;es nj pc. jury. c called ie
court t0 pu. their hand u his i h,rsc
The various modes proceeding in cases Of Iir,ncpt
ne pointed ont AID to'k view the definite meaning
oi I've term Pre'rrinent sufficient number the Jury
may know ~ their own breast that crime has en-
committed. In thar casr IL is only c,myeren, HEN,
10 PRESENT the facts within tiai: wn LEDGE in tho
t'in' c" ncsan'men An iniicIcn on the her Ia nd
'"uoe" on charge made, and suicien; evidence - o.
S"cen oe'oe 'he H'and jury in its support lie quoted
from Blackstone and Gritty, sustan his veJs on these
poi"iS. he statute Of Maryland, which had been quo
lsn 10 usa'n tn" loose practice OF tie mere ministerial
".e'S VI '"e Eo"f', instead OF sancouing extension
VI Tue p"wS's oi G'dmd jury, did in fact limit their
power.
/" h'S case on the second day Of The term arge mass
Witnesses were s"nfn' and IL docs not appear the
ecold 'nht any one was give evidence agains
TOBIAS Watkins II istfue mos Kendall was sworn
among the witnesses, but hr liberty 10 swear N any