Daily Richmond Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1828-1831, 1829-05-29


DO hastily traced.
Mr.. JOINS began by saying that the counsel for
me accused were, in the present stage and shape Of
the proce, Jings, laborng under great
IN proceeding TO submit to the Court what they
sidered very important qucstion--impornnt in it's
hearing not only towards tho individual concerned,
out TO the whole people whose rights were implicated
III IL. The accused, IN the present he said, had
uecn subjected TO what he considered very high
handed attempt to convert the criminal judcature of
the country from its proper direction for the purpose
OF making Its operation penal upon individual who,
every thing alcdged in the accusation against him.
was admitted To be true, only properly subject to
civil prosecution for the breach Of civil trust.
The evil attempted TO be rcdrcSscd by this prosccu-
ton was one which, II IL existed all in the pre-
sent case has existed at different times in every
country IN which civil government exists. There
was scarcely government in Europe. or America.
III which cases al breach public trust had not been
committed by individuals, by the appropriation TO
their personal use Of governmental funds which came
into their hands III trust, diverted from their
proper objects 10 individual uses. In the govern
mcnts Of the United States both Federal and State.
many such cases had occurred. But this was the
first instance that had occurred in winch mere nu.
Red accusation of transportation of public money
~ an individual had been made the Ground of inIict-
nest unless under particular statute making il
CRIMINAL Such transportation of public money
never had been, up TO this day, Considered an offence
per Sc against the fundamental law of the land which,
is designated the Common Law.
In the present case, moreover, Mr. J. said the uc-
cliscd not only had to encounter this novel aud nm
precedentcd form of prosecution but lac had to NEE,
1t when urged against him in the most oppressive
form and vCstvre in which it was possible for mower
10 array IT against him. He had, in truth whether
innocent or guilty fthc facts aedgcd in the ndict-
ment, III various forms already suffered all that th,
most vindctive prosecutor could desire He had suf.
tered, not upon conviction, but upon accusation Ill
sustained, and, IN particulars false on the face
OF IT. II sccm cd, he said, that this gentleman nfer
an nb'crce of some time from home; nfier tho y.av
/ 90 tpr T,il.
prejudice IN the public mind against him, by nccusa
tons of flight from Justice, upon his return home
wards. when, instead of pursuing him to the utnos.
limits of refuge, waiting for him until tho worry limo
arrived, when by bis conduct, no falsiiied the aeon
sation of flying from Justice by returning to his fam
ly, he was by II refinement of petty tyranny seized
late at night and dragged in the direction he was yo
unfairly going
counsel tho expectancy of combining himself TO tho
question of t1p before the court, to which his pre
sent course of remarks did not appear 10 have uuv
necessary connexiun.1
Mn. JoNEs said it appeared 10 him no MORO ,,, Sol,
70 ms client, who had already been subjected To much
oboquy, and was likely to be subjected IN more TO
place his case fairly before the court. lie proceed
ed TO say that he presumed it would be perfectly adj
nlssbie for him To state that II was matter OF rbe
highest Importance TO the good of tho country and "a
the security of the rights of the body Of the peouo
that the criminal law of the country should be precis
Understood and generally known; and that the co,,n-
sol Tor the accused we're dlscharging nothing but n
duty of the profession to ne public, whose servant
they IN some degree were, when they brought to the
test OF the law every accusation which went to place
IN peril the life or liberty of the citizen
MIR. j. then proceeded TO argue he question or Ic
demurrer upon the ground, first o the essenc, OF tho
ohence maintaining that giving every latitude tn the
aVernients IN the indictments that was possihle
moulding them into the most uneXcnutiorahio far,
and admitting them all 10 be proved there was mo
ground for charging the accused as now indicted wei,
any olIeHce against the common law. After which
nc proposed to look into the indictments themselves
anu sec whether they were not still further from any
definition of tho oTiunui oucnce than even tho no
Pular understanding of the charge contained in tsm
He assumed, what he undertook TO demonstrate fon
the terms of the indictments Themselves Tim, IL
whole amount of the charges 10 be proved IN H.;
utmost extent, was the case OF misrepresentation h.,
an officer OF the government, to his private noe -
moneys OF the governInent-bringng him within tho
description OF what was commonly called n nuhi;o
dCaultor. Pine question for the court tb", fu ,n
whether the numerous class Of GAGS con,inc r,I
this description, does constitute on offence Sorn;a
Die ny the common law of the land. On the mart NJ
s chent ana OF public justice, he Hlaint sncd hn this
%os not a case for the common laws that il wna No,
| so III principle nor vas 1t in authority.
| Mr. ). here went into an ANALYSIS of tbc rubI;.
Offences, TO show hat cmhczzlcmcnt of public none,
unless made crime by statutory law Was not ~
subject Of criminal Judcature, unless effectcd ~,
means tehd7g 10 wOfa general public cvE that i.
by srch mcons as forgery, cOuncrf.itino oc so,is
using false weights, &c. &c. and refcrred 70 rn
a"'hoHues 10 sneW such to have been the uniform,
course OF decisions in the English courts 90 &C.
The offence Charged in the indictments he said. ,vss
the obtaining of certain sums of money arnount,ny
altogether from 1000 TO 1000 dollars and IL nrove5
10 the in extent being accompanied by 10 falsiica
ton or surreptltious use of auy of those ,oLcr -
badges which invite public confidence did no, consti
tute an offence ut common law.
Having argued at large the general question of
the law as applicable to the case, Dir. J. proceeded
10 look into the indictments which bo tr.stod ;tL
very little ceremony "a 10 their contcpts tbougb
with perfect decorlnn as to their authors We haze
NOT room to give n synopsis Of his argument ~,
ths any more than on the first ground he occupied
ne sad that, III the first place, the Indictment Ina
held IN ms hand, land both nearly in the Same
form contained M definite or ineligible CHARGE of
false Pretences AT all il was true that it hcnncd I'm
number OF deiaratory words hut, in the Iangunoe
Of Lord Holt, to which nc referred more tbons ons
u requires something than dcfarnatory cptbefs
TO constitute crime. II not sufficient TO inn
pute that man has committed a crime, but tho in
fIrgf4 r,t~4r i.