Phenix gazette. [volume] (Alexandria [D.C.]) 1825-1833, 1829-06-04

Onfteo otates ". Or. w atkins IS too long Tor
insertion in this mornings Gazette. We take
the following abstrac, from the Telegraph:
The Court was of opinion, that the money Of
whie h the United States was def.auded was the
property OF the United States; that the offrnce
was commop law offence, and tina, this Court
had common law criminal Jurisdictions; bu,
sustained the demurrer, and quashed the in
dictmen,s on the grounds-hrs,, that they did
| not Sufficiently aver what the false ptetenoes
were by which the government was defrauded /;
and secondly, that the charge of forgery, il
sustainablr al all, could not properly be made
IN conjunction with another charge in the same
count OF an indictment. The demurrer is sus.
tanned by the opinion only on the formal objec-
tons TO he indie tments. As 10 the substance
OF the charges, the Courts decision is against
the prisoner.
Judge Thruston was clearly Of opinion, that
the demurrer ouyh, TO be overruled. Although
he c"ncurred with the ma jority Of the Court
IN opinion as TO the charge Of forgery, yet he
though that the indie tmen,. were, in other re-
spect>, good. If these indictments were no,
good, il was hardly possible, he believed, TO
sustain an indictment al common law for such
off nces against the United States.
After the decision OF he Court was pro.
nounc"d, Mr.. Coke, the counsel Of MIR. Wa.
k,ns, moved the Court that The same judgment
should be entered 20 third Indie ment, to
which. they had also entered demurrer
Mr. Key objected 20 this enry, and stated
thai hey should argue the demurrer. The
Council for MIR. w. then insisted that it pre-
sen ed The same case and must be decided in
the same way, and urged that If the Court
would allow an argumert under such circum'
stances i, should be made at once.
Mr.. Key replied, that hr admitted that this
third indie ment, and the demurrer 10 il, pre-
sen ed tie same case, but that NJ Swami aud
MINIS, 4 thought they could satisfy The court,
by aulnorities, tha' he indic,men, was sustain.
abb upon he prin 'iple> laid down by the cour.
IT, he opinion JUST, dei,er,d-tha; i, was an
indictm.n for fraud on the government, and
| required no setting out Of false pre,ences'-
that nothing more WAS necessary than TO aver
hat it fraud upon the government, x to
| ST., out the marner ofirs rerpe'ralion, which
was done sufficiently; 'natthe primo 'p'es relating
IL h, AIS by false pr"iences, we're wholly map
plicahle; AID thaI they would be ready 10
produce authorities. and be heard 'o-morrow.
The court then stated, it should be heard
Tomorrow. amt Judge Cranoh added, hat,
houchi might b" unnecessary 10 aver aud state
| the CASE tIelces, aud 10 charge lrat the gov
ernmsn was Jeirauded by the false pre'ences,
" thai, If i was done, (as il was here) and
h rar,y thereby saw that he was to be charg-
ed with these false pre'enccs, 1t would be ne
ccssary ina hey should be proved, and there
fore they shouts be stated and averred in
proper .orm, and with sufficient Certainty.
NJ. KEY replied, tha, be thought they could
sh ha' any such staien,- mt nf iaisa ','1t."r-"
| IS ~, ont, would W but surplusage; and that
II would he enough 10 Stew the Government
WAS dsfraudrd, and he means BY which it was
/ doue-
! Judge Thrusuon stated tina: he intended 10
have said, in his upiuoo, that il the offence was
indic,abe fraud upon The government, no
fa.sr prctencr> wrre ne.' ssery 20 be set out.