Daily Richmond Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1828-1831, 1829-05-30

mt .. then examined tho preliminary question
which had been made, which was. that this court
has no criminal common law Jurisdiction. How
this question ought to be settled in a mere Federal
court, 1t was not perhaps, necessary here 10 decide
Much had been said upon the subject but he was not
aware tlot any decision had ever been made 1y
the supreme court upon it. His own opinion wns
that the court must necessarily exercise of the now.
ers which arc necessary for the preservation Of the
Government. Bribery, contempts, assaults, riots &C.
he said, are oil common law offences and musf bc
punished as such, not at all. lsnt in this Dis.
trict, VIC have the State well as the Federal in.
rsdiction. The Constitution had riyen IN CSr
grcss exclusive legislation over this dstrict Con-
gross Ind adopted the laws of MARYLAND for the
Government OF the District; the common low WINS
n part OF the law of Maryland, and Of course
was part OF the law of this county. This common
law jurisdiction had been constantly exercised hv
the courts here. The common case of forgery by
the common law had been settled i'm Alcxnntris and
here olso, by decisions OF this court. There wae,
then, nc concluded, nothing in this objection.
MT. >. then proceeded TO consider the objections
20 the Indictment Ii had been said to he tissue Of
deiainatory cpithc,s. He should be sorry 10 think
1t was so-but ofthis he satisfied that nothn,y
IS set forth IN it but what is necessary to present
fair view Of the case
Mr.. 3. indicated the indictments throughout. as
well the general import the general language there
oi, replying to the exceptions which had been taken
To both by the opposite counsel If the terms used
were strong they might hive been stronger but that
the cfnpsc! for the u. S. followed the Inguage &c
the jury. The indictment set forth for exa spe TIM,
ostensbiy for the public service but falsely and frau
dulcnty the accused had procured TO be issued Cor
am requsition' upon the Treasury; and he araued
That there was no distinction in principle between HE
procuring the thing to be done and doinp IL bm,olr
Mr. - put The case: blank acquisitions signed bv the
lead of Department, felt, as is the usage in The
case OF ms Absence to he filled mp the exrcncies
OF the service may requires suppose one of these t
be taken and filled up, without authority of iaw
as alledged In the indictment, in such manner ma t
Shaoic me accused 10 commit fraud upon the pub
ic' was TINS or was II not forgery MIR. s. here re-
ferred 10 the definition of forgery and the decisors
ofthis conrt in reference thereto &c concludng HE
argument by saying that il was not his province "a
decide upon the question of fraud as charged in the
"iT,nent; out inc counsel had thought 1t their duty
to allege It, as believing that they should be able 10
prove IL. Having gone through the details of tho
indictment, Mr.. s. said here was n case Of mnn
who uses his public character, writes from his pub
nc ONCE 10 public agents. with view 10 ge,
possessiono OF public money for his own private hcre
and gets that money, snd it for the court To say
whether his doing all this was an indctabe offence
at common law or not -
In regard to the matter of the common law b.iey-
which this indictment il preferred, Mr. s. said he
should call to LIS aid, against the ingenuity of the
Posite counsel, common sense What is the common
law! The perfection of reason; n system of impl;ed
oogatoiis the enforcement of which i'm essential IN
tile well being OF society; common law in +, uord =
common sense and common justice. We can dctor
'nnc Tor ourselves without reference to autorit;cs
"hat common sense requires. Let U.s. then ask onr
no NH
ments one which ought TO be punished or NOT, Ir,t
common law did not embrace this case AFR & SAID
all would agree that it ought to do So B,t Mr. q
continued that the common law would bear him ont
the court would so decide. o'
In reply TO the argument of the counsel on the otber
sde' that If the facts alleged were proved they onIv
MADE the ccisod out to be public defaulter Mr. s
ssin that defauter was very different person. A.
dfaulter, In the commonly underst ood sonso &c ,t
term, ~ person who is bound TO receive or coIot
the puoiic money, which thus comes into his hands
oy que course OF law. Against such one il conld
not De charged that he failed to account NJ ct nyur
The mere failure TO pay makes him n defnultor. h,
WIS TINS inc ground on which this prosecution wes
to stand' Nos for the case Of the accused ;f The
facts alleged we're proved, was one of frsud from
ce INNING 20 ono ne had trespassed in writing tho
Tst - tev TO The Navy Agent IN dra winp tho SraS1s
IN procuring acquisitions to be issue to nav tb.rn
and IN altering the returns he was from
end trcSpasser. e'6 W
MIR: d then proceeded to examine the English au.
thortlcs, TO show the definitions of fraud indictab
at common law, which have been established h.,
he decisions OF the courts Of that country; from which
having made coplons quotations. he cnme TO the con-
cnsl9n snat any decctfu practice as well as token)
winch affected, or might affect, the public prone,,y
or me public interest. offence indictoblc ~,
common law. And under this definition, in addition
10 Tue 'tc'ate OF reason md common scsse he main
tanned the legality of this Indictment
Mr.. KEY, on behalf of the United States Go,lo,yo5
Mr.. Swami. Tic expressed his satisfaction in TIM
outset that the Counsel OF the other side had been
called back yesterday, by very proper suggestion OF
tne court, from an excursion which might have led
them to course Of argument neither suited TO the
dignity OF the court, nor to the question now 6euen
ding to which he protested intention strictly to
conine himself After expressing his hone thar tho
court would, with him. CONSIDER nothing b; the LEGAL
principle involved, and the weight of authority pro
duced from decisions IN the courts of Justice, Mr. K
proceeded to argue the demurrer to the indictments
hrst, upon the question whether the offence
charged in the indictments be criminal or innocent
whether 1t be al indctobe offence, or whether tho
remedy be only to be sought by civil sui aud Sc
condly, whether ifindctable at common law. the Of
fence ~ 80 charged as to sustain the Indictments
And first, Mr.. X. asked, il the substance of this
eharYc' ms tho story 10 told in the indictments ono
Which the criminal authority cnn take hold of and
punish or one which, whatever the turpitude Of n,
enables the offender TO laugh at the Government and
dare them to civil suit' The importance ofibis cues
ion ne SAID, was sufficient TO justify all the lubou-
which had been bestowed upon 1t on the other side,
and all Tint winch as counsel for tho United Statcs