The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1851-03-21

opened in the city Of Boston the 18th in
slant for its quarterly term, and that more than
usual interest was felt in its meeting, from the
fact that the persons charged with aiding and
abetting the escape of the person alleged to be
the slave "Shadrach" will come before il. The
storm prevented the assembly of the grand jury
until about noon, when the following persons
were empaneled Benjamin Dutton, Thomas
Hammond, William Little, James S. Marble,
Samuel G. Perkins, lothian Twchell, of Bos-
ton Michael Hittinger and Mark f. Warren,
of Charlestown; David Pratt and John Lille,
of Chelsea Nathan Breed and Warren Bur-
rell, of Lynn; William p. Burns and Albert
G. Hale, of Rockport; Benjamin Dana and
William +. Gray Of Watertown Otis Train,
Of Weston; James Wood, of Concord; Lewis
Eddy aud Charles Howard, Of bingham; Will
liam Ellison and Edmund Marsh, of Quincy.
BENJAMIN DANA was appointed by the court
foreman of tAe jury.
After the customary and required oaths had
been administered, his honor Judge SPRAGUE
addressed the jury in the following
Ear CHARGE:
Gentlemen Of the Grand Jury:
The Office you now hold demonstrates that the
Constitution has established not mere confederacy
of States. but Government acting directly upon
individuals, with Legislature 10 enact laws, ju
dietary to expound them, and an Executive to en-
force Them. Under this Government the people of
the United States have enjoyed greater degree of
enjoyed BY any other people in the history Of the
world. To preserve this Government, It 10 neccs-
sary that it, laws should be faithfully executed,
and you arc now called upon under the highest
ar cfio IN air In hin iudia uanhl
think il proper at this time to call your atten-
ton particularly TO that part of the criminal code
which prohibits and Furnishes forcible resistance to
the laws. Government is so great blessing that
the highest crime which can Be committed is trea--
This 10 defined by the Constitution itself in
the following words: Treason against the United
States shall consist only, in levying war against
them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them
aid and comfort" What amounts to levying war
This question soon after the adoption of TIE
Constitution in the several trials Of Mitchell, Vigol,
insurrection against tho law imposing duty upon
distilled spirits, under the administration of Wash
ington, and subsequently, in the trial Of Aaron
Burr in the year 1907 and in the case ofthe United
States Hoxie in the year 1908. These were all
trials in the circuit court.
The only case which has come before the SUI
premc Court was that Of ex parte Bollman ct al,
Cranch, 125. In this it was decided that elf
body Of men be actually assembled for the purpose
Of affecting by force reasonable purpose" this is
levying war. What is a reasonable purpose! If
the object be entirely TO overthrow the Government
at any one place by force, at New Orleans, which
is the case mentioned by the Supreme Court, that
10 "a reasonable purpose. But conspiracy to do
this, and actually enlisting men who never assem-
ble is not sufficient to constitute the crime OF trea
son. There must be an actual assemblage of men
for the purpose of carrying the conspiracy into Of
feet by force. So, also, it is reasonable purpose,
the object be to prevent BY force the execution OF
is entirely to overthrow the Government as to one
Of its laws. And II there be an actual assemblagc
of men for the purpose Of carrying such an inten-
ten into effect that's of acting together, and pre-
venting by force the execution Of the law generally,
in all cascs it will constitute lcvying Of war
But the sudden outbreak Of mob, or the assem-
bling Of men in order by force to defeat the execu-
ton Of the law in particular instance, and then
to disperse without the intention to continue to-
gcther to reassembe for the purpose of defeating
the law generally, in all cases. is not levying war
although not present with the force actually assem-
bled ssAll those who perform any part, however
minute, or however remote from the scene Of
tioD, and who are actually leagued in the general
conspiracy are to be considered as traitors"
There are minor offences created and defined by
acts Of Congress alone. By statute of the 30th Of
April, 1880, chapter 9, section %, it is enacted,
"That II any person persons shall knowingly
and wlfuily obstruct, resist, or oppose any officer
OF the United States in serving or attempting to
serve or execute any meene process or warrant, or
any rule or order of any Of the courts Of the United
States, any other legal judicial writ or process
whatsoever, shall assault, beat, or wound any
officer or other person duly authorized in serving
executing any writ rule, order, process, or war
rant aforesaid, every person so knowingly and viii
fully offending in the premises, shall, on conviction
thereof" be punished by fine and imprisonment.
Thus you perceive that for more than sixty
years, indeed from the foundation Of the Govern
ment, il has been q criminal offence to resist, or
oppose, obstruct the marshal in the execution OF
warrant or other legal process; and 80 plain is
the utility and necessity OF this provision that DUR
ing all that time no voice has been raised against
it, So far from imparing the energy with which
the laws arc to be executed, the people, by their
legislation, have added new sanctions Thus by
statute Of March 2, 1881, chap 49, sec. g it is en-
acted: "That If any person or persons shall cor
ruptly, by threats or force. endeavor to inilu-
ence, intimidatc or impede any juror, witness or
officer in any court Of the United Statss, in the
discharge of his duty, or shall corruptly, or by
threats force, obstruct impede or endeavor to
obstruct or impede, the due administration OF JUS
tce therein, every person or persons so oilending
shall be liable TO prosecution therefor, by lndict-
ncnt."
This salutary enactment to secure the free course
of law has been in force for nearly twenty years
without objection. But VIC have recently heard
that not only should the courts be impcded in ad-
minstcring the law, but that the marshal should
be obstructed and even resisted by force in the
execution OF legal process because oil recent sta
tue providing for the arrest and delivering up OF
fugtivcs from labor. II is to be observed that this
statute subjects person TO arrest who was not
before liable to be ecizcd and carried out OF the
State; for, sincc the adoption OF the Constu-
tne6c same persons nave Decu W eohCH
and carried away by those from whose service they
had escaped. For pro existing right, created
by the Constitution and affirmed by the Supreme
Court Of tho United States, Congress has provided
new remedy, by legal process to be executed by
public officer, and has added penal sanctions,
more eectually to ensure the execution OF the law
lift have not all the safeguards we could wish, SO
neither had the statute Of 93 passed by the fathers
Of the Constitution, with the appreciation of WISH
ington and sustained by the people for more than
half century The Constitution commands that
fugitives from labor shall be delivered up. The
Supreme Court have decided that it belongs to
Congress to provide the means. Congress have
enacted this law. II is imperative, and it will be
enforced Let no man mistake the mildness and
forbearance with which the criminal code is habit
ually administered, for weakness or timidity Re-
sistancc must make 1t sternly infcxiblc
Discussion ia Free Men of all classes and Of every
shade of opinion may, by argument, or even dccla-
nation addressed to the or the passions en-