The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1851-03-28
TIL Z r EPU BLIC.
Charge OF Judge sprague.

4
Charge OF Judge Sprague.
Some OF the paragraphs Of the late charge of
Judge Sprague to the grand jury at Boston having
been transposcd in the journal from which we CO.
piedit, in justice to tho Judge republish IL in its
properly arranged form:
| Gentlemen Of the Grand Jury:
The office you now hold demonstrates that the
Constitution has established not confederacy
Of States, but a Government acting directly upon
individuals, with Legislature 10 enact laws, aju-
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
liberty, prosperity and happiness than have been
ne
sary that its laws should be faithfully executed,
and you are now called upon, under the highest
sanction, to aid In this Indispensable work.
| think IL proper at this time to call your atten-
tion particularly to that part of the criminal code
which prohibits and Furnishes forcbe resistance to
the laws. Government is so greata blessing that
the highest crime which can be committed is trea-
son. This il defined by the Constitution itself in
the following words Treason against the United
States shall consist only in levying war against
aid and comfort" What amounts to ievyng war?
This question arose soon after the adoption of tie
Constitution in the several trials of Mitchell, vgol,
insurrection aganst 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
| -
| trials in the circuit court.
| The only case which has come before the Su-
Cranch, l25. In this it was decided that "if
body OF men be actually assembled for the purpose
Of affecting by force reasonable purpose" this is
levying war. What is reasonable purpose! If
the object be entirely to overthrow the Government
at any one place by force, as at New Orleans which
Ia the case mentioned by the Supreme Court, that
Is a reasonable purpose. But a conspiracy to do
this, and actually enlisting men who never assem-
bic, is not sufficient to constitute the crime OF trsa-
son. There must be an actual assemblsge of men
for the purpose of carrying the conspiracy into Of
feet by force. So, also, 1t s reasonable purpose,
if the object be to prevent by force the execution Of
any law OF the United States in all cases. for it
is entirely to overthrow the Government 10 one
Of its laws. And if there be 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 cases it will constitute evyipg OF war.
| But the sudden outbreak of mob, the assem-
bling of men in order by force TO defeat the
ton Of the law in particular instance, and then
to disperse, without the intention to continue to-
gether to reassemblc for the purpose of defeating
the law generally, in all cases, is not lcvying
If war be actually levied, persons may be guilty
although not present with the force actually assem-
bled. 'sAll those who perform any part, however
minute, or however remote from tie scene of &C
ton, and who are actually lcagucd 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 g. section %, it Ia enacted,
"fhat if any person or persons shall knowingly
and wifnlly obsruct, resist, or oppose any officer
Of the United States in serving or attempting to
serve or execute any mesne process, or warrant or
any rule order OF any Of the courts of the United
States, any other legal judicial writ process
whatsoever, or shall assault, beat. or wound any
officer or other person duly authorized in serving
or executing any writ, rule, order, process,
rant aforesaid, every person so knowingly and will
fully offending in the premisez, shal conviction
|, thereof" be punished by fine and imprisonment.
. Thus you perceive that for moro than sixty
. years, indeed from the foundation of the Govern
nent, it has been criminal offence to resist, or
oppose obstruct the marshal in tho execution OF
! n warrant other legal process; and plain is
the utility and necessity ofthis provision, that dur
it. So far FROM impairing the energy with which
the laws are to be executed, the people, by their
legislation, have added new sanctions. Thus by
statute of March 2, 1881, chap. 80, sec. it is
acted: .'That il any person or persons shall cor
ruptly, or by threats or force. endeavor to infu-
ence, intimidate or impede any juror, witness or
discharge Of his duty. shall corruptly, or by
threats force obstruct or impede, endeavor to
obstruct impede, the due administration of JUS
tce therein, every person or persons 80 offending
shall be liable TO prosecution therefor, by indict
ment."
This salutary enactment to secure the free course
, of law has been in force for nearly twenty years
, without objection. But we have recently heard
that not only should the courts be impeded in ad
ministcring the law, but that the marshal should
be obstructed, and even resisted by force in the
/
tute providing for the arrest and delivering up Of
fugitves from labor. II is to be observed that this
statute subjects no person to arrest who was not
before liable to be seized and carried out of the
State; for since the adoption Of the Constitu
ton these persons have been liable TO be taken
and carried away by those from whose service they
had escaped. For a pre- existing right created
by the Constitution and affirmed by the Supreme
Court Of the United States, Congress has provided
a new remedy, by legal process to be executed by
public officer, and has added penal sanctions,
eectually to ensure the execution of the law.
lfit have not all the safeguards could wish, so
neither had the statute of 93 passed by the fathers
OF the Constitution, with the appreciation Of Wash
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
vide the means. Congress have enacted this law.
It is imperative, and it will be enforced. Let no
man mistake the mildncss and forbearance with
which the criminal code is habiually administered,
for weakness or tmdity. Resistance must mako
it sternIy inhexble.
Discussion is FREQ. Men of all classes and of every
shade of opinion may, by argument, or even decla-
nation addrcssed to the the passions, en-
deavor to impress new views upon the public mind.
But IT, in their opposition to the expressed will "
society, they pass from words to deeds, and embody
mschicvous doctrines into criminal acts of resist
ancc to law, whoever they may be, and whatever
may be their position their ultimate purposes,
they must later find that the law is ire
sls;io,e and ovsrwselmlng me people nave nsen
under the quiet administration Of law, that they
not easily brought to believe that il can be OBJ
structcd, much less to contemplate the consc-
quences Of its overthrow.
But let them be startled by acts of violence and
systematic resistance; let it be brought home to
them practical question, whether they will live
under law, administered by responsible public
agents. or under the dominion Of mob, impcllcd
by passion guided by no rule, and subject 10 no
restraint and they will rush to The support Of the
constituted authorities, and Indignantly repress
the spirit of anarchy
The statute of 1880, chap 60, after providing that
the claimant Of fugitive from labor may have a
warrant for his seize him without process
proceeds, in the 7th section, to enact sthat any
person who shall knowingly and wilfully obstruct,
hinder, or prevent such claimant, his agent at
torncy, or any person persons lawfully assisting
him, her, or them, from arrcsting such fugitive