Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1851-11-22
NATIONAL INTELLIGENCER.
CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR
THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS.
UNITED STATES VS.. ROBERT MORRIS.

THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS.
UNITED STATES VS.. ROBERT MORRIS.
While one Of the counsel for the defendant was
addressing the jury, he stated the proposition, that
this being criminal case, the jury were rghtfully
the Judges Of the law as well the fact and if any
Of them conscientiously believed the act Of 1850,
commonly called The Fugitive Slave Act to be
unconstitutional, they were bound by their oaths to
disregard any direction to the contrary which the
Court might give them; and he was about TO adj
dress the jury in support Of this assertion, when he
was stopped by the Court, and informed tina. he
could not be permitted to argue this proposition TO
the jury that the Court would hear him, and if
they should arrive at an opinion that the PROPOSE
ton was true, the jury would be SO informed by
the Court; and the counsel then addressed the
Court in supper. of the position. The opinion of
the Court thereon was delivered by Judge Curtis
as follows:
The Constitution OF the United States, article g. section g.
provides that the trial Of all Crimes except in Of i'm
psacheo shall be by jury The counsel for the defendant
maintains that in every such trial Of cme the jury the
Judges the law as we'll OF the fact that they have
only the power but the right decide the law that though
the Court may give its opinion to the jury respecting any
matter of law involved IN sns sAojny and
should allow to that opinion only just such weight as they
may think deserves that If does agree with their
convictions they bound to disregard it. the response
bty Of deciding rightly all questions both Of law and fact
involved in the general issue. resting upon them under the
sanction Of their oaths. s Fs
This is important question: and has been pressed up
on the attention Of the Court with great earnestnes and
much power Of language by of the defendants counsel
have right avoid decision Of it. certainly should
have preferred have question of much importance
specing which deep interest is felt, such strong
convictions entertained and, may add respecting which
there has been entire uniformity Of opinion, to the
highest tribunal for decision but it is not practicable in this
proceed, therefore, state the opinion which hold
concerning it. The question is what is meant by that
clause of the Constitution, the trial Of crimes shall be by
jury" Ia
Assuming what no one will controve that the tribunals
for the trial Of crimes intended to be constituted all
commonaw tribunals in which trial by jury prac,ised
constituted. having judges who to
preside the trials and form part of the tribunal and
jury of twelve men, whowere to form the other part and
that the other au,horativy and finally deter
mine the law the meaning Of the Constitution that TO
the jury and TO the judges this power should BIS entrusted
There is sounder rule than that which requires TO
look at the whole o. instrument before determine
question Of construction of any particular part and this rule
is Of the utmost importance when spilled instrument
the object of which to create for great
country, working harmoniousy and efficiently through its
veal executive, legislative, and judicial departments. It
needu therefore, before determining this question upon
critical examination Of the particular phrase question:
examine other provisions Of the Constitution which
parts Of the great whole to which the clause in question
belongs. We find in article vi: "This Constitution and
the laws Of the United States which shall be made pursu
thereof and all treaties made which shall be made
under the authority of the United States shall be the supreme
law Of the land" Nothing be clearer than the intention
to have the Constitution, laws, and treaties Of the United
States IN equal force throughout every part of the territory Of
the United States alike in all places and at all times To
secure this necessary end judicial department created
whose officers to be appointed by the Presden paid
from the national treasury responsible through the House of
Representatives to the Senate Of the United States and SO
organized by Of the Supreme Court established by
Constitution, and such inferior Congress might
tabish to uniform and consistent Interpretation
of the as and unvang enforcement Of them according
to their just meaning and effect That whatever done
by the Government Of the United States should be by stand
ing laws. operating equally in all parts Of the county bind
ing all citizens alike, and binding to the extent and
with precisely the effect on ALL undoubtedly intend
ed by the Constitution and any construction of particular
clause Of the Constitution which would tend TO defeat this
essential end h the least open very serious
It that what contended for by the defend
ants counsel would have something than ten
dency Of this kind The Federa in discussing the judi
ca power, remarks Thirteen independent Of final
jurisdiction over the arising the same laws
is hydra in Government from which nothing but contra
diction and confusion proceed"s But what is here
insisted on is that every jury empanneed in every Court
the United States is the ghtu and final judge of the
sence, construction, and effect Of every law which may be
material in the trial Of any criminal and only
this but that every such jury may, and if does it's duty
must, decide finally, and without any possibility Of revision
upon the constitutional power Of Congress to enact
tute Of the United Sites which, such trial, may be
brought in question So that should have thteen
but nnumerable number Of Courts having final jurs
diction the arising under the laws
and these Courts chosen by lot among U.S. and selected
the marshal elsewhere Of the body Of the people, with
reference their qualifications decide questions Of law
not allowed to give any for their DECISIONS will be
presently shown not 10 decide the law to
support the Constitution Of the United States, and yet pos
sessing compete authority to determine that act passed
the legislative department. with all the forms Of legislation
is imperative and invalid. The practical consequences Of
such state OF things too serious to be lightly encounter
ed, and in my opinion the Constitution did not design
ate recognise any such power BY the clause question
Some light as to its meaning may be derived from other
provisions in the same instrument The sixth article after
declaring that the Constitution, laws and treaties of the
United States shall be the supreme law Of the land proceeds
snd the Judges every Slate shalt bound thereby
But was It intended that the Constitution laws, and
treaties Of the United States shonld be the supreme law in
criminal well in civil cases II State law should
make penal for officer Of the United States to do what
act Of Congress commands him to do not the latter
be supreme the former And if and in such
jues finally and nghuy determine the law, and the Con-
stution when speaks Of trial by jury, why was
this commend laid the judges alone, who thus mere
advisers Of the jury and may bs bound give sound advice