The New York herald., 1851-11-29

tute ana had well known legal hgnihcatton ae
raj constitution. This is expressly stated by Chief
Justice Marshall, Burr's trial, 40l, his language
beng that :" II Is reasonable to suppose the term
same in which it is under stOsd in the English
law to have been used in the Statute Of Is Ed
ward ILL.," He then adds. Z" that principles LAID
down BY such writer's S, Is Coke Foster, and Black
ss Ii. w. Where body q men war ar. 'Ss- ss
sembled for the purpose Of making war against
the government, and are in . condition To make
war, the assembage is an act OF levying WAR;
Coke, Foster, and the other English elementary
writer's clearly maintain the doctrine that any re-
and force, 70 render it imperative and Ineffective,
is treason by levying war and the American
authorities adopt the English doctrine. In the
cases of the Western insurgents, Dallas, $40, 3,
Judge Patterson says, "lf the object of the in
surrection was to suppress the Excise Office, and
to prevent the execution of an act Of Congress by
force and intimidation, the ofs noe in legal es:ina-
authority Of the government. 1t Is high treason
by levying war" Judge Iredsl, in the cases
Of the Northampton insurgents, in his charge 10
the Grand Jury, says, ' | am warranted in saying,
that if, in the cases Of the insurgents who may
come under your consideration, the intention
WAS to prevent, by force, the execution Of cot
forcible opposition calculated to carry that in
timidation into effect, was q levying of war
against the United States, and Of course an act
Of treason. But if its intention was merely to
defeat its operation in particular instance, or
through the agency Of particular officer, from
some private or personal motive, though . high
offence may have been committed. It did not
amount to the crime of treason. The particular
motive must however, be the sole ingredient in tho
case; for if committed with general view to OBJ
struc the execution Of the act, the offence must be-
trials, 534, Judge Peters, in his charge to the Grand
Jury says, " II is treason in levying war against
the United States for persons who have nsre buss
common interest with their fellow citizens, 70 op-
pose or prevent by force, numbers or Intimidation,
public and general law Of the United States, with
intent to prevent its operation, or compel its re-
peal" Again" Although but one law be imme-
dately assailed the design is completed
and the generality Of the intent designated by q
part ssuuing the government Of the whole
Though puhishments are designated by particular
laws for certain inferior crimes. which, prosecuted
as substantive offences and the sole object OF the
prosecution, are exclusively liable to the penaltiea
directed by those laws, yet when committed with
reasonable ingredients, these crimes become only
circumstances or overt acts Ihe intent u the gss
case, Immediately follows Judge Peters; and refer
ring to the law laid down by Judges Patterson and
Peters in the Western Insurgents, q Dallas X
1857 says" AS do not differ ftom that dec sions
my opinion is that the declarations should be-
made upon the points of law at this time" Judge
Chase, on the second trial Of Fries, was on the
BENCH and in elaborate opinionh he maintains the
doctrine which had been ruled in the previous
cases. Judge Story, in his charge to the Grand
Jury, delivered June Is, 1912, Il Story's Re-
ports, 6l4,) says:--"It is not necessary that
It should be direct and positive intention
entirely to overthrow the government. II will be-
equally treason if the intention is by force to pre-
vent the execution of any one or more Of the gene
raj laws Of the United States or to resist the exer
else of any legitimate authority of the government
in its sovereign capacity Thus, if there is an as
sembly of persons with force with intent prevent
the collection of taxes lawful, or duties levied by
the government, or to destroy all custom heuses,
or to resist the administration Of justice 10 tho
United States, and they proceed to execute their
purpose by force, there be no doubt II would be
treason against the United States" Judge King:
in his charge to the Grand Jury, on the occasion Of
the Kenspgton riots, holds the same doctrine. His
language is, ''that where the object of q riosoua
assembly is to prevent, by force and violence, the
to compel its repeal by the legislative authority,
or to deprive any class of the community of the
protection afforded by Law, as burning down all
churches Of meeting houses Of q particular sect.
under color Of reforming q public grievance, or
to release ell prisoners in the public jails and tho
like and the rioters proceed execute by force their
predetermined objects and intent., they are guilty
the charge Of the District Judge (ion. John X.
Kane) delivered to the grand jnry on the 18th Of
September last. He says, Tho expression levyng
war EN- braces not merely the act Of formed or de-
oppose the execution enforcement Of provision
of the constitution, of public statute, If accom-
panied or followed BY an act Of forcibIe opposition
in pursuance Of such mbiustion." The sa;hori-
ties and opinions which / have quoted are conclu-
sve the question Of law, and prove that the torc
BILE resistance to the execution Of the law Of the
United States, knswn as the Fugitive Slave Law Of
1850, which took place at Christiana, on the llth
Of September last, in which the defendant partci-
pated, with others, If designed to render its provi-
sions imperative and void, was treason against tho
United States. IL was levying Of war within the
mesning Of the constitution Tue intent with which
the act was committed, Is the essential Ingredient
in the offence. If IL was not levelled at the statute
slaves belonging to the late Mr.. Gorsuch, it
amounted far as the United States is concerned,
to nothing more than . high midemesnor The
death which resulted from the violence, in this as
pect Of the case would be indictable and punishable
rs murder by the laws OF Pennsylvania, but could
not be considered act Of treason. IL is your Pc
cuar province to pass upon the question Of intent
and you have . right to infer reasonable designs
from the facts and circumstances which attended
the transaction. The combination or conspiracy OF
the defendant with Others, forcby to resiht the Law
at Christiana, can be established without direct
Judge Kane, "may be addueed from tie concerted
action itself, il may be inferred from facts oc-
curing at the time or Afterwards, as well as be-
fore" In this particular case, however, there 10
fendent is concerned His resistance to the law vas
open and declared He avowed his determinatioD
the spot, not TO regard the provisions Of the Fu-
gtive Slave Law Of 1850. or any other act OF Con-
sree upon that subject, and in the very presence Of
an arm ed band Of negroes, who had come together
to resist the law, he declare that it's supremacy
shall not be aintained by him, and that the rights
Of these insurgents were superior to any statue Of
the Uni,ed States. "They are armed" was his
language, "and can defend themselves"
ltis manifest therefore, that Castner Hanway, so
far in him lay had resolved to prevent the exc
cution Of these Fugitive Slave laws in every in
stance, and TO make them dead letter in tho
neighborhood and county in which he resided, so
far any ability or influence Of his could coatri-
butte TO that end. His conduct and language to-
wards Kline, melted and encouraged ell tha. fol-
lowed afterwards. The prisoner is legally aud mo-
rally responsible for IL all. Hsd he chosen 70 dis
counter ance this agrant violation Of Law, and held
the excited and infuristcd blacks In check, toe
putation Of Pennsylvania never would have been
tarnished by the disgraceful occurrences Of Cnris-
tiana, and worthy and respected citizen Of 81 ad-
ioininn State wnuld nnt harn haen uantnnlr And