Washington sentinel. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1853-1855, 1854-06-13
From the N v ua.ala

Inc slave Trade and Resistance to United
staaes Omcers,-Charge of Judge Curtis,
UNITED STATES CIRcUIr CouRr-BosroN,
June The Grand Jury were empannelled,
OF whom Isaac Tower was appointed foreman.
Judge Curtis charged the Grand Jury with
especial reference to the slave trade, and re-
sistance to. officers of government in the
discharge of their duty We give so much OF
1t as relates TO the aforementioned offence:
There is another criminal law Of the United
States to which / must call your attention,
and give you in charge. 1t was enacted on
the 18th of April, 1870, and is in the following
words:
If any person shall knowingly or wiIfuly OBJ
struct, resist oppose any officer of the nited
States, In serving, or attempting TO serve or ex-
| ecute any mesne process or warrant, or any rule
or order of any of the OF the United States
| or any other legal writ or process whatever, or
shall assault, beat, wound any officer, other
person duly authorized, in serving or executing
any writ, rule, order, process or warrant afore-
| said, such person shall, on conviction, be i'm
| prisoied not exceeding twelve months, and fined
| not exceeding three hundred dollars"
You will observe, gentlemen, that this law
makes no provision for case where an officer,
or other person duly authorized, is killed by
those unlawfully resisting him. That is case
of murder, and is left TO be tried and punished
under the laws of the State, within whose juris
diction the offence is committed. Over that
offence against the laws of the State of Massa-
chusetts we have here no jurisdiction. 1t is to
be presumed that the duly constituted authori
ties of the State will, in any such case, do their
duty and if the crime of murder has been
committed, will prosecute and punish all who
are guilty.
| Our duty is limited to administering the laws
of the United States and by one of those laws
which have read to you, to obstruct, resist, or
oppose, or beat, or wound any officer of the
United States, or other person duly authorized,
in serving or executing any legal process what
soever, is an offence against the laws of the
United States, and is one of the subjects con-
corning which you are bound to inquire
1t is not material that the same act is an of.
fence both against the laws of the United
States and of particular State. Under our
system of government the United States and
| the several States are distinct soyereignties,
each having its own system of criminal law,
which it administers in its own tribunals; and
| the criminal laws Of State can in no way af
| feet those of the United States. The offence,
| therefore, of obstructing legal process of the
| United States is to be inquired of and treated
by you as misdemeanor, under the act OF
SohSiSoo Which, i nave quOttuy WITHOUT any re-
gard to the criminal laws of the State, or the
nature of the crime under these laws.
This act of Congress is carefully worded, and
its meaning is plain. Nevertheless, there are
some terms in it, and some rules Of law con-
| nected with it, which should be explained for
your guidance. And first, as to the process,
the execution of which is not to be INSTRUCTED.
The language ofthe act is very broad. Item
| braces every legal process whatsoever, whether
issued by a court in cesson, or by Judge, or
| magistrate, or commissioner, acting in the due
administration of any law of the United States.
You will probably experience no difficulty in
| understanding and applying this part ofthe law
AS to what constitutes an obstruction-it was
many years ago decided by ustice Washington,
that to support an indictment under this law, it
was not necessary to prove the accused used or
even threatened active violence. Any obstruc-
ton to the free action of the officer or his
lawful assistants, wilfully placed in his or their
way, for the purpose Of thus obstructing him or
them, is sufficient. And it is clear, that if a
multitude of persons should assemble, even in
a public highway, with the design to stand
together, and thus prevent the officer from
passing freely along the way, in the execution
of his precept, and the officer should thus be
hindered or INSTRUCTED, this would of ITSELF and
without any active violence, be such an obstruc-
ton as is contemplated by this law. If to this
be added use of any active violence, then the
officer is not only obstructed, but he is resisted
and opposed, and of course the offence is COM
| pete for either of them is sufficient to consti-
| tute it.
If you should be satisfied that an offence
against this law has been perpetrated, you will
then inquire by whom and this renders it ne
cessary for me to instruct you concerning the
kind and amount of participation which brings
individuals within the compass of this law.
And first, all who are present and actually
obstruct resist or oppose, are Of course guilty.
So are all who are present, leagued in the com.
mon design and so situated as to be able, in
case of need, to afford assistance to those aetu-
ally engaged, though they do not actually OBJ
struct, resist, or oppose If they are present
| for the purpose of afording assistance in OBJ
structing, resisting, or opposing the officers,
and are so situated as to be able in any event
| which may occur, actually to aid in the com.
| mon design, though no overt act is done by
| them, they are still guilty under this law The
| offence defined by this act is misdemeanor
| and it is rule of law that whatever participa-
ton, in case of felony, would render a person
guilty, either as principal in the second de-
| gree, or as an accessory before the fact does,
|
a principal in misdemeanors all are princi-
pals. And, therefore, in pursuance of the same
rule, not only those who are present, hut those
who, though absent when the offence was com
mitted, did procure council, command or abet
others to commit the offence, are indictable as
principal
Such is the law and it would seem that no
| Just mind could doubt its propriety. If persons
having influence over others use that influence
to induce the commission of crime, while they
themselves remain at safe distance, that must
be deemed very imperfect system oflaw which
allows them to escape with IMMUNITY. Such is
not our law. 1t treats such advice as criminal
and subjects the giver of it to punishment &C.
cording to the nature of the offence to which
his pernicious counsel has led. fit be case
of felony, he is by the common law an acces-
sorry before the fact and by the laws of the
United States and Of this State, is punishable
to the same extent as the principal feon II
it be a case of misdemeanor, the adviser is him.
self principal offender, and is to be indicted
and punished as if he himself had done the
criminal act. 1t may be important for you to
know what, in pointof law, amounts to such an
advising or counselling another as will be suf-
ficient to constitute this legal element in the