Semi-weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1853-18??, 1855-04-28

u.
L. HEREIN.
The Jury, having presented this secret organiza-
ton, inquired in conclusion, of the Judge, what
their duty in the matter, upon which inquiry
thus made, j Judge Saunders delivered the follow
ing charge:
CHARGE OF JUDGE SAUNDERS.
The Grand Jury applied to the Judge for instruc-
tons as 10 whether 1t was an indctabc offence If 1t
should appear that Society had been formed in
this county, the object and design of which was, to
influence to join the Society and then by oaths
to bind its members to secrecy and compel them
to vote against their will, for against particular
candidate. His Honor replied i'll substance that it
had been said by high authority, that few things
Involved in greater doubt i'll the criminal law, than
the point at which combination of several persons
in common object becomes illegal. Ii this be
in England i'll regard to associations OF political
c.iaractcr still more must it be i'll this country 1t
is the combination Or agreement OF a number OF
persons to do particular act, that constitutes the
giS of the offence. But to make the conspiracy or
agreement criminal, the act p opposed must be
Ltmfut ;. the COMBINATION and agreement must be
to effect legal purpose by illegal means. The ad-
ministration of oath to the members of any Soc-
city not to dvulge its secrets, to do not to do
any particular act, is legally of no binding Obiga-
tion and in Il moral point of view decidedly wrong*
The law only authorizes the Judge Magistrate
administer OATH in some legal investigation then
pending and of which the Magistrate may have
jurisdiction; and unless thus administered, the par
of perjury. If partys word of honor could
bind him, unauthorized oath would not likely have
the eff ct of doing so. In England they lave
of Parliament declaring the Society of United
LiShmen, and some other Societies, as unlawful, and
forbiddng the administration of an oath to its MEM
bers, according to the rules of the Society. But
have such statute in this State, and whatever may
be thought of such oaths by Christian men, they
cannot be treated as criminal. In this country par
ties and associations may unite together to carry any
political object by fair reason or argument, and even
hold out personal honors advantages to unite in
the support of particular men measures. But if
any of men should cOnSpire together to elect or
defeat any one who might be held up for any public
trust, by forcing the voter to vote against his will,
by threats otherwise the act would be unlawful,
and therefore criminal And if the Grand Jury
should know that any such act had been done, it
would be their duty present the Offenders. So if
the Grand Jury should know or have reason to be-
eve that there existed in this county any association
of men, combined together to effect such purpose,
it would be their duty to investigate the matter and
act accordingly But the Jury should not institute
such Investigation, unless they had Sufhclent
grounds suspect that such conspiracy did exist,
and that for unlawful purpose.
and the Methodist Church is believed has Article of
mport-declares that and rash swearing is
forbidden Christian men by Lord Jesus Christ But
that a may when the Magistrate requ.reth.
NOTE BY THE ED1roR.-see Methodist Discipline, 25th Ar
tcle of Faith
The Asheve News, from which we copy this
says:
''It will be seen that the presentment of the Grand
Jury is signed by sixteen respectable citizens coming
from all parts of the county. Eight OF them
known to be Wings and eight are Democrats-show
ing that people almost unanimously against
the Order. Only one present declined to sign it.
The eighteenth Grand Juror, John w. Wells Esq,
who had been called home, is known to be strongly
opposed to the Know Nothings. 1t thus appears
that seventeen to one against the Order. Does
h,<I1ty fort hair
after all their boastng?
1t is scarcely necessary for us to remind read
that Judge Saunders, for talent legal learning,
and experience is second to no one on the Bench.
He has been too frequently praised and even eulo-
gised by most of the leaders OF the Know Nothing
movement in this District. We trust therefore,
that they will acquiasce in his views, able, learned,
and conclusive, they are, and for the future aban'
don prac,ces which are equally mschievouS, wheth-
er considered merely in political, or IN moral
and religious point OF view"
Comment upon the foregoing is not needed.
1t speaks for itself. The charge Of Judge Saund-
ers is sustained by that Of Judge Porter, OF Penn
sylvania recently given to a Grand Jury in tha1
State. Both these Judges are venerable for theT
years, and respected throughout the country forN
their virtues and citizens, and for their
profound legal learning. Judge Porter says:
''If any number of men combine to form them
selves into association by agreements, VOWS, or
oathS, to control the opinions and votes OF any por-
of citizens in the exercise of their surages
so that they shall vote not according to their own
choice the dictates Of their own conscences, but
majority of such association shall determine
it is conspiracy, and punishable such by ndict-
ment.
And you will remember that it is the agreement
to do the act that constitutes the crimnaity, even if
the act itself be not done. It may be well here to
observe, that, if any person persons shall have
unthinkingy, unadvisedly, without being aware
of the criminal character Of such act joined such
association, or taken upon himself any such VOWS
obligations or oats, they not binding upon him
in law, and ought not to be in morals. He will en-
act the part of good citizen by eschewng all such
fellowship association, and abandoning the illegal
enterprise"
Both these charges describe beyond question,
the secret order known as Know Nothings and
til path Of duty has, therefore, been clearly laid
open before the Grand Juries Of the country. The
4dsprased demagogues and disappointed party
hacks who control the members Of this Order. may
Wincs and Nrithe in view of the exposures and the