The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1856-01-26
The Northern Light Affair.
U. 8. CIRCUIT COURT.


JAN 25.--En the Halter Of Jos. L. White and O1rs, In
dued ,or Obssuehng United States 0Hc15-Ths Judge,
this morning. rendered decision denying the motion 70
quash the Indictment
The indictment in this Ia founded upon the 2M
section Of the act of Congress of 1872 Ia which, among
other things It Is provided that any person persons
sha knowingly and wilfully obstruct resist oppose
sIy officer of the United States in serving attempting
TO serve or execute measure process warrant
any rule or orer of the courts the United States
any other legal or uoica witt shstsoever such psrssa
or persons shall, on conviction. be imprisoned not
eeeeiDg twelve months and fined not exceeding three
hundred collars ft volume Statutes at Large D. Ityl
To constitute the offence by the ab.ye reoited
act of Congress- it ia necessary that three distinct fsets
should be established These three distinct fsots .re
1st That legal process warrant writ rule or order
should have been Issued by Court Of the United States
I'd, That such legal warrant WRIT or srAsx
after the should have been issued should be I.
the hands Of officer ef the United States for ss-
vice. and h.vns s ss's.ay b the Ts Laws 2, the u1s.s
process, warrant, writ, rule order should be in
the hands Of such officer for service, SHOULD
knowingly and wiuily Obstuct resist oppose him In
serving or attempting to serve or execute the ssms.
These all The facts necessary constitute the offence
Indictment founded upon this act of Congress must In
order to be sejueged sufficient distinctly stats sA0
charge the exisences and commission OF three
facts, and that the complained Of place wihfn
the limits Of the Sou he1n district of New York ard Al
dctmsnt the cts above written with the saSstonsi
one that the act pantd OF took place wtthin tbs
limits Of the Southern district Of New York Tho auss-
ton then is does the indictment the subject Ct To-
vestgaton distinctly and explicitly charge The extea0e
Of these thee several fscts and that The mst*er
plain OF took Place within the limits Of the Southez1
district Of New York? The indictment the 6rst
thereof charges that the oath day Of December 1855
sha Of the United States f,r the disri Of New Yor
was duly issusd out OF. and under the seal Of
trycf INST fhA lin knvfh imhs 49,
cargo, &C., and the arms and ammunition on board
OF her; and to show what such process was it Ia 80
which it appears to have been warrant Of attachment
issued by The District Caur sgans said steamshp upon
to the Marshal Of the Southern cstrs Of New York foe
service. The warrant is the usual form of all
ure admitted by the counsel the desndants that
this warrant charged the indictment to been
the Marshal acting under him BY his autha-
ri'y that far as it respects him them, it Ia valid
the face Of it, that he and they not only auo
rze6 but that they bound to execute IT, But It il
contenced BY the oefendants counsel that Ma
bile under the act OF Congress upon which this posec
ton is fouuded for any resistance which he may mako
to the rsbal or to any acting under hm BY bts
authority while executing the warrant unless appearA
by The indie ment that the libel upon which the. writ
Issues good valid and sufficient hbe the In
dctnent does cot show what the sverments the hbei
States has such aiined jurisdiction that shl NOT -
presumed that the warrant properly ssuad bat that
II must te made TO appear By tho indictment
before 1t can he taken ESQ far their persons
copcerued) Thar the warrant regularly Issued 1t
District Court court Of limited Jurisdiction shall
not Therefore into that The necessities a
the warrant respects ths Marshal and those
in authority under him, Was Legal 1t was valid upoa
the tace Of IT. The Marshal to whom il was directed
cute it. This was their duty. Nothing would excuse
them fer tie form ancs of this duty. Az thev
were bound to execute it, everybody bound to yield
ohedit TO it. AS everyAt dy bound to yield obs-
dence to It. had right resist IT, oppose Or
execution efit The Marshal and his deputy had rsht
to exoeute the wsr1s1t The Law, in substance says.
that be who knowigy and yliuily obstruct rsss.s or
rant which II his duty serve, shall be punished.
twas the tuy of the Marshal to serve this warrsat,
vilfuy and rowipgG sbstrucs ressts or opposes him
in The eIto ofbis duty acts violation Of Law
not have ben to authorize the issuing oa sum
mtn The two remaining questions are does appear By
ne ind!ctment that this warrant placed in the
as.ss or proper osf for ssiv.os, Is it charged
that the defendants, while II in the hands Of such
Police officer FOR service, wfuly and knowingly obstruct
&C. ,esiea or opposed such proper 0ss in the service
aseihtr It's alleged in the indictment that the war
rant had The following Endorsement upon it signed BY
heeby depue B. f. Ryer and Luther Horton to execase
the within process" And it charged that afterwards at
city Of New York the defendants did tno~ing and
wiuny obetruct, resist and oppose Benjamin f. Ryer
and Luther Horton, in attempting to said
rant they the said Ryer and Horton then and there
officers Of the United States 10 wit deputies Of tho
Marshal of the United States the Southern District Of
New York. appears then by the indctusnt that the
warrant was in tine han5s of the Marshal He before
the resistance and obstruction took place, made hs
advsement upon It, II was directed to him to
It was therefore IN his hands for the purpose for
which It was issued, which purpose to have it
placed in his hands for service Although 1t IL not
in 50 many words charged that it placed In hs
hands for service yet the fair construction the Ian
guage Of the Indictment L. that IL placed. And
the charge direct that the defendant knowingly aud
ton execution Of the warrant, they At the ams
berg deputies of the Marshal But 1t is claimed that
rent vas placed the hands Of the Marshal service
and although ne may have deputed Ryer and Horton
ssIss the same that they Ryer and Horton, not
United States that they the assistants and
servants Of the Marshal that any obstruction or
tsapce to them not within the prohibition of the
law: that although obstruction and resistance IN
them might in law be considered an obstruction and
resistance is charged. The question then is, vere
Ryer and Horton officers Of the United States authorised
to serve the variant They were deputies of the Mar
deputies they were authorized to the warrant
without any special appointment. But it Is said
assistants or servant, of the Marshal, and wers
the United States little consideration of the laws OF
Congress- I'LL show that deputy marshal Is officer Of
the United States authorized to process; il
such officer authorized, resistance him prohibit.
ed BY the act OF Congress in question Tne Marshal has
20 hsh oe oSs asion, 70 appont one or more
deputies who are removable from office by the Judge OF
the District Court the Circuit Court sitting in the dis
nici at the pleasure Of either Act Of 1889, vol l. p
81, stc 27) lfa deputy marshal can be removed from
office, he Is officer before he Is 20 removed for he
cannot be removed from Office unless he an officer and
he kno~n 10 process he Is an officer OF TIA
United s'aes empowered to process. Upon ths
death OF the Marshal his deputies continue Office un
.ss Otherwise specially removed, until another marshal
shall DO appointed and (Act of 1889, VOL L D.
81 SEQ. zs9 Every marshal or his deputy, when re
moved from Office, shall have power notwithsandine to
execute all tuch warrants may be in their hands at
the time of.uch removal (Act Of 1882 vol i, p. ss,
tec. 2S) Marshals and their deputies shall have
powers in executing the laws of the United state,
as sherfs and their. deputies in the several States
have In executing the laws OF the several States (Act
f1767 1195) When witness Is material ON the trial
OF the criminal case person Is authorized to Issue
warrant directed to the marshal or other officer su
thoIzed to criminal and civil process arress
send convey and carry him before the Court (Act
APP lS46 9.u. s. laws, p. "a, seo ~ Ttee several