The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1868-02-08
PROCEEDINGS OF THE CONVENTION.
TWENTIETH DAY

The convention assembled at 13 NJ. Prayer
| by Rev. - Harris.
Leave OF absence was granted t. Boozer, 81
that he might attend to his duties as District
Judge OF Lexington.
f. j. Moses moved that the President be re
| quested to take such steps as may he necessary
to correct the inaccuracies in the journal iron
day to cay. Agreed to.
After discussion and attempted amendment
the replrt Of the Committee on Rules and Ke
| gulatious. fixing the hours Of session hereafter
between half-past 10 A. NJ, and half-past P
H., was adopted.
On motion of R. C. DeLarge, the convention
resolved itself into Committee OF tho Whole (J
N. Rutland in the chair), and took up for con
| sheraton the unfinished business OF yestef'
day, beng the 9th section OF the Bill OF Rights
which reads as follows:
Sec. 8. In prosecutions for the publication
of papers Investigating the official conduct ol
officers or men IN public capacity, or.when the
matter published is proper for public lntorma-
tion, the truth thereof may be given in evi-
| dence; aud that in all indictments for libel, the
Jury shaIl have the right to determine the lnw
and tho facts under the direction OF the court.
G. C. Bowen made strong speech in favor OF
| the section as it reads, and quoted largely
from legal decisions in support OF the PROPOSE
ton, The following extract from an opinion
by Judge Story, in the case of the United
| States us. BATHS, reported in I'd Sumner, p
24O, will afford an idea of the general line OF
argument o. the speaker:
"Before proceed said the Judge, ITO the
merits of this case, wish to say a few words
upon point suggested by the argument OF the
| learned counsel for the prisoner upon which
| have had decided opinion during tho whole OF
my professional lic. 1t is that, in criminal
cases, and especially in capital cases, .juries
shall Judge the law as well az the fact. MY
opinion is that ju1es are no more judges OF the
| /, 81 l1,ar Ions hQT
are in any civil case tried upon general issue.
In each ofthese cases their verdict is necessa-
rily based upon tho law and fact and includes
both. In each they must necessarily decide
the law as well as the tuct. In each they have
the physical power to disregard the law as LAID
down by ths court; but deny TINT in any case,
civil or criminal they nave moral right to de-
| eide tho law according 10 their own notions or
pleasure. On the contrary, hold 1t TO be
the most sacred constitutional right Of every
party accused Of chime tnat the jury should re-
spond as to the fact and report as to the law.
1t Is the duty o. The court to instruct the Jury
us to shelaw. Il is the duty of the jury to ioi-
low the law laid down by tue court"
bIr. Bowen also showed that what was known
as Mr. Fox's libel act, passed by tho Eng .lsh
Parliament, only proposed to give to the Jury
what was proposed in tho 9Th section, and that
it ed hSaG q tic Uned scs
J. S. Craig, of Colletcn, moved that Section
be stricken out M toto.
SPEECH OF DIR. A. G. MAoKEY.
Mr.. Chairman: have waited to see whether
any other gentleman desired to address the
convention; and, presuming, that au nave TX
nressed themselves who wish to do 30, taKe
this occasion to say few words upon the sub
jcct under consideration.
believe this section to be the most lmpor-
tant one contained in the Bill Cf Rights; aud
when find gentleman like the delegate from
Coleton. in the middle of tho nineteenth cen
tury. lust after we have passed through inc
most gigantic revolution the world has seen,
and llpon this floor, more than Une hall OF the
occunants of which have boon liberated from
state OF bondage and invested with the riS nts
| of Recommendation I SEQ gentleman ot lntcili-
eence rise here aud offer 3 resolution 10 strlhe
| out 6 section that perpctuates the great Paua-
dunn OF our liberties, 1 must confess my as
| tonliIhment and raise my voice In condenna-
ton; for it is proposition TO carry us Daoh nf
again to the decisions OF the Star Chamber Of
old; to the days when judges joined with op-
pressiye governments, and put their hecls upon
| the aecks Of the peJp.e; proposition tnat we
shall abandon all that we have gained III Inc
war through which our country has passcd,
and submit ourselves not to the decision OF
our peers, but to the decision OF judges VINO,
frora time immemorial, with but few excep-
tiops, have always boen arrayed upon The side
of tyranny and oppression. lApplanse.l
boltiy proclaim that fact and declare, further.
thas If YOU trust your lives and liberties in tue
hards Of the judges of any country, your lib
critics are forever gone. [Applause.l
Need I call your attention 10 perlou, no'
more than half century ago, when, under the
corrupt administration OF John Adams, TIC
Alien and Sedltlon laws were passed and tho
Judges of the Supreme Court Decalne Inc
willing tools Of that tyrant, and inflicted thost
laws upon tho people? Need call your atten
tloa to the more recent time when the supreme
Court, under the administration OF that man
Chief Justice Taney, whose name has been en-
balmed Iii eternal infamy. declared that "blaci
men had no rights which whIte men were
bound to .espect2 Nood 1 caii your attention
to the present time, when it is subject OF al
tlcipation, that the Supreme Court OF the UNI
ted States will cndcaror 10 destroy 81! the irult
of the victories throu,h Which We bav'
passed.
Sir. d. not intend to arguo this question al
O. LAWYER. 1 thank God that in the invcstiga
ticp Of this subject I am no lawyer, because
AM thus free from tho technical prejudices o
the profession learned by lawyers in tn
schools, and which nnhne them with reverence
for Judge, which ! confess, do not possess
unless he oe hou8st and upright as judge ant
man. wish to investigate this question II
tie light of philosophy and statcsmauship.
Now. wha! was the origin OF the system b.
which the court was made the judge OF tn
INV in libel cases? II is the opinion of yer.
eminent jursts- among tnem, OF tboma
Cnopel. than whom none better knew the sub
cct under discussion, because he was hlmsel
, n yictim-that the Common law III England II
libel cases gave to the jury The right to decld
the law as well as the tact; and was yester
, dsy astonisheI TO ar my frle;.d from Sum
fer If. J, Moses Jr.i, man who has sat O
tne il ct Of Ganaliel, declare that it was AZ
abominablo thing even to suppose that
Jury should be the judges OF tho law. Why
there is 10 court in which the jury do not de
eide the law in all cases where the law ant
facts are complicated. IT D man is indctc'
, tor murder, do the jury confne themselves t
! the simple fact that he has committed O. homl
eide, and leave it to the Judge to decide whetne
, The killing amounted to manslaughter, justin
nble homicide, CT murder? by no means. The
declare the grade OF tho crime, OF find HIM no
rulty, according to tick version OF tue To-
. and knowledge Of the facs. Law and TACT ar
, taken together. The facts aro Investigate
and tho law applied. It Is true that tn
! iudge-and it is proper he should do so-ur
. dcrtakes to give the jury directions and ad
vice. Being learned in tho law, he con stat
= authorities and precedents to them, aud re
a commend them to be governed by his lnstrut
a tions: but in many cases jurles, like other pee
a nle when advice is offered, give verdict III tn
i very teeth of advice, and no one " Ii uudcrtak
1 IN say that such verdict, though contrary
! the opinion of the Judge, is illegal. Ii iur
+ has ncnuittcd IT, man, he will be dischargct
y ;. MISUNDERSTANDING the judge lnay think him K
aally guilty. IF they find li.u guilty, ho ma
. Hong Notwithstanding the judge may bclier