New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1873-07-17

/
libel for II the Declaration OF Independence y nys
@ m S1 wSst libel is Il was one which most happily
accomplished Is objects which first untureu . n was
adopted the wise and good the S 1i on
that was Of tho same character court. and
| old tyrannical expressions, to suppress p
| JupGE BLATCHFoID SATISFIED .bioh
At the conclusion of Mr.. BartletVs miss said
was listened 10 with marked aI'o ,rn r,ny,
mat no would submit his points 10 'ho -, ~ o,,t %,
10 $3.50, 7 have not fully argued inc points LUZ
| ~, ..sa, have only, as IL were, soareu On tno
! r,o,r ton as expected that Juuso On "Vu'4
d 90 tbe valleys below and bring 70 nght Things
| which have not thongn' o. .,
IF no other counsel Is to speak. have moth.
| ing more to say -, -. .,o, =,
readv. propose to say few words.
nudge Blaohord livery decdedy)I am entirely salts
fed that cannot grant this motion. Loud and I'M
checked applause.l
Mr. Bliss--Allow me 10 call yonr Honor's attention to
some points
Judge Blatchford-The discussion is closed, and
stated. Renewed applause 1t needs no authority to
convince that the Constitution expressly provides
that the trial OF the whole crime charged shall DO by
jury and 1t is impossible for me to get over that view
The audience here broke out into almost uproarous
applause Judge Batchford checked IT, and continued:
1t is true as far understand IT, that TINS Application
for warrant was based solely on this information
which ia very clearly information in police court
under the statute constituting that court TINS iniorma
ton being the sole evidence the Commissioner had
before him. and the Commissisner In his complaint
states that the offence was committed, and that 1t is
to be tried II must be tried In the police court and on
this information.
Mr.. Blss-It is true Sir but allow me 10 call your
attention TO the fact that the Supreme Court OF Massa
chusets and the courts OF last resort In Connecticut
Pennsylvania, Indiana Ohio, California and North
Carolina have held that provision OF this Kind s con.
stltutiona and Justice Shaw OF Massachusetts, that
the clause Is identical with the Constitution OF tue
United States, and holds that where trial Dy Jury IS
eventually secured, that Is All mat s required ana
there is not the United states Reports where
doctrine Is met 1t is also decided IN the Dsct
Judge Blatchtord-rt cont he possible! Tt violates
| the fundamental principle OF the Government o, inc
Ex-Judge sblpman-It is true that Chief Justice Shaw
in that case says that provision IA tho STATE Const
tons, then sought TO be nterposed was similar 10 tho
sixth Amendment OF the Constitution, put nc does NOT
say that it similar to the clause IN the Ihrd Aucio
4 which your Honor has quoted. -, -, .
judge Batchford-I am not referring TO the Sixth
| Amendment I'm the case OF Duane IL was held that
even the sixth clause not 10 DO applied except IN
those cases previously tried by jury We al Know hat
England. had but one opinion on tbs point IL
Impossible, unless violate the Constitution ana violate
my oath OF office not % come to the conclusion that the
trial Of all crimes under the law of tho United States,
which ra0le by jury always must De trcu ny jury
| / do mean 10 say that TINS Police Court ID
Washington for the trial OF assaults and batteries may
not be properly constitutional and that such crimes may
he within the provision OF the statute We MI KNOW
that there have such things as special sessions
know that great many efforts have been made ~
judges OF TINS district and other Judges nave ICY
what relief It would be II were not compelled 10
try every officer no matter how email by Jury Dn tne
answer IL that all such crimes must be ttled by jury,
and the Court must pass any day from trial OF great
In this case il is clear that this court 10 which this
IS removed, by the face OF the warrant must be
held as the court TO Try the case Is 1t true mat IA te
does not help the matter any that there Is
right OF appeal and second ttial by Jury that 10
NOT within the spirit OF the Constitutions AZ ID that
mans rial-hs first trial shall be by jury and he is
entitled not To be first convicted and toen acquitted ny
Jury he 10 entitled % be acquitted IN tue INST IL
stance by jury and that seems TO be sound by the
ground which it places the decision. The Judges OF
the United states Courts nave no power except "at 70
conferred by statute. BY the language OF the 55h sec
lion OF 1882 lie is TO DO committed for trial IN the
District Court WHOM has cognLance OF the Onence me
Courts have remained established NY that Act but Con
gIess has wiped ont the words, which haa ldIlsdeOh
by the Act OF 1882" II is clear in my mind that there Is
warrant IN the statute for sending person 10 any
other court than the court established by this Aot
Ne Bliss here referred to au interpreted OF the APP
phcaton OF the provision by WIn Worth and Chief jus
MI Bartlett said that the gentleman had plainly mis-
quoted Worth.
| THE GROUND OF JUDGE BLATcHFoRD's DECISION.
Judge Blatchford-I do not decide this case on any
such grounds am satisfied should send the
for trial TO wing jurisdiction to try it, for 1t
is one which should be tried by jury and that ground
| alone 1 give my decision. 1t is high ground. and
goes 10 the bottom OF the whole matter.
make the decision solely WIN reference 10 the lact
that it is a charge of libel, which always crime
riablo by jury and that there nothing before the
Court to suggest that this particular ofense in this case
Is to be tried anywhere else except in this Police Court
Mr.. Blss-We admit that.
Judge Observation-Disclosures there "a another court In
Washington that may llnd an indictment know not.
| Ex-Judge shlpman-Therc is not, Sir.
Judge BatchordI regret that the Court has not the
benefit Of argument from the leading counsel for the
defense for the Court would perhaps derive some
ghteDment from it; but, notwithstanding this, feel
bound not only to make decision, but TO make 1t
promptly without writing 1t out, because these PROPOSE
lions seem plain that consideration or study
could bring me TO any other conclusion.
Judge Blatchiords closing remarks wore greeted with
prolonged applause; and after It had subsidized Mr. Da
na's friends gathered IN body around Lin snd warmly
| cong ratuated him.
AS Mr.. Dana still in the custody OF the Marshal
on Commissioner DaycuporPs commitment, Dir. Bartlett
obtained writ Of haDeas corpus returnabie immedi
ately Marshal FIske endorsed 10 that he held Mr.
Dana by virtue OF the Commissioners warrant and Judge
Blchiord ordered his instant release. After lie had
left the Courtroom crowds thrOnged around him the
hall cheer after cheer gwen, and above them
/ heard the words "CitZens OF kew-HOrk have rights
which the powers al Washington have been forced to
| respect"