St. Johnsbury Caledonian. [volume] (St. Johnsbury, Vt.) 1867-1919, 1874-07-24

| libel is an indlctable offence, except
where they have otherwise provided by
statute. But the United States, as such,
have never adopted the common law,
and therefore it has long been held that
there was no such thing as Il common
law offence against the United States 4;
i'm other words the courts of the United
States cannot try IL man for any crime,
except such as is expressly made so by
act of Congress.
Now there is no act of Congress that
makes libel an offence, even i'll the
District of Columbia. The only libel
act ever passed by Congress WIS the
old Sedition Act in the term of the elder
Adams, and that expired by its own
limitation March 3, 1901. The courts
of the United States therefore have no
jurisdiction of libel, because there is no
such "crime or offence against tie United
!States." Under the Judiciary Act of
1889, therefore, no man could he tried,
or removed for trial, to another district
for libel. 1t would seem very clear,
vision is made to apply To the courts of
the District il could have no more scope
or effect than it had us applied to the
courts established 10y the judiciary Act
itself. If libel he indictabe ut all in
the District of Columbia, it is 10y virtue
of the old law of the state of Maryland,
which existed when the District was
ceded to the general government, and
which 10y the terms of ccSsion was to
continue IN force until superseded 10y
act of Congress. 1t seems clear to me,
therefore, that whatever WAS intended,
or not intended, thought of. or not
thought of, the act can have no such
effect as is aScribcd To it.
1t does not appear to me that there
would be anything so oppressive if it
were so, as to Justify the clamor that
has been made. If man will malicious
~ publish fal>choods of another. tend
ing to degrade him, or to subject him
to punishment. where is the great hard
ship i'll requiring him to answer for it
i'll whatever place he circmlatcS it ,
The object of the law has been stated
10y Judge Poland in his published let
ter. The first section WAS Ia cure IL dis
putc as to jurisdiction of the respective
courts in the District. 1t creates no
new offence, imposes no new or differ
cnt penalty. The second section WAS
added :" thai there might he some
mode of retaining an offender who had
escaped. Strange aS it may seem there
has never been any such law. While
for every offence against state laws. or
against United States laws. ample pro
vision existed for arrcSting the offender
anywhere in the United States. none
existed applicable to the District.
Should murdcrcrS. ruhhcrS. thieves. and
prriurcrS. escape trial and punishment
because they succeed in getting out of
Wv i''~''"' Nv ''t" WIS I"lh'lN
proper and necessary. and know Judge
Poland would have had nothing To d"
with it. had he not deemed it 50. The
clattcr that has been made about il 10y
Democratic papers. and such lndrpcnd
tnt Greeley papers as the Springfield
HcpWbiicdH and the New York Tribunc.
copied hy the Farmer and Standard.
wont hurt him much anon" the intclli-
gent people of this district think
both he and senator EdmundS have
been known too long and too well in
Vermont t" he cNtingui>hcd 10y abuse
from such sources JUSTICE.