Montgomery County sentinel. [volume] (Rockville, Md.) 1855-1974, 1880-03-19

To the same effect is the language OF Arch
bold, in his treatise on Criminal Practice
and Pleading. "lhe Indictment" he says,
must state all the facts and circumstances
comprised in the definition of the olfense,
by the rule of the common law or statute
on which the indictment is founded And
these must be stated with clearness and Ger
tainty otherwise the indictment will be
bad, And he states that the principal rule
as to the certainty required in an indictment
may be laid down thus: "fhat where the
definition of an onensc, whether by rule
OF the common law or by statute, includes
generic terms (ls Unnecessarily must), it is not
sufficient that the indictment should charge
the oifense in the same generic terms ms in
the definition, but it must state the species
it must descend TO particulars" P. So
This doctrine is fully stated and illustrated
in the Cruikshank case, both in the prevail
ing and dissenting opinion. (92 U. s. 55S
and 56S) Tested by it, the indictment here
is but string of words, presenting no spe-
citic oicnse anG, therefore, not justlying
the issue of any process for the arrest and
imprisonment of the petitioner
1t is difficult to understand how an in
dicmcnt SO detective could have been drawn
by the public prosecutor, unless we accept,
as an explanation Of it the extraordinary
statement Of counsel, that the district Judge
instructed the grand jury to the effect that
whenever it appeared that State judge, in
dischargng the duty imposed ON him by the
law of the state to prepare annually II list
of such inhabitants of his county as he
should "thnk well qualified 10 serve as
jurors, being persons of sound Judgment
and Tree from legal exception had never
put coorcd persons ON the jury lists it was
l. 4 l. A.. \
because of their race, color or previous CON
dition of seryitude, and that il was the duty
of the grand jury 10 indict him for that
ollensc. In the face Of this ruling no de-
Tense could be made by the accused, al
though he may have exercised at all times
his best Judgment in the selection OF quail
fled persons, unless lie could prove, what in
most cases would be impossible, that in II
county of many thousand inhabitants there
was not cOi0rcd person qualified to serve
rs Juror. With this ruling there could be
no necessity OF alleging in the indictment
anything beyond the general failure to put
coorcd persons ON the jury list II fact which
could not be disputed, and il would sulll-
GENTLY inform the accused that he must be
prepared, in order to rcbut the presumption
of guilt, 10 prove that there were no persons
Of the coIorcd race in the county qualified
10 act as Jurors II Is difficult to speak of
This ruling in the language of moderation.
My second position is that the forth sec
ton Of the act of 1875, so far rs it applies 10
the selection Of jurors in the Stale courts, Is
unconstitutional and void. Previous to the
late amendments il would not have been
commended, by any one familiar with the
Constitution, that Congress was vested with
any power 10 exercise supervision over the
conduct t,i Gtl,t Ia, fin IiJ4lt al,
their duties under the laws OF the State, and
prescribe punishment for disrogarling its
directions. IT would have been conceded
that the selection Of jurors was subject eX-
cusyely for regulation by the States that
it was for them to determine who should act
as jurors in their courts, from what class
they should be taken, and what qualiiica
tons they should possess; and that their
officers, in carrying out the laws in this re
spect, were responsible only to them. The
States could have abolished jury trials nj
together, and required all controversies to
be submitted to the courts without their in
terventiun The Sixth and Seventh amend
mcnts, in which jury trials are men
toned, apply only 10 the Federal courts, rs
has been repeatedly adiudged.
The government created by the C0nsti-
tuition was not designed for the regulation
Of matters OF purely local concern. The
States required no aid from any external
authority 10 manage their domestic affairs.
They were fully competent to provide for
the due administration OF justice between
their own citizens in their own courts, and
they needed no directions in that matter
from any other government, any more than
they needed directions as to their highways
and schools, their hospitals and charitable
institutions, their pubic libraries, or the
magistrates they should appoint for their
towns and counties It was only for mat
ter5 which concerned all the States, and
which could not be managed by them in
their Independent capacity, or managed only
with great difficulty and embarrassment that
II general and common government was de-
sired. Whilst they retained control Of local
matters, it was felt necessary that matters of
general and common interest, which they
could not wisely and efficiently manage,
should be intrusted 10 a central authority.
And so To- the common government which
grew out Of this prevailing necessity was
granted exclusive Jurisdiction over external
affairs, including the great powers Of dcclar-
ing war, making peace and concluding trea-
ties; but only such powers Of internal regula-
ton were conferred rs were essential 10 the
successful and efficient working of the gov
ernmcnt established; TO facilitate intercourse
and commerce between the people Of the
different States, and secure 10 them equality
OF protection in the several States
That the central Government was created
chiefly for matters Of "a general character
which concerned all the States and thcirpco.
| pie, aud not for matters ofintcrior regulation
/ il shown ~ much by the history Of is for
nation ms by the express language Of the
| Constitution The Union preceded the Con
stlullOn. As happily expressed by The late
/ clirl justice, II began among the colonies
| and grew out oi common origin, mutual
! symplthics kindred principles, similar in
! icrcst8 ani geographical relations. II was
confirmed and strengthened by the nccessi
| sOf war and receive definite form and char
arter and sanction from the articles Of con-
| federation" Cicxas w. White, 72j) Those
ARTICLES were prepared by the Continental
| Congress, which WAS called 10 provide
measures Tor the common defense Oi the colo
| nicsaglinst the cncrOachmcnts Of The British
! crown, and which, failing ~ secure redress
/ declared their independence rs members
/ lOresaw that when the Independence Of the
| cpOnics was established and acknowledged,
| their condition as separate aud independent
| States would be- beset with dangers threat
enng their peace and safety; that disputes
I
| rice, always incident 10 noighborng nations,
would .cal lp armed collisions aud expose
| them 10 rc.cDnquct by the mother country.
! 10 provide against the possibility Of evils Of
this kind, the articles 81 confederation were
prepared and submitted b. the legislatures ii
The several States, and finally Ia 1881 were
adopted. They decired that The States en-
br.d into liru league Of friendship with
each other ior their common defense the as.
curily ~ their liberties and their mutual and
general welfare, aud they bound Themselves
~ assist each other against attacks on nc
count II religion, sovereignty, trade Or any
other pretense. They clothed the new gov
eminent created by them with powers sup
p1srd 81 be ample 90 secure these ends, aud
declared that There should be- freedom ofinter.
course aud commerce between the inhabi-
ianis Of the several States. kicy provided
for % general Congress. aud, among other
things invested u with the exclusive power
Of determining on peace and war, except in
case NJ invasion 81 % State by enemies Or i'm
minent danger u snch invasion by Indians
Of sending and receiving Ambassador, enter