Reading Time: 3 minutes [427 words]

JOHN HODGES. 171

eiples upon which the prosecution was founded, I do not think
it necessary to trouble the jury with a refutation of them. I
confine myself, therefore, to 2 few general observations.

Mr. Glenn again proposed his prayer to the consideretion of the
court.

In support of it, he read the following authorities: 1 East. Cro.
1.70. If the joining with rebels be from fear of present death, and
while the party is under actual force, such fear and compulsion will
excuse him, But an apprehension, though ever 0 well grounded, of
having property wasted or destroyed, or of suffering any other mis-
chief, not endangering the persou of the party, will be no excuse for
joining or continuing with rebel, Ib., p. TL

2 Dall. 346. ‘Vigol’s case. This was an indictment: for high trea~
son, in levying war against the United States. Patterson, who pre-
sided in that case, said, there were two points for consideration—the
facts and the intention, He etated the evidence and the design, and
concluded that the combination of these facts with this design, con-
summated the crime of high treason, in the contemplation of the eon-
stitetion and law of the United States. It may not, said the judge,
be useless on this oecasion to observe that the fear which the law
reeognizes as an exeuse for the perpetration of an offense, must pro-
eved from an immediate and actual danger, threatening the life of
the party. The apprehension of any loss of property by waste or
fire, or even an apprehension of a slight or remote injury to the per-
son, furnieh no excuse. Also Cranbourn’s ease, from Salkeld, 633.
He admitted that he must prove a certain portion of the intention,
and that in the present case there were but two inquiries to be made
—Ist, Did he deliver the prisoners? 2, Did he intend to do sof
Both these questions must be answered affirmatively; and therefore
‘the treason was proved, and ‘he bad no more to say on the subject.

Hr, Pinkney. Gentlemen, nothing but an utter confusion

of ideas could have introduced a doubt upon this subject. The

- counsel’s prayer exeluded all idea of criminal intention; or it

relied upon the inference of a criminal motive as a necessary

eoroliary from the naked facts charged as the overt acts in
the indictment.

Tt might be affirmed as an universal proposition, that erim-
inal intention is the essence of every species of offense. All in-
dictments commence with an assertion of corrupt motives,
and in indictments for treason the overt acts laid bare are to
show the manner in which the wicked intention was carried
into execution. In the speeches of Lord Erakine, to whom the
world is so largely indebted for a correct knowledge of the

Related Posts