The Trial of Theodore Parker: For the "Misdemeanor" of a Speech in Faneuil Hall against Kidnapping, before the Circuit Court of the United States, at Boston, April 3, 1855, with the DefenceParker, Theodore
Religion
The Trial of Theodore Parker: For the "Misdemeanor" of a Speech in Faneuil Hall against Kidnapping, before the Circuit Court of the United States, at Boston, April 3, 1855, with the Defence
Parker, Theodore
Antislavery movements -- Massachusetts -- Boston; United States -- Fugitive slave law (1850)
Mr. Hale, as senior counsel, stated to the court that the counsel for
the defendants in several of the cases had conferred, and
concluded--on the supposition that the Court and Government would
assent to the plan as most for their own convenience, as well as that
of the defendants' counsel--to file the like motion on the different
cases; and, instead of each counsel going over the whole ground for
each case, to divide the matter presented for debate, and for each to
discuss some particular positions on behalf of them all. This was
assented to; and motions, of which the following is a copy, were filed
in the several cases:--
CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, MASSACHUSETTS DISTRICT,
SS.
_United States by Indictment_ v. _Theodore Parker._
And now said Theodore Parker comes and moves that the
indictment against him be quashed, because,
"1. The writ of venire for the jury that found said
indictment was directed to and returned by Watson Freeman,
the Marshal, who was not an indifferent person, and it was
not served and returned as the law directs.
"2. Because said Jury was not an impartial Jury of the
District, designated as the laws require, but the jury
Districts for this court embrace but a portion of the
District and of the population, and said jury was in fact
chosen and designated from but a fraction of the District
and contrary to law.
"3. Because the matters and things alleged in said
indictment do not constitute any crime under the statute on
which said indictment is framed, the said statute not
embracing them, or being, so far as it might embrace them,
repealed by the statute of eighteen hundred and fifty.
"4. Because said indictment does not allege and set forth
fully and sufficiently the authority and the proceedings
whereon the alleged warrant and order were based, or facts
sufficient to show that the alleged process and order were
lawfully issued by any person duly authorized, and his
authority and jurisdiction, and that the same were within
such jurisdiction, and issued by the authority of the law,
and originated, issued, and directed as the law prescribes;
said warrant and order not being alleged to have issued from
any court or tribunal of general or special jurisdiction,
but by a person vested with certain specific statute
authority.
"5. Because said indictment and the several counts thereof
are bad on the face of them, as follows, viz.:--
"First, it nowhere appearing that the same were found by a
grand-jury, because the second and third counts do not
conclude, against the form of the statute, and have no
conclusion, because the third and fourth counts do not set
forth the estate, degree, or mystery of the person therein
charged.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account