major Cu hjng ;nd myfeff, in which, in his opin for wl.ii -. ; ; conceived it likely that he had used this '■l'.'ho.i of *: jur.vm V)t ; that Mr. Davis had ienned J'urr.r«:"jrl at th information, and said that is never before heard of this quarrel, which, hew « •' r, ic:ou: ted t< Uira for th« condu& major Cufh ing had ot>ferved towards him upon the fubjeA of s U.c, said claim when it w.s beiore the Houf: of Reprefentir ive.N : that Mr. Davis oddedthat he and inajor ha:l s it that time, lodged together, a"... that major Cu.hing had labored to convince him that my claim was uujult—-that the appoint ment of me as ai l de camp given to mt by the commander in chief, not for the good of the service, but merely to serve and gratify me : and that such an appointment never wasnectflary That he (Mr. Strother) had replied, that on my arrival he fbould certainly inform m« of this cir cumstance, for which it was probable major Cufh ing would b<; punished. Of thi I was on my arrival here, informed, by Mr. Strother. Of the truth and accuracy of the information I neither have, rtor ever had the kaft doubt. a full imprefiion of its truth I a»ft «d as has already r.pp a red to the court ; and the question to be determined is, whather, under the tircumftnr.ee* ot the cafe', my behaviour wasy£<m dalous, itifamausj and unbecoming au officer and I \. T« {«m 1 ■fitpcflbry. Mjif' the, j firtrt if Md-we.evi dence irettg&t to foppkrt tltera do not Vtfignate aaj pye a hteh«Tfaiir fumtakui, betomingan 'officfj, mda goßtlrriisf), if. is not in ',j£e newer tgtoSja to make it fi»i *nd the £&(uyflbr> drjftvn.t Jhhw, in order to bring the <iiy *«ithih * jirtide nf tte W« ®® ft jfrafct«ejon with it. * ' bHravioiir ignited to me ii chirgej Hi con nltjj' •*». ■' •<" •-• ■ i \ !n writing a note to major Cuftiing on the ttih of July, containing these words, viz- " For you' villainous interference againtt a just claim wnictt 1 had before Congress, I am determined to pwiilH you. Thereby falfely insinuating that ma jor Cufliing had been g u ilty of "villainous condud, and in a style as un-gentlcman-like as it is falfe " sd. " It/"rsfufing to demonflrate that major Cnfhinj had interfered, as slated, after he had denied fa-i.and called upon me to prove it." 3d. " In publilhingin the Coffee House of the City of Philadelphia that major Cufliing was a poltroon, and no gentleman, or words to that ef fefl. The cause of so much of my behaviour, charged as criminal by this fpcciiication, as is warranted by the evidence, has been already mentioned, and is,[ trust, iatisfaftorily proved by lieutenant Strother. 1 had been appointed bytke lategallast and patri otic general Wayne one of his aids de camp, in a toilsome and hazardous war, and I had reason to believe, that during hard laarJtes, and severe campaigns, I had discharged my duty in a manner that was fatisfaSory to the general and to all ftij fellow ioletiers, whofc good opinions I was ambi tious o! obtaining. I had .onceived I had a just claim against the United States for services which Temnmad anrequitt-d, and had exhibited that claim to Congress for its adjaftment ; I had seen it sanc tioned i y a vote »f a large majority of one branch of the legrflatnre, and, when I least expected it, I had seen it reje«ed by the other branch I had no doubt btti that the members of that branch, as well as the ether had atfted impartially, and, in their opinions, justly. Such was, however, the nature of my claim as to leave no doubt, on my mind, fut that tltey had been abused and deceived; and that I had been grossly injuredjby some lurking «-iemv, -who had fought revenge in the manly way of t'-jc' Uiting and secret misrepresentations. I knewthr. tViffentionl had been induftrionfly and i'lS-'.ioufly fomented in the army, and I had seen the ccmmmdtr in chief abused ano vilified in the jnibirc ropers; I ltnew there had existed in it a parry ajpiinft him, and I also knew that a well in tcnf.j.iid, and VfeH merited attachment to him had rendered many deserving officers as well as roylelf, obnoxious to the malcontents. ]I caf: my eyes among, them in search of the author of the injury done me, and my suspicions immediately fell on major Cuftiing. ! knew him to be in town I knew that I had,on a former occasion, disgraced him, and 1 knew him too well to fcppofe that he would either forgive me, or fcek for fatisfa&ion in an open, manly way. With this knowledge, and under these imprrffi®ns 1 remained fi'ent until I received from Mr. Strother the information ai readymentioned. I could not entertain a moment's doubt of the veracity either of him, or the honor able Mr, Davis. The former has verified his statement under the folcmn faniftion ot an oath, administered before you, and that of the former I certainly ftould procure if I deemed it at all necel fary. Judge thy>, I beseech you, what mujl my feelings hav<- been when 1 saw the memory of a ganeral, defer vedly dear to every meritorious of ficer and fcJ.dier who had ever fought under him, attempted to be tarnished by a charge of " having appointed me aid de camp merely fir tie purpafe cf ferv *>§, and "without mny regard It tbe good of tbeferviee.' aft yosrfclves what my feelings must have been at feeing malic*, notw«cping likcCaefar at the death of Pompey, over the grave of its objf<ft,but fliar p< nihg its edge to mangle all that remained of the officer's andfoldiers friend. Hirw frnfikiy alive Blttft my feelings, as a soldier, have been at my feeing my appointment represented by an enemy, whom 1 had difgraccd, as a mere sinecure! as an office given me merely f«r the purpsle of serving me and without any regard to the good of tht service ! and dill more so, at finding the fame enemy secret ly and constantly laboring with a member of Con gress before whom my claim had been depending, to convince him that it was unjufl , and ought not to have been paid Yet even all this, it is possible 1 might have raffed over,had it affe&ed me aloHe; but whan I found myfelf secretly and insidiously charged with living on the public bounty through the corruption of my general—eating its bread •without earning it, and toconfummatethe whole, with exhibiting a claim against the public, which, from the flatement, I must know to be altogether unfounded ; and when further I cenfidered that the memory of the general who had appointed me ■was no less involved than myfelf in this complicat ed charge of fraud and corruption upon the public, i must confefs that I had not fufficient command over my own feelings to suppress them, and I fer vently pray that that momeni, should it ever arrive when I.can, may be my last ! —I therefore, on the *Bth of July sent, by my friend captain Taylor, a letter to major Csfhing, containing tbe expreffiont mentioned in *he firft article of the fpecifications. The honorable Mr. Davis had, as appears in evi dence left Congress and returned to Kentucky be fore 1 received his flatement frem Mr Strother, or it is probable I fliotild have applied to him on the fubjeS before taking notice of major Cuftiing. Lieutenant Strother did, it is true, desire me, if I had any doubts refpefling thetruth of his account to apply toMeflrs, Clopton aedNew, members of Congress from Virginia, who were then in Phi ladelphia, and who were present at the conven tion between him and Mr. Davis. But as 1 bad no such doubts, and as they could c ive me no further information than Lieut. Strother had done, I deemi-d the application unnecessary From one of these I have received a certificate, cer tiorating Mr. Strrtker's flatement, to the truth of wi' ich, he, Lieut Strother, has fwee sworn. Permit me now to a(k, was it under these eircum ftanccs of the cafe, behaving in afcanda.'ow and infamous manner, such as is unbecoming an officer and a vutleman to write, and lend the letter by Captain Taylor? I confidently trull it was not ; though these epithets might been justly applied to »e, had I no' either written at all, ur enpielfed myfelf >n terms more mild. Admitting, for the fake of argument, that 1 had mistaken, «tr misapplied the faQ slated in my note, or that it had turned out that Lie-1. Stro 'her's information was unfeanded ; ft til my behavi oar would have fallen far fliort of the terihs bestowed on it. Is it JcutJdons or infamous, or behaving in | such a manner a* is unbecoming en oflicfi and a gen tleman to refcni an injury, which you have every rea son to fuppofc you have received by the improper eonduft of another ? Is it fctndalous or infamous to threaten to punish wrongs, and to express yourfcH in terms commensurate to the insult which you have such reason to believe you have received I If not, and surely no soldier will contend for it, this charge must be groundless. It is the intention with which an act is done that renders it criminal in a greater or lefferdegree, or en tirely innocent. He who beats another upon appa rently well founded information, and under an idea of having been reviled by him, was never yet deemed scandalous and infamous on that account, even though it should afterwards appear that he was mistaken. It is, however stated that, by that note I "J*/*? inftfuitrtcd, that major Cubing had been guilty of w lainotts conduct " To this I answer, that it must ap pear I had fufficient reason for believing his conduft to be such as I mentioned ; and I am so far from believ ing the insinuation to be faife, as to have no doubt on my mind of its being ftri&ly true. Major Cufhing, it is true, denies having ever inter fered with any member of Congress, refpefting my claim. But this evidence ought, in my opinion, to be received with many grains of allowaoce, when the va rious chara&ers in which he appears in this business as mentioned in the early stage of these remarks, are taken into confederation. But further, major Cufhing admits that he was seve ral times i« company with members of Congress when the fubjeft of my claim was mentioned, at which times, it was possible, he might have made such ob servations as he supposed werepropei upon the occasi on ; but ho denies that he ever gave a dircß opinion that the claim wat improper ; and adds, th3t he never introduced the fubjeft to any Senator or Representative. What idea the major meant to convey, with what he may deem a f'afe confidence, when ha fays that he ne ver interfered with my claim, is pretty evident from hia faying that he never introduced the fubjeft to any Senator or Representative, since he admits that he was feversl times in company with members of Congrcfs, when the fubjeft of mv claim was mentioned, and dots not deny having, on those occafsons, made use of such observations as he thought proper. Does the major then mean to convey the idea, that he never in trrfered with mv claim, because he never introduced the fubjeft, although in several conversations with members of Congress tefpe&ingj it, he made use of fueh observations as he supposed weie proper on the occasion ? Is not the interference the fame in either cafe; and can it make anv miterial difference whe ther the fubjeft was introduced by him, or caught hold of and purlued by him whenever it happened to be mentioned by others ? But again, the major, if he is to be believed, does not remember what anyofthefe observations were; therefore, the court cannot, from his evidence, form any udgment of these amounting to au improper interference, or nor, and of course, a correft opinion can only be formed by considering Mr. Davis's statement, as sworn to by lieut. Strother. But there are two parts of the major's evidence in which he seems not to have been fufficicntly guarded, and which, if alluded to, will (hew how much weight is due to the other paru of his evidence. In one of them he fays, 14 He never gave a dirtEl opinion that my claim was improper Surely this is a full admlfli on that he gave an indircQ opinion of its being so ; o therwise he wonld have denied the one as well a* the If I am right in this, J am warranted in faying his conduit was not the less calculated to have its intend ed effeft of doiiigi me an injury, than if it had beso conveyed in dirbß terms, which might have created suspicion, and defeated his objcO. Every body knows, even without Stern's celebrated sermon on Backbiting, that indireS hints infidjoudy iutendrd to convey doubts, under an apparent concern, left there may be too much found -lion for them, generally do more injury than direct charges Again, major Cufhn-g beingafVed if be did not at ' anytime, when my claim was before Congress, tell Mr. Davis, a member from Kentucky "that the ap pointment given me by General Wayne was for the purpose ot serving m-, and not, in his opinion for the good of the service ?" arifwered, that he hadnorecol- Icflion of having fatd so to him, but it is foffiiU he may have made such «* tbjtnatim," but not with a view of injuring me. fuch an admiflton, how can major Cufliing fay he never interfered with my claim f—and what credit can be due to such evidence; aa to his views, and they can only be judged by hisa&ions. * I have now done with this charge, and am only a. fraid that 1 have taken up more time in refuting it than it merited. The next charge is for behaving in a femdahus and infamous manner, &c. io refufing to dcmonjlrate that major Cufhing had interfered as Hated, after he had denied the faft, and called on me to prove it. What kind of demonstration the major required I will not pretend to fav : but it is realonable 10 sup pose it to be nothing short of mathematical, fincetbisis the only kiodsof demonftratim I have any knowledge of I can, heaever, allure him that little short would be necessary to convince me of his innocence. But be this as it may, I had, on a for mer occasion, been made too well acquainted with the major's mode of explanation, after doing*ninjury,andbeingcalled to an account (or it, to consent to meet him for any such pUrpnfe. There is but one kind of personal ai re real inn that I can ever agree to have with him, and I know him too well to believe that be will ever agree to that kind *f personal altercation with me,—So that our disputes ate, probably, drawing toaclofe. In addition to this he knew, andJhntw, that Mr. Davis had returned to Kentucky, and would not be heVe for some time Delays, procraOioation, preva rication, and fubtelties I knew to be his usual wea pons of defence—they were not mine. The wound infliSed on tbe memory of General Wayne, and on my honor could not remain for months without a probe. I therefore determined on a Ipeedy remedy in a cafe that would not admit of delay. In this determination I was certainly j'jflifird by the verbal message brought me by captain Taylor from major Culbing, "That if I persisted in thii thing, he, major CulHing, would disgrace me, and that thit wu the anfwerhe was to bring me." I will not intuit the spirit and fetlinga ofmy judges by a (king them whether there it any one ot them, who, after receiving fuchia meflage, would con»ey an answer through any other medium than the Coffee houfe books, or a newfpaper; or, if he could bring himfelf to expreft in any other language than that made use of by Signed. The court assembled pursuant to adjourn ment. Captain Lewis made bis defence, and the court Jind that the prisoner is not guilty of tbe charge on which be has been tried, and therefore do acquit him. (Signed) MAHLON FORD, Capt. Artillerist & Engineers, and President. (Signed) Charles Willisc Hare, Judge advocate pro hac. The President of the United States having fully considered the proceedings of a General Court Martial, which was convened at the city of Trenton, in the state of New-Jersey*, by virtue of a warrant issued from the War- Office, and sat from the zctb to the 30th, inclusive, October 1798, for the trial of capt. Thomas Lewis on the charge nnd specifica tions thereof, Exhibited in a paper of which the following is a copy, viz. Philadelphia, 20th July, 1798. Captain Thomas Lewis, of tbe army of the United States, is hereby ordered in arrest, on tbe following viz. For behaving in a scandaLus and infamous manner, such as is unbecoming an officer-, and a gentleman : ist. Ia writing me a note, on the 18th instant, July .1798, containing tibese words, viz " For your villainous interference a gainst a just claim kubicb I bad before Con gress,! am determined to punish you," there by falsely iusinuating that I had been guilty of villainous conduct, and in a style as ungen tlemanlike as it is false. 2d. In refusing to demonstrate that I bad interfereas stated in the above note, after I bad denied the fact, and called on him to prove it. 3d. In publishing in the coffee bouse of this city, on this day, (the iotb July 1798) that major (lushing is a paltroon and no gentle man, or words to that effect, all which, toge ther with other specif cations as may be given in full trial, will be fully proven by T. 11. GUSHING, Major\st Heft of Infantry in the service of the U.S. Together with the defence of capt. Lewis, and the sentence of the court, viz.—" That the prisoner is not guilty of the charge on wbicb be has been tried, and therefore do ac quit him." ~ r ' lam commanded to make known, that the President approves of the aforesaid sentence, from a conviction that the court could not have done otherwise, than acquit captain Lewis of behaviour that was scandalous and infamous ; but is of opinion, that captain Lewis t in the style of his frst note to major Cusbing, neglected the urbanity and decorum becoming an officer, and in this particular is therefore reprehensible for bis error. Given at the War-Office of the United States, in Philadelphia, this 14tb day of January, 1799, and in the 33d year of the Independence of said States. (SignedJ' JAMES M'HRNRT, Secretary of War. THE fiirtfdog rtfolution 6f I general Court Mar tiki, which w»c<MM«B«d'M of Trtnton, To the state of New- by mr m of a wmnt. iffu edfrojnihe \V»r Office, iod lu tram the«oth to the 80th iacluliitc, Ofiobcr 1799, far the trial ofcjptiio Th'otaU Lewi*, aud Mi« fcmence of the court, together with tlve ddfeoce narde by captain Lewii, m 4 the ap prove of the afarefrid (eoreftcr by comp>ynrf of thft FreUdent, »re truecopievfroni the original*, on file, to the War Once as (hf United Statft, * ? JOHN OALDWm, ,' XV CIV. Dpaat. War Office, 6tb .. December 28, 1798. WHEN (tit claim of major Thomas Lewis at extra aid de camp to general Wayne was before Congrrfs the second tirnr, I aflccd major Thomas Cufhing his opinioftof the claim. He ft id it was not founded oft law, aRd he believed th« appoint ment of extra aid wis ufeltfs arid gi*en to I.ewii as a matter of convenience, to afford him an oppor tunity of fettling his privite bufinffs, "and that major Lewis had told him so, or words to that im port. Other convention did pass, but the parti cular words I ra<nct tcmcmber; however, it amoun'ed fully t« t'.iis, viz. that the claim of Tho mas JLcwii was uuiliQ, and ought not to' he granted. THOMAS DAVIS. Major Thomas Lewis. [Cipt. Lewis declares that so far from having made use ol any «/th> erpreflion* tc Major Ci'.fti <ng, contained ii» rt? ccrt fUate of Mr. Davis, that he never had a converfatioc with him at any time on the fubje<s of his appointment at Aid-de-Cai»p to General Wayne.] Of the COMMITTEE To whom were referred, on tlie 12th inft. certain MEMORIALSand PETITIONS complaining of the aft, intitled, " an aft " Conceniing Aliens," And OTHER LATE ACTS of the Con gress of the United States. [Made the order for this day, Feb. 35.] The Gomm^ ttEE, to whom were referred the Memorials of sundry inhabitants of tbe counties of Suffolk and §>ueen, in tie state of New-Tork ; if Essex county in New- Jersey ; of tbe counties of Philadelphia, York, Northampton, Mifflin, Dauphin, Washington, and Cumberland, in Pennsyl vania ; and of the county of Amelia, in Virginia, complaining of the act, entitulcd " an act concerning aliensand other late ads of Congress, submit tbe following IT is the profcflfed objeft of these peti tions to folitit a repeiil of the two afts pafled during the last feflion of congress, the one " an aft concerning aliens," the other " an aft, in addition to an aft for the punishment of certain crimes againll the United States," on the ground of their being unconftitution a!, oppressive and impolitic. The committee cannot, however, forbear to notice, that the principal measures hither to adopted for repelling the aggreflions and insults of France have not el'caped animad version. T. LEWIS, October 20th. Complaints are particularly direfted against the laws providing a navy—for augmenting the army—authorising <l provisional army, and corps of volunteers—for laying a duty on Ramped vellum, parchment, and paper aflefiing and collefting direct taxes —and au thorising loans for the public service. With these topics of complaint, in fonie of the petitions, are intermingled inve&ives against the policy of the government from an early period, and insinuations derogatory to the character of the lagiflature, and of the adniiniftration. While the committee regret that the pub liccouncils fliouldeverbe invited to listen to other than expreflions of refpeft, they trust that they have impartially considered the questions referred to their examination, and formed their opinions on a just apprecia tion of their merits, with a due regard to the authority of government, ar.d thedifpaf fionate judgment of the American people. The aft concerning aliens, and the ad in addition to the aft, intitutled an a£t for the punishment of certain cilinies, (hall' be firft considered. Their constitutionality is impeached. It is contended, th«t congreft have no power to pass a law for removing aliens. To this it is answered, that the asylum gi u '-*jU ■* <§ ■"— RFPORT REPORT ven by a nation to foreigners is men mat ter of favor, refumable at the public will. On this point, abundant authorities might be adduced, but the common practice of nations attests the principle. The right of removing aliens, as an inci dent to the power of war and peace accord ing *o the theory of the constitution, belongs to the government of the United States. By the 4th fefton of the 4th article of the consti tution, congress is required to protfft each state from invasion, and is vested by the Bth ifeftiori of the jth article, with power to make,all laws, which shall be proper to carry in to Weft all powers veiled by the cor.ftit'J tion in the government of the United States, or in any department, or officer thereof ; and to remove from the country, in times of holiility, dangerous aliens, who may be em ployed in preparing the way for invasion, is a mealure neceflary for the purpoie of pre venting invasion, and of course, A measure that congress is empowered to adopt. J he aft is laid to be unconstitutional, bc caule to remove aliens, is a dire£t breach of the conllitution, which provides, "by the 9th feftion of the ift article, that the mi gration, or importation of such persons as any of the states shall think propfr to admit, lhall not be prohibited by the Congress, pri or to the year 1808." I o this, it is answered, firft that this sec tion in the constitution was enafted solely in to prevent congress from prohibiting, un til after a fit period, the importation of slavks, which appears from two conlider ations. First, that the reftriftion is confin ed to the states which were in existence at the time of establishing the constitution ; and secondly, that it is to continue only twenty years, for neither of which modifi cations could there have been the least reason had the reftriftion been intended to apply, not to Haves particularly, but to all emi grants in general. Secojtdly. It is aofwered, to prevent emigration in general, is r very different thing from fending pff, Sifter their arrival, such emigrants as' might abuse tb© irnht!- gence, by rendering themselves dangerous to-the peace or fafety of the country, and that ,if the cpnftittition, in tjjis particular fliould be Jo construed r it would 1 prevent cotigrtfs from driving it body of ara?ed ir*en from the country, who might land with views Evidently hoftiie. Thirdly, That a* the Cor.ftitution has given to the dates do power, to remove ali ens, daring the period of the limitation un der consideration, in the mean time on the condruftipn afTuuted, there would be no au thority in the country, empowered to feud away dangerous aliens, which cannot be ad mitted ; and that on a supposition the afore faid redtiftive clause included every descrip tion of em grants, the different feftions mud recieve such a condraftion at shall re conc le them wivh each other ; and accord ing to a fair interpretation of the different parts of the Coriflitution, the fcftion can not be confid<*rfd as redriftive on the pow e» of Congress 19 fend aarey dangerous for-1 cigners in times of threatened or aftual ho dility. And though the United States at '.he time of pafling this aft, were not in a date of declared war, they were in a date of partial hodility, and had the power, by law, to provide, ae by this aft they have done, tor removing dangerous aliens. This law is said to violate that part of the Condi: ution which provides that the tri al ef all crimes, except in cases of irapeach meut shall be by jury ; whereas this aft in veds the President with power to fend away aliens on his own fufpicioD, and thut t» in ftift puriifhment without trial by jury. It is answered in the fiift place, that the Conditution was made for citizens, not for aliens, who of confequencr have no Rights under it, but remain in the coun try, and enjoy the benefits of the laws, not as matter of right, but merely as matter of favour and permiflion, which favour and per mission may be withdrawn, whenever ihe government charged with the general wel fare shall judge their further continuance dangerous. It is answered in the second place, that the provisions in theConftitution relative to prelentment and trial of offence* by juries, do not apply t* the revocation of an asylum given to aiiens. Those provifionj toJely refpeft crimes, and the alien may be remo ved without having committed any offence, merely from motives of policy or fecurily. The eitizen, being a member ef focicty, has a light to remain in the country, of which he cannot be disfranchifed, exc pt for offences firft ascertained, on presentment and by jury. It is answered thirdly, that the removal of aliens, though it may be convenient to them, cannot be considered as a punilhment infli&ed for an offence, but, as before re. marked, merely the removal f r «m motives of general fafety, of an Indulgence which .here is danger of their abnfing, and whfch ve are in no manner bound to grant or continue i rhe ' Aft in addition to an a£t, iutiiuled an aCt „ f( \ r punishment of certain crime» agamft the United States" commonly cal led the sedition »a, contains provisions of twofold nature ; firft, against feditiousafts and, second, against libellous and seditious wnttmgi- Tn« firft have never been com plained of, nor has any objeaon been made to us validity : The objeaion applies (ole ly to the second ; and on the ground, in tht fi'ft place, that Congress have no power by the Court itution to pass any a a for punish ing libels, no f lic h power being expressly given, and all powers not given to Congress, being reserved to the states refpeaively, or the people thereof. 3 To this objeftion it is anlwered, that a law, to punilh falfe, scandalous and mali cious writings against the government with intent to stir upfedmon, is a law necessary, for carrying into effed the power vested by tt • j" o tUtlon 10 llle 8 0¥ernrn ent of the V' 3 r d ,he dad officers thereof, and coafequently futh a law,as CongreU may pass : feecaufe ;h f direiSt tendency of such writings is to r,b ftruft the afts «f the government by excit. iing opposition to them, to endanger its ex. ftente by rendering it odious and contemn, tiblc in the eyes ot the people, and to pro. duce seditious combinations against the laws the povTer to punilh which has never beer quefh'oned : bccaufeit would be manifeftlj absurd to suppose that a government might punilh sedition, and yet be void of power to prevent it by punilhiug those a£h, which cause under the general power to make all laws proper and neccffary for carrying into effeA the powers vested by the Conftitutior. in the government of the United States Congrtfs has parted many laws for which no express provision can be found in the Con. ftitution, and the conftitutionali'y of which has never been questioned ; fuc.h as the firft feftien of the att now under eonfideratioß, aCt pa fled during the present fefiioa, for punilhing peifoi s who, without authority from the government, (hall carry on m correspondence relative to foreign affairs with aay foreign government ; —the aft f or the punilhment of certain crimes againftthg United States which defines andp;ini/V misprison of treason ; the lotli and izt feclions, which declare the puntlhrnent c fliall confederate to become pirates thein felves or to induce others to become so, the 15th feftion which inflifts a penally on those wlv tteal or falfify the record of any court of the United States; the 18th aud 31 ft fe&ions, which provide for the punifli. ment ef persons committing perjury in any court of the United States, or attempting to bribe any of their judge* ; the 2id sec t efill the prscefs of any court of the United States, and the 23d against rescuing the of. fenders who have been Evicted of any capital offence before V&ofe courts ; provU i.ons none of wh-.y, are CJtprefsly author ;f. f, .J w ,ir -0 have been considered as con ihtutionj.,, because they are necessary and proper for carrying into cff.ft certain po*. R.i cxprefsly given to Congress. It is objected to this aft, in the second place, that it is txprefsly contrary to that part of the coaftitution which declares that " Congress {hall make no law refpeaing 3n eftablirtiment of religion, or prohibiting the free exereife thereof, or abridging the liber laid to be an " abridgment of the liberty of the press, ' and therefore uncondi tional. To this it is answered, in the firft place, that tne liberty of the press coi>fift ß llo t : a pleases, w.thout being liable to punilhrnent if he Ihould abuse this licence to the injury lie and individual*, for any abijfe o{ this permission to their prejudice; in like man ! juftity him .n going by violence into another ; man's house, or in afTaulting any perfoo •• the liberty of the pref*," while in fcveral if not all, their laws provide for the puni/h. men! of libellous publications, which would be a manifeft absurdity and contradiftion, if any and every thing, without being amena. ble to the laws for the abuse of this licence. According to this jsft, legal, a ß d universally admitted definition of " the liberty of the P rc /*.''' a law to restrain its licentioufrefs, in piiblifhing falfe, scandalous, and malicious eonfidered a. « an abridgement" of its " liberty." t> >fi t < It is answered, in the second place, that the liberty of the press did nerer extend, ac cording to the laws of any state, or of the Umt.d States, or of England, from whence our laws are derived, to the publication of 3 wt and malicious writings a gamft the government, written or published with intent to do mifchief, such publications being unlawful, a „d puniffiable in every rtate ; from whence it follows, undeniably, i lat a law, to punish seditious and malicious publications, is not an abridgement of " thr liberty of the press," f„ r it would be a man,'- *■ a^fui 'dity to fay, ihat a man> liberty was abridged by punching him for doing that which he never had a liberty to do. It is answered thirdly, that the aft in quettion canno.t be uneonflitutional, because if makes nothing penal that was net penal before, and gives no new powers to the court, but it merely declaratory of the com mon law, and ufeful for rendering that law more generally ka )wn, and more easi ly undeiltood. This cannot be denied, and if it be admitted, as it mull be, that falfe, fcandalcua, and malicious libels againfl the government of the country, published with intent to do mifchief, are punilhaMe by the cammonlaw; for by the 2d feilion of the 3d article of the constitution, the judical power of the United States is expressly ex tended to all offences ariling under the con stitution. By the constitution, the govern ment of the United States is ettablifhed, for many important objefls, as the govern ment or the country; and libelsagainft that government, therefore, are offences a rising under the •onftitution, and conse quently are puniftiabW at common law by the courts of the Uni ted States. The a&» indeed, is so far from having extended tbs law, and the power of the court, that it has abridged both, and has enlarged in fkad of abridging the «• liberty of the \
Significant historical Pennsylvania newspapers