K CHARGE TO THE GRAND JURY, AT THE JULY TERM OF THE MUNICIPAL COURT, IN BOSTON, 1854. Ebenezer Rockwood By E. R. HOAR, One of the Justices of the Court of Common Pleas of Massachusetts. PUBLISHED BY BOSTON: LITTLE, BROWN, & COMPANY, No. 112 Washington Street. 1854. E 450 .197 HOS NOTE. A report of the charge of Judge HOAR to the Grand Jury of Suffolk County appeared in the newspapers on the day following its delivery, and has been extensively circulated. The part of it which discusses "the relation of the military power to the civil authority of the Commonwealth" was written before it was delivered. The rest was oral, and more liable to verbal inaccuracies of the speaker or the reporter. Some of these have been corrected in this publication, but without departing, in any instance, from the substance of what was said. 7742 BOSTON: PRESS OF PRENTISS AND SAWYER, No. 19 Water Street. UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN CHARGE. Ar the opening of the July term of the Municipal Court in Boston, on Monday, July 3, 1854, a new Grand Jury for the County of Suffolk was empanelled and sworn, and the Charge required by law was given by Judge HOAR. He commenced by instructing the Grand Jury, at some length, upon the formal duties of their office, and upon the nature and obligations of the oath which they had taken. He then proceeded to charge them particularly upon the laws prohibiting lotteries, referring especially to attempted evasions of those laws, under the name of Gift Enterprises, and Gift Concerts. He instructed the Grand Jury that such enterprises were infractions of the principles of the law, and that persons engaged in promoting those enterprises, or in selling or advertising tickets in them, were liable to indict ment. He then spoke of the fraudulent issue of the stock of corporations, and stated the rules of criminal law applicable to such a transaction. On this subject he held that if two or more officers of any corporation had fraudulently issued stock unauthorized by law, they were indictable for conspiracy; and if one officer alone had made such over-issue, and by that means had obtained money or other valuable things, he would be liable to be indicted under the statute for obtaining goods under false pretences. He then proceeded substantially as follows: Another subject on which I think it important that the law should be distinctly stated to you is, the subject of riots. It is matter of public notoriety, gentlemen, that riotous proceedings have taken place within the County of Suffolk, within this City, and recently. It is probable from the action of the inferior tribunals, that cases of this description may be brought before you, and it may be your duty to investigate that subject. I will, therefore, gentlemen, in the first place, state to you the legal definition of "Riot," and then state some of the rules applicable to persons engaged in riotous demonstrations. "When three persons or more shall assemble themselves together with the intent mutually to assist each other against any who shall oppose them, in the execution of some enterprise of a private nature, with force or violence, against the peace, or to the manifest terror of the people, whether the act intended were of itself lawful or unlawful, — it is an unlawful assembly: and if they execute their enterprise to any extent, it is a riot." You will notice, gentlemen, that to constitute a riot, there must be three persons, at least, or more assembled; they must be acting in concert, with intent mutually to assist each other against all who may oppose them. It must be in the exercise of a private purpose, to distinguish it from war or rebellion against the government. Now, gentlemen, there is no doubt, if three or more persons should assemble together with force and violence, and in a manner calculated to produce a breach of the peace, or to excite the terror of the people, with the intent to rescue a prisoner lawfully in custody, and should in the execution of that purpose proceed to batter down the door of a building in which that prisoner is held, that this would come within the legal definition of a riot. And, gentlemen, when an unlawful or riotous assembly exists, a responsibility may attach to all persons composing it, for the commission of an act beyond the intention of the persons who are thus unlawfully assembled - that is, beyond the particular intention of each individual for the rule of law on that subject is this: "That if persons go together, united in an unlawful design, to commit a felony or breach of the peace, and in the course of effecting that purpose, any one does an act in pursuance of the common purpose, they are all answerable for it. But if one does an act, not in pursuance of the common design, the others would not be answerable." |