Page:United States Reports, Volume 1.djvu/45

 34  dence could be given of a man’s entiments; but that the intention expreed by any words offered in evidence, mut relate immediately to the overt act laid and proved on the indictment; that although an adherence to the Britih troops was treaon, yet, an adherence to American troops, even under a uppoition that they were Britih, did not amount to that crime; and that the opinion, that words joined with actions made treaon, however ingeniouly upported, failed in point of Law. See 3 Cro. 332.

The Attorney General, on the other hand, admitted that words alone do not amount to treaon; but, he inited, that they were proper evidence to explain the Defendant’s actions on a trial for that crime. 1 Hawk. 39. Fot. 202. For, though barely being within the enemy’s camp might be innocent; yet if it could be hewn, that the intention of going thither was to join and adhere to them, the evidence ought to be received.


 * —No evidence of words relative to the mitake of the American troops, can be admitted; for any adherence to them, though contrary to the deign of the party, cannot poibly come within the idea of treaon.

But, as it appears, that the prioner was actually with the enemy at another time, words indicating his intention to join them, are proper tetimony to explain the motives, upon which the intention was afterwards carried into effect.

The Attorney General then called a witnes to prove that the Defendant was een parading with the enemy’s light hore in the city of Philadelphia.

But to this, alo, his counel objected: For, they urged, that every criminal act mut be tried in the county in which it is committed. ''Cro. C.'' 247. 4 Bl. C. 301. 3 Int. 48. 49. 80. And that the circumtance of merely joining the enemy’s army, being neither treaon, nor mipriion of treaon, unles done with a traiterous intention, no overt act had been proved in Cheter, which was a prerequiite to any evidence being heard of an overt act committed in any other county. To evince that this was, likewie, the ene of the Legilative, the Defendant’s counel read the act of Aembly giving the Supreme Court a pecial power to try offenders in Lancater, for crimes committed in the counties of Cheter and Philadelphia.

The Attorney General anwered, that when an overt act is proved in the county where the trial is held, corroborative evidence may be given of overt acts committed in any other county. Fot. 9. 2 Hawk. 436. And that having etablihed the prioner’s preence with the Britih army, nothing, but the proof of actual force, and its continuance, could excue him from the charge of adhering to the enemies of the Commonwealth. Fot. 11. For, joining the army of as enemy has always been held  evidence of an overt act. And