The New York Herald Newspaper, March 13, 1843, Page 1

Vol, IX.-—-No. 74,— Whole No, 3285. Price Two Cents. U, 8. Ciroult Court, Before Judge Betts ly.—[We now give the concluding portion of Mr. Butler’s argument in this case.] I think it will be found when we come to look at the acts of Cangress, which I am now prepared to exa ress in the execution of the powers devolved e constitution, have adopted the very view ve endeavored to present, he judicial lawof 1789, This act creates the federal judiciary, and establishes remé Court called jor by the constitution, end also the in. erior Courts which are first, and the highest of all, the District Court, and next the Circuit Court. section confers onthe District Court a certain criminal well as a very extensive admiralty juris The District Courts of the U. ‘ates, then, are invested with all the admiralty and mari isdiction ef the U, States, on certain criminal cases The 1ith section gives to the Circuit with a very extensive cog. nces cegnizable under the laws of the U States,except as this section and the laws of the U. States otherwise provide, concurrent jurisdiction rdto crimes and off-nces This act then makes the Courts the highest courts of the U. States of original criminal jurisdiction. Fortha Circuit Court has in the lace concurrent jurisdiction with the Di 5 en extensive origi allogianceto the United States | United States or to citize tas has. been suppo the individual owes th And that no such dou! isted in the mind of thy Chief Justice, did exist then, may be inferred from the fact that Mr. Webster, who appeared for the prisoner, and made one ot the It has been suggested hero, and wo assented to it as true in point of fact, that Com- mander McKenzie is now up a Brooklyn, on the ve int made to this grand. ju apply to ships of war of the U: driven to this consequence : that whatever felony ,ofhow- ever atrocious a character, might be committed on board a ship ot war,at this period, it could not ave bi under the laws of the United State: To the Public, , are therefore THE NEW YORK HERALD—daily newspaper—pub- lished overy day of the year except New Year's day and Fourth of July. Price 2 cents per copy—or $7 26 per an- num—postages paid—cash in THE WEEKLY HERALD—published every Saturday mornisg—price 6} cents per copy, or $3 12 per annum— postages paid—cash in advance. ADVERTISERS are informed that the circulation of the Herald is over THIRTY THOUSAND, and increasing ast. Ithas the largest circulation of any paper in this city, or the world, and is therefore, the best channel for Business men inthe city ur country. Prices moderate—cash in ad- ; because, uoder pplicable to it he year 1800, and antecedent to which ti armament was actually in existence. of Chief Justice Marshall, although perf regard to the technical fact,that in 1790 there was not any Tsay it with great deterence, n—not a sound remark. the navy was then practically in existence, and in passing the law of 1790, knew that there w ous provisions, they made re- expressly declared the sovereignty and vited States over all vesse! cellor Kent has remarkod, that couets the pendency of a former yet he is mistaken in supposing that that rule applies to a lease, And asthe experience of that distinguished judge, since he lett the bench has not been very ext 1a criminal cases, it is not at all extraor lien inte this error, for an error un ing is better settled in the crimiral the principle another indictment pending same offence, even although that other indictment be in the very same court. The remark, then, | indicted, and might lose his life,—did not apply to offences in a public armed vessel of the United States. And [cannot believe that he would have omitted an ob- % atthe very threshold of the case, if there } any force or propriety in it. 1 therefore humbly that when this objection was not take! i and such Counsel, th Ghief Justice must be confined strictly to an answer to the argument of the Attorney rievious error,that it is aguinst t ‘at he intended to express the opinion which some who ritten on the subject would seem to argue. The au- thorities showing that the opinion of the judge isto be strictly limited to the record,are numerous and sufficiently well known to your Honor. I cannot doubt that if this ques- tion shall ever go to the Supreme Court ot the U: that the language in which the C expressed himself, inthe case of Cowan against the U. peated in regard lose of this opinion, a garded us being as oj as if these remarks had never been made. then, that in the tru of that instrument which [ tion tor the same cause, ‘The first ot thi navy in existence, ne national Su- | but with entire convict that he should have fal tobe a navy, and, by vi i it, and Jurisdiction of the Un belonging to a public navy, or to private consequence, i! it shall turn out that the view of the other side is correct, to wit : that this law of 1790 never applied to offences committed on board ships of war—is this till this very hour the effence of manslaughter, committed zh seas, is unpunished by any act of Congress; for when I come to the law of 18001 shall show that that crime is not included in the provisions of that law, and in express terms denounced in the act of 1790.— be contended by the other side, as we have Suppose, that it 14 not within that’ law, because no part of the iaw applies to the Navy. ‘The conseq will be then unavoidable, that that not denounced in any of the statutes of th it your Honor ploase, that those gen 790 must be held, so far as they relate to crimes 4 known to the common law, aid general law as within the provisions of the law, it Coe ca Chit coats, ates Shee aws of interpretation Until the other indictment passes into a judgment cither of acquittal cr conviction, In this respect the rule is different incriminal courts from that which obtains in civil courts. (1 Chitty’s Criminal Law, 446) 5 Mr Chitty sustains the principle to the fullest extent— le in practice better on in the Sth amend: ited States—nor shall PRINTING ofall kinds, executed at the most moderate prices, and in the most elegant style. JAMES GORDON BENNETT, Proprietor oy THx Henavp Estasuisument, Northwest corner of Fulton and Nassau streets. of a minor kind. Court of the U. States, alon nizance of all crimes and o! it cannot be pleaded. ‘The cases referred to by pages 453-9 462 settled than that. meat of the Ce! any person be twice put in jeopardy ply to acase of pending tria , 4th vol, 355. with the District punishable therein. HOUSES T)) LET AT YORKVILLE? tore the comer of 81h strvet aud 3d avenu house, grocery or to these remarks at'th of them is calculated for question will be tna for gorden comico In the construction given to Ee sion by a decision of the Supreme Court it has been held and is perfectly settled hall not be tried the second ‘time for the n once convicted er acquitted diginent been passet always been held not to apply when a jury has bi charged without agreeing, or when judgn is case of Good Johnston, 189, is in p murder, the jury cou yet he was alterward: ime is till this day uction ef the act of 1790, it does extend to murder and other felonies committed on board a United States ship, in the circum-tances described If this be tne true construct n be no question, as | presume not, natity of Congress in pa question is, whether they have lation the provisi of 17901 The subsequent legislation con 5, which provide for the better regulation of (1 Duane & Bioron, 351; and Ist of Story, . ist article of the rulesand regulations for the overnment of the navy provides that the crime of mur- ler, when committed Wy an officer, n longing to any vessel of the Unit territorial jurisdiction of the death by the sentence of remark in the first ig diction of all those higher ces which are by the 9th section made not I pause upon this act of f bringing to the notice of the court in which the Cir 8 ots, with grape vinesand fiuit quire 0} JOHN A. ROMMEL, cognizable by the District Court. 1789 for the purpo: the neculiar relation U. States stand under the federal constitution, and also to the other courts under that government, and I observe that the Circuit Courts of the United States being the highest courts of original jurisdiction under this govern. ment, are when compared with other courts, whether civil or military, Superior Courts—that they to naval courts martial, a8 the King’s Bench in England sustains to all the other courts of that realm, and which are analagous to the relations in which the Supreme Court stands to all the courts of this State id th: @ Circuit Court of the United States, both as regards its civil and criminal jurisdiction, i preme Court, yet not in the sense of the section as an infe- that it is a court of general se rules of the common law ‘which apply to the highest court of general criminal jurisdiction, as contradistinguished from interior courts, pply to the Circuit Court of the United States although from the limited character of the Federal Go ernment, it is a court inferior to the Supreme Court.— ‘These views of the Circuit Court, and which repudi the idea thrown out at the commencement, by coursel ent, that it was to be re; withia the sense of common which will be found to bi 10th Wheaton, in the section. of 1790, and if there as to the constitut iction of eny | law, the only ry ig to any vessel 4 varied by subsequent le FO LET—The upper ont of th street, af-w doors from Wall street; the second stor pted for a merchant or law- store No. 7 New it Courts of the | ofthe U. Stat committed on the h gh particular State, and by persons belongi over which the U. States, as a separate and independent that they are not to be limit. There is noth t of ajury, and hes two offices, and it is 9, the three story house 34 Walker st, between Broadway an excellent situation fora genteel family, oc- sees ame not agree, and were discharged— brought by the District Atto the trial. ‘Tne objection was raised that he had alrea been tried and putin Jeopardy of his life, and that ol jec- tion was very tioroughly discu: counsel then at the bar, and in that case the Supreme y hadnot previously been put in e doctrine has been held by the tutes, of Philadelphia and Bos- ircuit Court Report Story p 660, sec. power, has jurisdiction ; an‘ ted or restricted to the merchant service. ing in the law itsell on which to found any suci restric- ‘There is nothing in the reason of the case on which to support any such argument. On the contrary, the statute which negatives such cogent aud numerous rea- site construction should ie k store corner of Pike and Cherry streets, occu: led by Messrs. Valenune & Ci bl ¢ convenient two story house with attic end couuter celler, No. 229 “The two story brick house, No.73 Gold ice. at. formerly owned by Mr, Mi as a feed store, a rooms, basement ‘occupied by Mr. rine or seaman be- there are provisions ap argument; and there a sons which require that an op; begiven. And, let me ask, what possible detriment can terms their natural signification? Will the gentleman opposite be so good as to peint out some practical inconvenience which will result trom the for which we contend? Some interrup: tion ofthe disciplineofthe Navy, some weakening of its vigor and efficiency? They can show no such thing — But on the contrary, every argument which can bedrawn from the law and reason ofthe case, of this law, aad within its powers all off-nces committed by suisjects vessels belonging to the merchant service or inthe Navy of the government. , those employed in the navul service of the country are more eminently within the jurisdiction of tho governmont to which the vessel belongs, than tho.e em- ployed merely jn her merchant marine; and instead of there being any argument from reagon, convenience, or tice against it, there are the strongest arguments deri vable from those sources. in favor of extending to the per sons employed in the naval service the terms ot this law. There has been no judicial decision in which that ques tion has been distinctly presented. ing any reference to it is that of the United States ag: Beving, in 831 Wheaton, p 33 ‘our Honor, in the opinion on the application of wmetime inthe monthof January, and from which, and some part of the language of Chief Jus: tice Marshall, your Henor inferred that it was doubtful whether the Act of 1790 applied to offences committed in vessels of war on the hi by the most eminent treet, one door fro me, may be punished with + Hitchcock. The inferior to the Su- Court ruled that ie part; 1 ot mandatory but ‘missive—‘ may be punished,” not “ shall be , that this section gives the tion to try the offence of murder, when it has been committed out of the territorial juris diction of the Unite State rt It from givi rior court. On the contrai reeult from giving the jurisdiction, and that all against Haskett, 31 vo les against Pet those I betore cited, showing you cannot plead a pending indictment in abatement in a I shall next refer to cases show ing that the proceedings in the ficst case must have been free from error in order to prove a bar to a second trial, Hawkins, Book 2, ch. — sec.9, 1 Chitty 453-64 58-62 6: William Vaux’s case, 4th 44; so that’ it is impossible for Commander McKenzie to plead the pendency of these proceedings in abatement until after they have gone into judgment; question wilt come whether it was by a Court of rightful Jurisdiction and authority, or the question m on ademurrer to his plea. 4 —In D treet, ‘Smith stree , bi rire ee oy heat, shel Se be ps Path with two lots of $C. Court Martial jurisdi ial out of the jurssdic | in connexion is the interpreta- Will the counsel say it that interpretati the most choice grare vines. vets, with a well and pump of excel/ent 1s proverty is well calculated ectable family, te whom it will terms, by apply- JOSEPH McMURRAY, tion I give to this articl that I interpolate by atlixing t 0 that the section is silent with respect to the place of trial? It will be a fair suggestion ;and your Honor will judge of its weight, and [ willask them by what right they interpo- late this article in regard to the place of trial, that it may be either out of the territorial jurisdiction of the United in the construction they interpolate in regard to the place of trial, and a great deal more, ‘09, than | propose to insert. er ‘ater on the premises favor of a large Jet for one year or more on accommed: and one of the ded as an inferior court, ‘oke’s_ Reports istinctions and ed in 4th of Dallas, p. 8 p- 192; 1 Paine, p. 45; 1 Sumner, p. 478— uence which I draw from this first ps evolves upon those who object to thé juris- urt of the United States over an offence conceded to belong to the government of the Uni- plainly, and beyond all doubt that the jurisdiction resid court, or else it is a casus omissus, for whic! ‘That is the common law princ! of King’s Bench. What I mean draw any analogy from the peculiar powers possassed by the Court of King’s Bench, and thence to argue that the Circuit Court of the United States posseases the same pow- ers, nor do { mean to insist that the Court of in England hes any jurisiiction over off-nces committed onthe high seas, for in the former part of my argument I that such jurisdiction belonged to th But the principle for the establis! ment of which I make this reference is, that the Circuit Court is not an inferior one in the sense of common law. It therefore devolves on those who object to the jurisdiction of the Circuit Court of the United States to try andgpunish a felony committed on board an United States ship of war ont of the territorial ju State, to show clearly and conclusively what other Court has the jurisdiction: for the presumption must be, until that be shown, either that the case has not been provided is to go unpunisbed, or e Circuit Court of the United States. much we think we are authorized to affirm ot the judicial act of 1799, by which these various Courts were created. Now, then, we will passed by the same Congress which passed the ju This law of 1790, I may remark, requ careful consideration at our hand: read that law without being perfectly convinced that it was the intention of Congress—whether the design was accomplished or not inall respects may be aquestion—to exhaust the whole power conferred upon them by the Constitution, and to make a penal code which should be the authority of the new Government, g for all the casesover which their crimi: jurisdiction could extend, so far as related to crimes and misdemeanors known to the general law of the land —to the common law—and to th which hed constituted this new government. They it case belonging to this general head of criminal jurisdiction, which they could loresee. And particularly was this law designed to execute those provisions of the Constitution referred to at the gommence- argument, by which Congress riged to define and offences against the law of nations on the 6th section of this law of felony committed on the ith the provision thi of the United m6 r 4 TO LET—From! Houses, in Grand street, 1 aSiore No. s Canal st, now oncup ito t ve mrenient sto es it coul made into two very cot JOHN THO (a HOUSE —One the city, having been oceopied as such fora number of years, with agood rua of busi nes, 255 Learl street, in the same diction of the Circuit C In ether words, this eee esabe of Goodwin, page 203 of Haw ‘said expressly if an’ error lh into the judgment, it will be so barto the second trial. cordant with reason. ciple, @ very just and sacred one, that no man shall be true, yet if the former erroneous one, if the Court had no jurisdic. toin, he ought not in reason any more than in law, to be exempt from atrial bi fore a competent Court, on alawiul charge. And in regard to the peculiar constituti it isto be observed that the proceed ings of acourt martial do not necessarily issue in judgment those of civil courts, beeause they n of the Secretary of the Navy, So that non constat, ha been any error in the proceedings or difference of opinion in regard to the resui:, there may be a withholding of the approbation of the executive authority. At allevents we the end of that proceeding before it can be right- up as an objection to the jurisdiction of the Cir- ‘ourt of the United States. And onthe sub jurisdiction I will take the trouble of ad no undue presumption doubt with regard to these questions. doubt in regard to the legal authority of th to try this case, then I do submit that that is urt should take cognizance of the far at least as was suggested yesterday by the Court, a ‘The Court had doubts as to ita ju but it instructed the TO LET—A BOARDIN <A BO of the territorial jurisdiction of the U. States expressly most desirable stai d inition of the offence, which must,it de- clares,be committed without that territorial jur sdiction It says nothing whatever of the place where the Court Mar- in a former part of d to all crimes tad States, to show clearl; or peradventu kins, where it reference to the de Eaquire of James of Sanderson, 21! Pearl st. For whilst the prin- al is to sit und tr my argument, I next, the moder built ‘The only case bear- ‘hird st, *vith attic, ba Mar, and marble mandes throu farther particulars inquire at 47934 Pearl st TO LET Th sau aud Fulton streecs, TO LET—A small, neatly furnished lodging roor joderate. Apply a ¢ m ave shown that in jeopardy for his life, nces known to the common law as crimes, contr distinguished from military offences, that of course then for all felonies on the high te Constitution iteel! to stare jm house, No. 11 This is the cai rovision is made by the that they shall be tried bya jury, and trict wherein they were committed, and ea place of of the U. States ir Kore No. OTHE Naseam, street, nthe ly atthe Herald o! wee ae pond, eo nt it otherwise Congres: and this place is fixed to be the Dist: to which the offender shall firstbe brought. And [here refer to a!] the considerations which were before address- ed by meto the Court, in regard to the interpretation of ‘onstitution, that the Court should article in suvordination to and consistency Pr the Constitution to which | have already referred the court. t, in order to carry out the great principles of the constitution, give to these articles the construction, that not only mustthe murder have been committed out of the general jurisdiction of the United States, but that on to punish it must also be carried into execution out of that general jurisdiction. For remember, not only an implied power: ofthe necessity of the case, and there may be great safet: propriety, and convenience, in authori i composed of competent perso murder, while the vessel is yet territorial limits of the Uaited states. necessity, propriety, © ting such atrial after the party has been brought within the territory ofthe United States; because there is already isvence, armed with all necessary h the accused will have all the safeguards by the constitution, a court more competent than any can be to try the c: in’ that artich stated expressly Admiralty Courts. en the doubts m the words of Chief Justice 3 jat the venerable ex-Chancellor Kent proeeeds in his first proposition to lay down as doubtful whether the courtsofthe United States even possessed this juris. diction over murder in ships of war. prised that ona question submitted to your Honor, with. Out discussien, and that being exceedingly hurried, hav- h ve, only one nightto prepare that elaborate inio, that you should have fallen into the error, which with all deference, but all freedom as counvel,{ would ven- foycu, because the language of Chief Jus- rectly calculated to induce the opini ‘iven, and I have no doubt that fora gentleman. A RARE CHANCE—A first rate stand for a grocer, and of the Presi uate on corner Delaney aut Cannon st, with a smal tock, the present proprietor wishing to go into the Having been Jong cstablinved, would, nd a first rate run «f business. 6 UOD_ CUTTA! i) heavtitul country remdence, on Gowanus Hi the Greenwood Cemetery , conta cellar, wood house, and largr garden, all Distasce from th A isdiction of avy particular fing that there is the assumption that there is fa at all by Congre Well, if there be it belongs to t) tasted, ax to command an uninter- » fee. it’ Martin & Co, of Mr. Martin,’ on the premi: which you hat lawyers ont of ten, looking hastily y of the Chief Justice in the latter part of his opinion, case whether there are any ns in any of the acts of Congress in relation es committed on board ships of war of the U.States. My remarks on this point fall into two general heads. I will show that this part of the opinion was not called for d therefore forms no part of the judgment of the court, and in the next place, that if what is said in the latter part of the opinion were really a part of the judgment of the court, question now unier discussion, or at least it would not de- 1 do not deny that it would have some bearing on it, because it belongs to a kindred question. cessary to bring before the attention of the court briefly rticulars of the case referred to. Bev ed for murder, alleged to have been committed on board theU States ship “Independence,” then lying in the harbor of Boston, in waters of sutticient depth tor vess with free egress to the ocean. 0 to the law of 1790, one which grows out 6 John st, New York or would have acqui West Point case. diction to inquire into that cas Grand Jury to find the bill, for the very purpose of obtain ing the solution of the doubts of the Court by authority, to wit, the Supremi t all events it is a doubtful qu be tried im a Court Martial,or whether it It then there be doubt ought olved by the very highest authority not of the greatest importance that i that it can never hereafter be called in question 7? Is it not important to all persons employed in the navythat it should be settled and definitively settled? How can by the Supreme Court of the United States, unless this Court take cognizance of the case, and so being carried up? If the case be left inthe 3 ince be taken of it by the ins, unless the Court My 0 try persons accused of n tho high seas, out of the yet there is neither nor justice, in py 69 South street. LE—A_ desirable Village. Long Ist House, ine ttave style, with 4a: in Iudiug a Garden’ well igh state of cultiv anahalfa mile of the Ne fork avd Long 'sland Railroad, which has a commaunic tion by the case presented, powers, andin | belongs to the Civil Court. co-extensive with it would not bear on the should be so settled There is not one in relation to the and | therefore cali on this court to limit it tothe action and decision of a court marti out of the tercitoris] lin way you make t! visions of the constitution, pertectly ill secure on one law of the several States syllable, not one letter oe read SE the an ueyrean | tended to provile for eve ¢ acte of Congre: 7 Martial, and no cogn d rfect exercise of all the | Courts, the doubt re: summary powers belonging to courts martial, and on the band eeeure tothe citizen, when the commandor or oflicers ef the fleet do not deem it necessary to hi before the return of the vessel to which the offender be Unite! States, all thore laws afford him ‘by trial trae construction of thi There were various head- within which these waters lay, and it was contended on the part of Bevins that the harbor of Boston, in which the vessel lay, was not out of the juris- diction of any particular State, but on the contrary in the jurisdiction of the State of Massachusetts—and under this ‘statement of facts the question occurred which w: mitted to the Supreme Court for dec in the sworn statement cf facts the oftence charged in the within the jurisdiction of the State of or any court thereof, and secondly, wheth- er it was within the jurisdiction of the Circuit Court of the State of Massachusetts? two questions were discussed at great length by er nt and able counsel; aud Chief Justice Mar- shall delivered the opinion of the Court. He answers the ¢ ve, and shows that the ssc- tion of the law of 1790 describes the offence as being com- mitted out of the jurisdiction of any State—it fence committed but the place in which committed, which must be out of the jurisdiction of any State. He show that Congress has not exercised all the power on this been exercised consistently with the provisions of the Constitution, but that they have limi n of the Circuit Court to offences com. Nova JOHN J.MARSH Mamaroneck, West heater 0, Ny IR EXCHANGR FORA Os ol ous hondts fn position in which.the. appasit jurisdiction of the Civil Courts, is a grand principle that the Civil Courts are supreme over the Military |— Our object, for I avow itas the true ebject of my learned associa e and myself in the professional attention we have given to the sulject, has been, to bring this subject before that tribunal, whose august outhority, whose profound knowledge of the law, confidence of the peop! they pronounce their judgment all will be satisfied. Are afraid to trust their case to the Supreme Court? und for supposing that a Naval officer is to ve tried by the honorable when placed inopposii rovides for the misprision and that in oor country The Sth section the trial for the crimes spe- cified in it shall be in the district in which the offender shall be apprehended ; thus executing the power devolv- ingon Congress by the 3d a1 which provides for trial by jury. And that provision I may remurk is also contained in the law of 1825—the ge- HN es law of thet date, which tent a substitute fer the law of 1799. law of 1825, which makes fences committed on the high the offender shall be first apprehended and brou; 9th section of the law of 1790, jtuated, plenty of frust, well watered 4 therefore submit, ss at any day in the part of the law of 1900, that it really do Naval Court Martial any jurisdi Court, and that tial county of Kings, within the te of New York, and the Southern District undertaking to mmander McKenzie, i legal and unconstitutional tribuoal. trary t> that expectation, which there is reason to be- lieve is confidently ‘cherished in some quarters, that Court should finda verdiet of guilty, I that the learned counselof Commander McKenzie would low him to suffer the extreme penalty of the law question as to the legality o! im now contending; and | sub mn. First, whether ethe le of the Constitution, jietion, even concurrent so strong in the States, that when i FOR PROPERTY indictment w RK—A vaunble Farm ‘itorial limits of th Weat Chester County. to acertain ex- action 14of the rovision forthe trial ofall of- in the district where of it 80 anges 0 railes below White jetwo story dwelling house, with a pare, carriage and oat hi 8! itchen afraid of having it tested w 32 bearing apple orchards, esprit du corps of his associates, kept within proper bounds, but which mus* always be arded by the people of the United States as operating, even unwittingly, in a manner prejudicial to impartial justice? Are there not, | im policy, essential to the maintenance of justice itself, that be disp ch a way as will b it before the highest tribunal of the country? Andi such course can be taken in full{accordancewith thé usual prac: tice,why should it not be taken?I believe thet [can appeal to some who now hear me, of cases, as well as to the Englis! case in which serious doubt was entertained of the pro- in a billin this way, in order to test the jurisdiction of the Court. Your instructions to bring But I submit that in accor- and for the reasons I have mostly grofted fruit, Bt water and cistern provides for certain other ofpiracy and robbery not included in the general terms of the 8th section. The 10th section provides for the punishment of persons accessary before the fact, in iracy or rebbery on the high seas ; and the 11th sectioa provides for the punishment of those who are accessaries after the tact. that if any seaman or other person shall commit man. or various other offences punished in the manner therein 12th section uses question in the neg. aiken relelng th asons of the strongest that tribunal for which mit that the true interpretation of this article Aman for murder committed out United States, provided the trial be held there; that it is against all the rules of inter the plainest, most explicit, most fre- quently repeated fmost solemn provisions of the constitu: tion—provisions which our fathers were unwillin; leave, even under the strong instrument, but which they ae tie tage cases of murder raoat doe rable places in ; S TRAVIS, on the premises, ‘be 12th sectior. provides | point, which might ha Court Martial m: . BRUSH, mies No 33 Fatt st. of the territorial laughter on the high s merated, he sh: described. And this which can be applied only to public armed vessel Commander or master of | any he word “ commander” is unnecessary, unless it hed licable to the commander of a the next section, the 13th, will ted the jurisdict mitted out of the jurisdiction of an: he then comes to the conch harbor was not out of the jurisdiction of the State of Mas- sachusetts, and having come to that conclusion,that it was iction of the Circuit Cou: was a full and distinct answer to the second question, which involved the first ; and when these questions were thus answered the duty of the Supreme Court ended, and with the duty ended also the authority. The rest that fol- plainly obitery, and was introduced as an answer to anargument offered by the Attorney General. Court will look back to the argument of terney General, it will be fouad that he introduced the ar- gument that as the offence was comm a United States shipof war, it came wi tion of the statute. nce in criminal particular Stat: auhorities, in vain, fora retation—against at this part of Boston | q ‘uarantee of the original | priety of bringin; inserted in these amend- he very price of fhe constitution, without which New York, New Hampshir never would have assente o inst ell these to assignto this law any other interpre which we contend yo barbs, and other out houses parts, at the nouse of been intendal to be 9) blic armed ship. An found expressly to refer to such vessels. ! that meant revenue cutters] belonging to the United States, or 0 any citizen or cit! zens thereof,” so that Corgress discriminates between vessels belonging to citizens of the United States and whole merchant mari: vessels which belong to the United States ment. The counsel says “ revenue cutters.” Undoubt- edly. But does that exclude all other armed ships, for the revenue cutter is no more a vessel belonging to the Uni. ted State: than a frigate, or a seventy-four, or a sloop of In truth a revenue cutter vessel, and belongs tothe naval service, and so regarded asa part of that arm of defence. Tho 16th section pro vides for the punishment of larceny onthe high seas, and s refers expressly to the stealing of any munition belongin victualling of soldiers, marin Mota also can be ba Stee only to jarines” are persons who serve onl. Wethen affirm of thi 4 hat inasmuch as the wordsot ing, and universal, re- my committed on the ll, cannot be reviewed. dance with general practic stated, that the Grand Jury be instructed that the: , to the end that the objections to jarit i id carried in au here they may rv Ihave now finished lan in Whivpany, on Fri eh, instant, at 20 clock. P.M. Ci liberal, and attendance at the Ser of sale by the sab- VIN HOWELL, cerutors of said Deceased. a STATHN ISLAND FARMS *OK SALE— Iwo aluadl tuted. and in a high state ieulavs, eaquire of UD id street, or DAVID NITED STATES HOTEL OF PHILADEL- PHIA. he days and nights of their fine pints 4 tation than that for that by this ossent of Commander McK ing proceedings on the other aide of thentic form to the Supreme Court, final decision. all T have to say respecting the cenera Sommander McKenzie and the crime of Thave, however, zie to these pend- ras, heodsemely ir. Wirt, the At that embraces the as it relates to murder with which he stand: a few observations to gid with respect to the chirge of manslaughter, Mr. Cleveland has preferred the charge of manslaughter against Lieut. Gansevoort, all the putting to death of ha $ only Court having jurisdiction over the crime of man- slaughter, committed on the high sea Court of the United States. distinctly provides for manslaughter, by th: d in the act of 1800, establishin, Jations for the government of the navy, there is no provision made for the crime of manslaughter. These rules for the government of the navy were copied, almost verbatim, from the English code—the 22d of George The 28th section of the English vides for the crime of murder, to which the Court will find an easy reference in Tompkins’ Diction on the deck of imminest jeopardy, these most sacred provisions of the Constitution laim in this argument any imputation that we are en deavoring to oppress or persecute Commander McKenzie ssociated with him on that vessel. nd here on the high ground of pub- tional liberty, and contend for the ‘tity of one of the most important privileges an citizenship. But if I am not right in this in- terpretation, at most the Court Martial has merely con- ic thon; does that take awaythe jurisdiction of the crvil tribunals? Whence has that remerkable and most distinguished of livin, idea, not distinctly put fo rgument was not called for by nd therefore the reply to itcan form no part Court. He then goes on to make the additional remark that there was no navy when the law of seventeen hundred and ninety was d that afterwards there wes no jurisdiction in that res given to the Courts ofthe United Stat in its nataral interpretation, the Chief Justice would be to the law of 1900 did not make any P ment of crimes committed b sons belonging to the navy. Whereas that very law to which we refer does contain a provision securing the pu- nishment of the crime of murder when committed by a person belonging to a United States ship of war. But it the Chief Justice did not reg ourt of the United States. Can we rdity to the Chief J much a Court of the United States when McKenzie and ing it to have been committed in We submit that the yn, of the judgment of thy or any of the person On the contrary w is the Circuit i Reaeek od ‘The act of 1700, section 12, States, or stores ite and aff .ble deportment, ke. merican jurists der: but rather intimated—thet ant of concurrent jurisdiction to an inferior Court, des the jurisdiction of the higher Court? Certainly he has adopted the idea without careful examination, for from time of Lord Coke to this d itled than that the ju risdict pecially of a high Court, is not given ring of concurrent jurisdiction on an inferior Court. The authorities on this head are very numerous, and the point is so well established that I may be excused ‘their citation. But again, it the Act of 1300 gives concurrent jurisdiction of this kind when the party has been brought within the territorial limits of the United States—which 1 we maintain that it is taken away by the Crimes Law of 1825, 7th vol. of Laws, Dui nd 3d Story 1999. ‘The first sectio: fer is the fourth,which high seas, within the admiralty and marine jurisdiction of the United States, shall commit the crime of willful mur- der, he shall be deemed guilty of felony, i thereof shall rufter death.” This i mentof the iaw 0 1790. Now thissection like the 8th section 1 the broadest terms, and makes the urt depend not on the particular char- ‘acter of the vessel, whether she belongs to the National marine or the merchant service,but on the actual situation } at the time when the offence wi provisions of this act show that the trial is to be the Circuit Court of the United States. The Lith sec: Now, certainly, these broad terms of this act cover every case on which the Congress jent te legislate. And uo- ps. on board ships of war. is our construction of it — the 8th section are broad, nnd swee; lating to murder and all cases of fe! high seas, without reference to the question whether com mitted on board public armed ships, or by ing to that service, or on board of sh’ e United States—defining t one committed on the high seas—that that empraces of- fences of this kind committed on board of Natio ed vessels, reven' wo ral eats, wins favor fromall why frequent his refer to indulge in, the “sw 1 atwenrding to the breakfa their own convenie will be sad thi Court Martial as aC impute such ai Court Marrtal by Congress, as the Circuit Court or the Su. preme Court itself? It not a Court of the United States, how can it try an offence growing out of the peculiar ju- risprudence of the United States? ignerant of that 2st article of the rules and eguiations for the government of the navy? porter supposes that he was really ignorant of it, and has increased the difficulty which belon; language of the Chief Justice, in the note which he has appended to this part of the opinion. Now the solution of this whole matter will simply be found in the lim he Chief Justices’ remarks to the argument which he «l if these remarks be limited to that they should be, atthe hour whieh nothing has been bet- in of any Court, and es- b: fer- belonging to cit ay by the confer. r or other person in the Na offence merely of cruelty, oppression, fraud, profane swearing, drunken. dolous conduct tending to the de- Is homicide of shall be found guilty ness or any other sci struction of good mora! that particular grade, included in these general terms, “scandalous conduct?” fined are cruelty, &c. &c. hter is in one sense itisin a sense, but is itso ina legal sense? man be tried for homicide or may words? If they are broad enough to include homicide of grade of manslaughter, so also are they broad enough nelude murder; and if murder had not be 1 another article they might, with equal warrant and ave preferred the charre against him under Ifit had been intended that manslaughter should be tried by Court Mertials would it have been co- vered upin those words when they conld seid by a single word thatit should be tried? Were they not bouni, ifso they meant it, when mansla' by the common law, and by word? Finding that this common law fli into homicide and mai country. a of this house is decidedly the best in F a ite the Bank of Unite: very centre of fashion and business of the city. METALLIC RAZOR STROP SI ted by G., SAUNDERS in order=it produce h aud thin edge to a razor in atenth part of th required on a hone, with c hes ever been 80 m1 last twenty-five ye wi e Chi cutters, as well as when bg eh committed on board of merchant vessels. And we ask the ide to show the exception in any other part of this law, by which cases of this kind can be taken out of the broad ani comprehensive terms of the &:h Will it be said that at thistime there was no Navy, and that therefore Congress did not intend to legi Jate in regard to offences committed in a Navy? Tam aware that a suggestion of that kind has been made by one of the most distinguished Judges in thi ve isfactory answer to that, and vindicate that distinguished Judge from any thing like all fallible men he was The offences de- Now it may be soid that man ‘candaious conduct.” Why the learn . Counsel on the other hy the learned Re. to the inconsiderate @ & Bioron, p. ve A lh any person on the Hh id ersaly koown avd av: was answering; argument,which in all j then it will be found that the Chief Justice hay advanced contrary to our doctrine; for what is the argument e was answering? That the deck of aship of war wasa place, a locality within the meaning of the Sth sec- tion by which oflences are defined, not according to their ic character and grade, but by the mere being committed on a soil over which the United States 1 although the language of vidently meant to a) bstantially a re-enact- first preminms tthe Amen jo. of paffing,) estab! 11 parcs of America, of being the only hazor Strop 'p razars in perfect order. lieat n the possession of ‘screntific gentlemen of both countri fr superiority. When taking into connideration le but alegal error into whic! liable to fall, and did fall, Although it is true that there was no Navy distinctly organised, and constituting any material part of the public defence of the United Stat on the 30th of April, 1790, when this law wa: yet it is a mistake to Congress did look to the fut hed reputation jurisdiction of the Cou ter was a distinct offence 90, to employ the sion of murd+r ughter was recognized, would it not be against all the rules of interpretation to bring in manslaughter under these word the whole range of scan Jalous | ehaviour calculated to subvert good morals? We ask, then, thatin relation to the subject of manslaughter. should be inst the jurisdiction of the Circuit thatit is the only Court which has jurisdiction over it. the attentionof Mr. Butler to e rules and regulations of the all offences, not previously according to the © the inventor from the had exclusive jnrisdiction the section was such, wi offences committed on terra firma, yet Mr. Wirt intro- duces this new idea, that altho the high seas, out of the jur State, but a bay within the jurisdiction of the United States, vetthat the deck of the Independence was like a fortor arsenal—a place or district of country, within the iction of the United States! Now the Chief Justice in reviewing that argument, and in that connexion he#says—" why to th never made provision for the puni committed in aship of war wherever it may be stationed,” meaning evidently —for if other vument. and as Mr. W! not intend in making this enectment to ure existence ef a Navy, and to provide for cases arising ina Navy, for inthe section to which | d—the 12th section—they speak of and in the 13th section they speak of ves- 5 ana in the 16th ree ofembezzling munitions of war in posse ‘of gunners and soldiers, and so when passing this there would be a ad themselves by passed tor the purpose of carrying effect, the act of 1789, establishing e & Bioron, 21 vo! force? This act was on the 7th of August, partment of War, the the act of the 30th of April, revious law a ‘ar, and for the first tion makes that provisi«n. .. It is the only Strop thi tion and cownterfei laid stamp it as being be me en deemed worthy ting, ‘The great number of those eloie the climax of perfection. tm isfactory tv tne public, the names of - ven certificates as to reo ase here pabligned General James Tallmadge: Frese “Amerigen fusthy ‘and. Mr. M Boston harbor was not iiction of any particular of the United Stat less the act of 1800, does give jurisdiction te ad Martial to try this offence after the party has been brought into the United States, and unless that act still remains in force, notwithstanding the broad terms of the act of 1925, this section covers the whole case and giv ‘ourt of the United State: rded as exclusive of any previous | lative provision, unless that provision be preserved. there is no reservation here ef the C And to show that Congress whilst enacting this law remembered that in 1890. rules and articles for the re vy had been made, it provides that person shall maliciously setj on fire or otherwise destro United States, out of the to the United Stat sion of marines, as well bh; all showing that Congress before them the idva th exclusive jari tion tothe Cireu 1825 must be reg’ Mr, Duen begged to cal e general clause in th navy, which pro tuded, are to be tri usages of the service. eeded—I defy the counsel to point out h manslaughter has been tried by Courts included, all other re likewise; and in this way you come to the offence committed by a naval officer or able only by Courts Martial yond those purely militery by the customary laws of Megaat nae very day Congress ha onecttbe organlo Anwineseror ite ment of any crime the Constituuon into it has no reference to on has shown, would have been erroncous—that Congress, down to that day, on for any offences committed on the terms, describing that has removed trom Saint Pi mates walk irom the Custom House, which with every comfort and convenience favored with a concinuance of th BIRDS T!—For sale, a chowe election cellent singers. Als eed by all to be the feat in t all to be the fin ‘at No 313 Pearl street” Kntennce 59 Fevry UGALS WANTED FOR STONE A feet of t Tome none foot thick, express provislon for an passed, as your Honor recollects, 739. "And under the care of this D y continued to be, until 1798 which repealed so much wer in the Secretary of the Navy into a ‘distinct department. In book (page 84) will be found the law of 1708 which provided for amaval armament; end rs 1794 and °93, when the Navy I force of the United states had come to he quite considerable. It was them in con: ture of atfairs— gvly increased, an special supervision of it year 1800 there was no gulation of the had made no provi any coset wh deck of a ship of war, by expres deck as the locality where the offence was committe: ‘And 0, if the Court please, to this very day, the words of Chief Justice Marshall m least with regard to murder ghter be thu jurisdiction of any partic guilty of telony, and s0 punished, provided nothing in thi ction shall be construed to take away the right of Cour T would also take the lib- opinion that this provision ap seaman is punial in to carry that section offences known to and punished the navy, there i# no assignable limit at which you a Gansevoort, | have a word to is preierred against him onthe ing and abetting inthe acts were unlawful, he is responsible although acting under the command of general principle on that well settled, and it is not necessary to refer to refer in general to the case of the People against McLeod, for the principle that the com: nande of a superior officer are no excuse to the party who acts in obedience to him, ifthe commands be uniawlul. I reler to this case for acollection of all tho authorities on the subject, In relation to Mr, Gansevoort, it is further to be obeerved that he is not on tri tisl. If he were, we suppose for the reasons already y be held to be’ correct id some other offences. For although the eighth section is bromd enough to in whether committed on a has never defined the! as heretofore pro y of remarking that th plies to the whole act, is in my bhumb! Ifthis provision had been at the end of the law ina itself, then I would agree thi @ jurisdiction of Courts sion is not so placed, it is a provision simply—something of asolecism, but sulticiently expressive of the truth. ia provision annexed tothe 11th section, and not to any clude crimes of this des ship or on a boat, by assigning the the description has reference to the nd not the character of the part of the committed. Our doctrine i: in relation to M: Th ys groand that he was Jartial. But this provi | foi nisined of icularly with respect 0 iriment to take the Wasestablished. But until the law which could provide for the ment of any offence whatever committed on board p of war, exeept so far as the Pi lent by virture of hia general authority under the Constitution, as commander in-chief of the land and navai forces, might be anthorized—if indeed he even could be— naval courts martial, And those who contend ing language of the 8th section Of, the law of 1790, is to be so narrowly construed a¥ not to vessel in which the crime not that the law of 1790, by express words declare, th Somers, but that the offence ot murder committed on the high seas, not in the jurisdic articular State, but wit jurisdiction of the United States, by any per son who owes allegiance to the United Stat Jeot to their Government, is both to be indicted and pre. sented in the Cireuit Court of the United States, no matter where the veasel may be, #0 that it be on the high seas, out of the Jurisdiction of any particular Stat r cubic foot, * Fro, for 1900 bar an Commander McK mri LD ywnalt lots, a» wanted, aud on the deck of the! If I recollect the terme of the opinien, it n adress Capt. John Sanders, Corps of Enginee ring on the point that a provision was ne- I am very hoppy to receive that interpretation of that part of the opinion. There is another section of this law, page 401, which expressly ap. plies to vessels belonging to the United States. The 6th section also relates to vessels, whether belonging tothe fore the Court ) stated, that it would not make any difference, But ifthere be adifference, it is against him, and not in his favor. We have admitted that on both cases the Court of Inquiry has pessed, and that the Secretary of the Navy has on Court Martial on one and not on the other. On tha ject I have only to say that we hold that the action ofthe Secretary of the Navy, as well as the proceedings of the Court of Inquiry itself, have nothing to do with the pre- The report of the Court of Inquiry is in it it does not exonerate him from this criminal proceeding in this Court, if the juris- diction rightfully belong tothis Court. An acquittal by Court Martial, if it has no jurisdiction, would not exone him. But it is not within our admission, for we do not know that the Secretary of the Navy has exonerated him, and ordered no Court Martial in his case. Duen—That is giving the letter and taking away bstance of your admission. Mr. O'Conxon-—You asked for the inference, but wo do not admit any such thing. Mr. Burien proceeded—But it is yet open to remark that if the exculpatory report of the Court of quiry had been formally affirmed, which latter fact w could not admit because it is not known, it is only arrived at by inference, but even if it were here in eo man; in black and white, still it would not alter thie jor the reason that if ‘the Court of Inquiry did sequit it isno bar to A trial before the Ciremit Court. It would be illiberal ond harsh for a Secretary of he Navy after the re ception of an exculpatory report which he had affirmed, thus to place the individual on trial before a Court Mart But if | recollect right the provision respecting Courts of Inquiry snakes them neifher more nor less efficacious than a Grand Jury. But it is not material to go in‘o a discus- sion of this point, because even if Mr. Gansevoort were in the same situation with Commander McKenzie, he could not claim exemption from trial before this Court, on the ground of the pending proceedings before the Court Mar. tial, [now conclude all that [think proper to advance in this opening discussion at this stage. ‘The remaining marks which might be offered, can be made if necessary with equal propriety in reply to the opposire Counsel. LUCINA CORDIAL; Prayed to L Exyptian w hacer Called to their nid the Priests of Isis; And even now, the meek Hitdoo— Warm as her clime, and tender too idless twelve moutos from her bridal z to her senseless Idol, y raised hands, 1m accenta wild, mah fora child; oo bed of barrenness. ch for love in day’s by-gone, vaue customs in our OW} even vow, does Luve’s communion ferile union’ wal felicity, , een in this city. But not the prorreative power ixir’s dower. Is it will prevent— e the impotent; whate'er its date, re leet And ‘e's functions renovate. us from the akin it chases. And bringsback beauty and the giacest “Tis weman’s trust—and ne’er deceives her; From Fluor Albus it, relieves her; Apd each dis with proper care, too,) Her fair cnd fragile form ts hei 0, ‘These are but truths; who calls them fletion Bball have stern proof in contradiction. Letterr—all forms ol attestation— From the savans of mation, Ww om all quarters, Quack ery’s martyrs; eath, ightly pravers repent Tha. ks to Lite’s friend, in street, Or, dream Gry out for the Lacina Cordial” ‘medicine trom the country, by sending ce, can have it boxed up and sent to any part of the Price $3 per boitle, or $24 perdozen. _m7_Im*rc ENGLISH SCHOOL, HAVANA, ISLAND OF CUBA: CHARLES DUNNE WATERLAND, PRINCIPAL. HIS Acalemy was eatablished two years ago, ander 1 troneye at tne former L of the Intendent Gene ira. und many of them speak it habitually and fiueatly $ ‘The Principal hes the experience of schools in France, Ge many, England, and the United Stat chief nim Isto ive the youth ‘entrasted to his care m practical! knowledge of Gose Rechebes ofp polite eleemtion, which are requiree fa Of totive careers, and are applicable to any. he couse’ of study, therefore. comiprehends the Evi French, German and listory, Geogrs Natrol Philosophy, t of Mather: Drawingaof various kinds Professors of divers nations and acquirementa reside in the es- wattishme: nd nll the classes receive, in rotation, instruction as has attended this plan of taicion, that se Is, a twelve years of ages, write and speak in languages, ina perfectly intelligible manner, and thone of riper years, eorreetiy and easiry. ‘The acquisition, not only. af the Spanish, but alao of other the reach of the youth of the . without its being necessary for them to re- nish the many advantages which accrue from anknglish ed- aeation. The object of the Principal in desiring to receive yourhs from the United States,is to fneilitate the aeguizement of the Kngitsh recent for his ‘Spanish pupils, whieh service yrould be doubly repaid them by by the latter, tnd to introduce here the manly. spirit of the English schools. ' ‘The young, eit tena of the United Stetes can have nothing to fear from mate, the houre being 51 id situated hort distance fros th bath and complet Phealth, Two ol ‘sa married. man, and. bis wite and her ge of Spe ]eulor serergenye tehildren are received a any vattnat of infancy.“ i %. very papi! enjoys bis religions opit ope undisturbed. ‘Tne terms are $400 per senor, payable three months wanes. There are no extras frewt clothes and bool References MESSRS. CHAS. DRAKE & BROTHERS ALEXANDER MORALES, EAQ e javane TONDUON AND “ANUHESTER INDIA RUF BER GOODS, WHOLESALE AND RETAIL, No.8 Wall street. Th subscriber has received and offers for sale a large assort- ‘tent of inverted Indie Kebber Weter 4 Goods, viz: Cots and Capes, of suvenor Lama, C: r@ Lama, Pessian, Menno and Cotton, of ali colors and sizes. udia Rubber, Water Proof, super Larrea, Laine Per Cc eon, pranezed fort ber lors. ndings fe ke. enbin for TAB ABRADASISON. PRESS.— bseribers have aud Newark, ud “bills ad Orders for art a delivered free of charge. New York at No.7 Wall street, and in Newark, af re Rew York at Ie A Mond 13 P. ML tig ee disee i ADAMS & CO MAKTIN’S CASH TAILORING LSTABLISHMENT. 154 by ‘iam Street, Corner of Ann Street, [S.decitedty the cheapest in the city. ‘There ie always hand asele «tatock of seasouable grads, eoab, which will bu made up to order iu the styl th & has given such general satisfa and Rc & positive #AvINg Of 30 pe Are requested to eail and eramii wh soayy cae DE AND TRIMMED, (amish th err MABE AND ats, made snd trimme do do Over Coats, ++ ‘Tertaa—Unah ou delivery. ivt6 3m MICHAEL &. MARTIN EAR NESS CURED—SCARPA’S .ACO! ic O01 Kor the cure of Deafness, Pains, and the discharges of matter from the Bars. Also, all thone disngreenble noises Ii the hazting of insects. faling of water, whizzing of steam, kee, es which are #5 mptoms of arproachtng aeafness, and alae generally ‘attendant with the disease. Many persons who have ndeaf for ten, filteen, and twenty years, and were obliged to use ene trampeis, have, aft . thrown, ir trampets, bei clans: ace Kiy recommen ; following ““Drarmean Cunro.=-We have hear x greet many speak of erat Suarpes Acoustic Oil as + remedy for Deatbean, ea ese. assured that itis unearpassed by anything known wo instances of its curative tien for the purpose. One or ; have oven pointed ong (0 , and they are really - D fi, "and sold on ageney, 306 ~ Byeimied by Hp, Bel oh cede i) who have been so anfortunate as vate disease, and have become to restore themselves to health met with bitter disappointment im: mised the desired effect, can now take ie and look forward w th confidence to a perfect and featoration oft all their energies. Dr. Thomas? Speeifie. Pil have never yet failed to - ure the most ag avated and protract esses of Gonorrhoea, Glert.or Stricture, and they will Iy cure a recent case of a mild kind in thirty-six hours. pills are equally beneficial for either sex, mild theireffrcts, removing like a charm all'the germ of disease the system.and leaving the constitution mall the strength ed youth. Priee$i per box. Agent Broadway, 79 and 160 Fulton st., and 273 Broad: ma ae® Tr EW ERY. —Onlers for wupolgin Bo ia, Water the ensuing season will be received at No. 161 Bigrcwinre premises Co let with fita ting of boite rewing premises Co let with fixtures, consisting of rs, A good situation for the Root Beer bu: awe SLOCKs, AND JEWSURY, reparea in and warianted, mach lower than.at aay other pince in the city, at @. C. ALLEN’S, of Watehes and Jewely, wi 4 1 eve of the I We named, they inay hear of something tot oze by calling on’ the subscriber, 22 Saint Marks Place York. aes t L. DE FOREST. LEACHING POWDSRE—I00 cabs, now lant Bitip Rovctas, and fot sale by me hom free PERSE & BROOKS, ¢1 Liberty st ATCH BOX BOARDS. ust ree MA fireate by pea att 61 Libert pas Lists supphed with lee On alt a and Jelly, 19 RE Awe. ON.t visions