Activate Javascript or update your browser for the full Digital Library experience.
Previous Page
–
Next Page
Full Title
A report of the whole trial of Gen. Michael Bright, and others, before Washington & Peters in the Circuit Court of the United States in and for the District of Pennsylvania in the Third Circuit, on an indictment for obstructing, resisting, and opposing the execution of the writ of arrest, issued out of the District Court of Pennsylvania, in the case of Gideon Olmstead and others against the surviving executrices of David Rittenhouse, deceased / by Thomas Lloyd ; the arguments of counsel and charge of the judge, revised by each respectively.
Author
Bright, Michael, Gen.
Contributor
Lloyd, Thomas, 1756-1827. Olmsted, Gideon, 1749-1845. United States. Circuit Court (3rd Circuit).
Date Added
13 January 2014
Language
English
Publish Date
1809
Publisher
Philadelphia : Printed for P. Byrne
Source
Pennsylvaniana
Topic
Bright, Michael, Gen. > Trials, litigation, etc. Trials (Resisting an officer) > Pennsylvania > Philadelphia.
About
More Details Permanent Link
Disclaimers
Disclaimer of Liability Disclaimer of Endorsement
OCR
gvv‘
ly ..f’Fl1e‘lortune, ‘Eharacter, andlpiersonval liberty of. myyciiegm.
r -On that supposition, it would have been more correct to have-' '
‘ a degree of forceof expression. a ‘
arelost ‘to-pour, view in the moresalarrningaspect o‘f.thecau,se
exhibited hy.tVlr.-attorney. = ‘ t
1 , His penetratingleyeenabled himto perceive that he could i e
not expect tosucceed in this prosecution,,unless.he could re-‘ ’ ‘
move from your minds the idea of -the "sovereigntytof the .
"state, except as -in the hands of the people at large,gHniot as .
organized governments. V t ‘
‘ Your dutyt now. imposes a responsibility of thermos: imi- ;
- portant kind. Your verdict is to be, founded upon a consi- V
deration of the clnkimof “Pennsylvania tosthe character of ad“ ,
:free and independent commonwealth, as an organisedtgo-xv:
vernment. v v
I joinissue with my learned antagonist upon this most: it
interesting question, the opportunity of contending for7’the
right of the state ought to give to the most unpractxce
Follow Mr. attorney, then, I pray you, to the meti1orabl,e:
-epoch, the 4th oft July 1776:. hethas led the way; I only ,
pursue: the pulse of patriotism will throb with increased
' strength nhile we read the concluding partof the declara-
tionof American independence. ‘ s V A
“ VVe, therefore, the representatives of the Unitedestates.
of America, in general congress assembled, appealing to the
Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our inten-
tions, do, in the name, and by the authority of the good peo-
A ple of these colonies, solemnly publish and declare, that these
united colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and inde-
pendent states; that they are absolved from all allegiance to
the British crown, and that all politicalconnections between
them and the state of Great,Britain, is and ought to.be to-
tally dissolved ; that as free and iizdepeizdent states, they have
‘ ‘full power to levy war and conclude peace, contract alliances,
-establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things"
which independent states. may of right do: and, for the,sup-
port of these declarations, with a firm reliance on the pro-
tection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to"eacl1
other our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honour.” 7
Was it intended to merge the state govermnentsvinjthztt
of the United States? Was consolidation or.confederation'
designed? If the former, why substitute state for colony?"
said, the people of these states, have full powertto levy war ;
not that the states have such power, and to do all other.acts"
-l-and things which independenttstates may of right do.’ If
psi .