Report of the Trial of James H. Peck, Judge of the United States District Court for the District of Missouri, Before the Senate of the United States on an Impeachment Preferred by the House of Representatives Against Him for High Misdemeanors in Office
Hilliard, Gray and Company, 1833 - Impeachments - 592 pages
Other editions - View all
admitted answer appeared argument arpents article signed attachment attorney Audiencias authority Buchanan cause character charge claimants claims common law concession confirmation Congress considered constitution contempt contempt of court counsel criminal decided decision defendant Delassus District Court error evidence exercise fact Foreman Gayoso grant guilty honorable Court honorable managers House of Representatives impeachment imprisonment imputed indictment inference intention interrogatories James H Judge Peck Judge's judicial judiciary jurisdiction jury King land Lawless libel liberty Lieutenant Governor Luke E Luke Edward manner ment Meredith misrepresentation Missouri Morales O'Reilly's regulations object offence opinion ordinance of 1754 pending persons petitioner present principles proceedings proof prove province publication published punish question recollect referred regulations of O'Reilly respondent rule Senate signed A Citizen Soulard Spanish Star Chamber Storrs sub-delegate Supreme Court tion titles trial trial by jury tribunal United Upper Louisiana Wickliffe witness
Page 294 - The fundamental principle of the Revolution was, that the Colonies were co-ordinate members with each other and with Great Britain, of an empire united by a common executive sovereign, but not united by any common legislative sovereign. The legislative power was maintained to be as complete in each American Parliament, as in the British Parliament. And the royal prerogative was in force in each Colony by virtue of its acknowledging the King for its executive magistrate, as it was in Great Britain...
Page 502 - To fine for contempt, imprison for contumacy, enforce the observance of order, etc., are powers which cannot be dispensed with in a court, because they are necessary to the exercise of all others ; and so far our courts no doubt possess powers not immediately derived from statute ; but all exercise of criminal jurisdiction in common law cases we are of opinion is not within their implied powers.
Page 337 - Nothing is more incumbent upon Courts of Justice, than to preserve their proceedings from being misrepresented ; nor is there anything of more pernicious consequence, than to prejudice the minds of the public against persons concerned as parties in causes, before the cause is finally heard . . . There are three different sorts of contempt.
Page 298 - But if there is one maxim which necessarily rides over all others, in the practical application of government, it is, that the public functionaries must be left at liberty to exercise the powers which the people have intrusted to them. The interests and dignity of those who created them require the exertion of the powers indispensable to the attainment of the ends of their creation.
Page 47 - House having resolved that he be impeached of " high misdemeanors in office" (Journal, 1, 21, pp. 565, 566), it Committee ap- was ordered " that Mr. and Mr. be appointed Senate. ° s ° ° a committee to go to the Senate, and at the bar thereof, in the name of the House of Representatives, and of all the people of the United States, to impeach James H. Peck, Judge of the District Court of the United States for the District of Missouri, of high misdemeanors in office...
Page 489 - Forgery at common law has been defined as 'the fraudulent making or alteration of a writing to the prejudice of another man's right
Page 294 - The laws of the several States, except where the Constitution, treaties, or statutes of the United States otherwise require or provide, shall be regarded as rules of decision in trials at common law, in the courts of the United States, in cases where they apply.
Page 332 - Certain implied powers must necessarily result to our courts of justice from the nature of their institution. But jurisdiction of crimes against the state is not among those powers. To fine for contempt, imprison for contumacy, enforce the observance of order, etc., are powers which cannot be dispensed with in a court, because they are necessary to the exercise of all others...