several paragraphs, from acts of congress, in sup. port of his opinion, and commented, at some length, upon the operation of the sinking fund, and the impropriety of changing the system, for the sake of saving appearances. This proposition, he said, presents two questions: 1st. Is the fund pledged to redeem the national debt? And, if not, 2d. Would it be sound policy to appropriate it to other objects? have a general concern in the political system of Europe, with which they will always maintain important, though never, we trust, vital relations; and in the fate, throughout the world, of human rights and political liberty, which Russia has now openly proscribed in Europe. They must be glad to know at length, from so authentic a source as the Russian government, what are precisely "the principles, the object, and the scope of the European alliance," and having heretofore referred to the umpirage of that government, in a great controversy affecting He had expressed his decided opinion, that it national independence, and submitted to its inter- was pledged; and, if it was not, he was against the ference in the prosecution of an important territo-policy of the measure. It would form a precedent rial right, it is well that they should understand its which he could not tolerate. He could recollect real character, general views of foreign policy, and the spirit of its engagements with the European powers. They must feel deeply for the Spanish nation, as long as she continues to pursue her present enlightened and most exemplary course of moderation, and to shew herself, as she has hitherto done, eminently worthy of the free constitution which she has established with unexampled apparent unanimity. of no instance in which a sinking fund, either here or in Europe, had been withdrawn, in time of peace, from its proper purposes. Ought we at this session to set an example so pernicious? If, said he, there is any one event which the people of the United States desire above all others, it is the total extin. guishment of the public debt. They at least have a right to consider the fund as pledged. They ask you, what progress you are making in the redempSuch are the considerations upon which we found tion of the debt? And what is your answer? Why, our opinion of the importance of a particular ex-sir, a bill containing two of the most odious fiscal amination of this unexpected memorial. In our propositions which could be offered to the nation next we will analyze and illustrate it, premising, as -a loan, and a diversion of the sinking fund to the necessary to the full comprehension of its character, current expenses of the year. He urged other reaa brief history of the conduct of Russia and the al- sons against the proposition; and said that he would lied powers towards Spain, before the epoch of its leave it with the committee, and turn his attention date. As respects the deportment of Russia in par- to the first section. ticular, perhaps no more might be necessary than A loan, said he, is wanted this year, and another the quotation of the following passage of the Rus-next; we are fairly afloat upon the plank of loans, sian minister, count Romanzoff's official answer, in and, whether we shall push the debt off, or it push 1808, to the demand of the British government for us, is a problem which he would leave for time and the admission of Spanish plenipotentiaries to the tide to solve. congress then proposed by Alexander and Bona- He was dissatified with the report of the commitparte conjointly-"The admission of the kings in tee. He was so understood by the chairman; and alliance with England suffers no difficulty, but the he had given notice that he should make the motion emperor of Russia cannot allow the admission of the which he had submitted. He commended so much plenipotentiaries of the Spanish insurgents: more. of the report as recommended retrenchment, and over, he has already recognized king Joseph, and is as-gave it his warmest approbation. But he objected sociated with the emperor of the French for peace and war, and is resolved not to separate his interests from those of this monarch." Debate on the Loan Bill. The following is the substance of the remarks of Mr. TRIMBLE, of Kentucky, on his motion to strike out two and insert five, in the first section, so as to create a loan for five millions, instead of two. to some of the fiscal facts, the arrangement which 1st. That the report is delusive, and calculated, To have himself clearly understood, he would take the liberty of stating some facts which, upon this occasion, ought to be remembered; and this was a proper time to say, that he would state no facts except such as had been reported from the proper offices, and that he had taken some trou ble to avoid mistakes. He would remark, that, in making calculations, he had cast off all below fifty cents, and all above was carried to a unit. He began by saying, that the first section of the bill proposes a loan of two millions, and the last section enacts that the balance of the sinking fund (which is 2,378,398 dollars) shall be applied, in aid of the loan, to make good the deficit of 1820. It would, therefore, be proper to keep the whole bill in view upon the motion. If it was the pleasure of the house that the balance of the sinking fund should be so applied, then a loan of three millions would be necessary: perhaps more, certainly not In January, 1791, the public debt was 75,169,974 less. If it was intended to leave the sinking fund dollars. In '93 we began the loan system, and conto act upon its legitimate objects, then a loan of tinued it for twelve years, at which time the debt five millions must be made. He was decidedly stood at eighty millions, vibrating during the whole hostile to the proposed application, or rather mis- time between 75 and 85 millions. He gave those application, of the balance of the sinking fund. It twelve years to gentlemen who prefer loans to rewas his settled opinion that the ten millions appro-duction. It was a section of the "road to ruin" that priated for the redemption of the public debt was he would not travel in himself, nor would he adpledged inviolably for that purpose, and that it would vise others to go far along it. From 1805, when be a breach of national faith to divert it to other the loans ceased, the debt diminished rapidly until objects, except in time of war, agreeably to the 7th section of the law of March, 1817, by which the fund was enlarged to ten millions. He read 1812, when it stood at forty-five millions. This result is an argument for those who recommend retrenchment and reduction. Experience proves that, so long as deficits are made good by loans, there | treasury this year; and the third bonus belongs to is no reduction of public debt or current expenses. next year; and, if he was not greatly mistaken, it The war debt, added to the last sum, made an would be wanted to make good deficits in that aggregate, in 1816, of 123 millions; which has been year. To use it this year is only covering the defi. since reduced, and, on the 1st January last, stood cit with cobwebs. $88,885,203 at Part of this sum is redeemable at the pleasure of the government, viz. three per cent. stock, 13,225,915, and five per cent. stock, (subscribed to U. S. bank,) 7,000,000, 20,295,915 Leaving a balance of funded debt, at six and seven per cent. $68,589,288 This balance is redeemable at the following periods, and in the following sums; to each of which is added the annual interest accruing on the whole amount of public debt, and the aggregate sum ried out, so as to show, at a single glance, what sums are annually reimbursed until the year 1828: 1820, Jan. 1st. Sundry items, as per treasury report, 2,799,659 Interest on public debt this year 4,911,843 1821. Deferred 6 per cent. stock 534,033 Interest this year, 1822. Deferred 6 per cents. Interest this year, 4,773,737 602,836 4,704,934 1824. Balance defer'd 6 per c'ts. 356,858 Interest this year, 4,666,267 1825. War stock, at six per c't. 18,870,405 3,440,411 22,357,368 2,098,969 Interest this year, 1826. War stock, as above Interest this year, Interest this year, 1828. War loan, as before Interest this year, Again: A bank dividend is stated for July next, at four per cent. making 280,000 dollars, and, to be consistent, the dividend in January, 1821, ought to have been carried back with the bonus, as funds for 1820. But there is no reason to believe that any dividend will be made in July: if one is made, it will be for the sake of demonstration; it will be to keep up appearances. Again: The revenue from public lands is stated at two millions. These funds will be deposited in banks in Ohio, Indiana, Missouri, Mississippi, Ala. car-bama, and other places. The whole disbursement of public money west of the mountains is only about 1,250,000 dollars per annum, and the balance must be remitted to Philadelphia, and places east of that, before it is available funds for the treasu. ry. It is found that 8 or 9 months are required to transmit money from the western country to the treasury. 7,711,502 5,307,770 5,307,770 5,307,770 5,023,126 -22,310,817 -24,456,338 The operation is usually performed by the Unit, ed States' bank, but four months' notice is demand. ed, and it is about four months after payments are made before they are deposited, so that a notice can be given to the bank, and requisition made upon it to effect the transmission. These moneys are paid in specie or bank notes. If in specie, it would take four months, and cost two and a half per cent. to transfer it to the treasury. If in paper, the remittance cannot be made by the bank at an earlier day than that stated, without loss to the institution; and if the local bank notes were transmitted, the loss to the treasury would be from five to twenty per cent. In fact, the loss upon public funds paid in the western country is about three per cent. if the money lying idle and useless may be called a loss. Now it is admitted that Kentucky and Ohio hemp is worth two and a half more than Russia hemp, and, upon these facts, he would ask if it would not be wise for the government to purchase -14,829,721 | western hemp for the navy at five per cent. above the price of Russia hemp? and also procure clothing for the army, and other supplies, if to be had, in the western country, at an advance of from three to five per cent. on the current price of imports.→ The bill which was passed a few days since, on this subject, ought to be carried into effect by the department without delay. The people of the west would begin to look into this matter. You make us pay our dues in cash. We have neither loans nor credits. The eastern people get all the money, all the credits, and all the loans. Surely our agriculture and manufactures may, for the future, expect to receive that encouragement which can be given to them without loss to the public.If he should live to take his seat here next ses sion, he would find it his duty to enquire pretty closely into the prices which may be given by pub. lic agents, during this summer, for clothing and hemp, and one or two other articles, of western growth or manufacture. 1827. War loan, at 6 & 7 per c't. 13,011,437 Still leaving the 3 and 5 per at the pleasure of the treasury. He said he would have to refer to these items hereafter, and would, therefore, waive them for the present, and take up the report of the chairman of the committee of ways and means, and would1st. Take the chairman's facts as the basis of his calculation, and, by putting items in their proper places, show the true deficit for 1820. 2d. Upon the same basis, he would show a deficit for 1821, of certainly 4,000,000 dollars, and probably 6,000,000. The report begins this subject by enumerating the items of revenue for 1820, to some of which, he said, he had the most decided objections and others would be unavailing this year. The third bank bonus, or instalment, as the law calls it, does not fall due until the first day of January, 1821, and He would proceed with the report. The items yet it is set down as available funds in 1820. This he had named ought to be deducted from the estiis taking a loan from next year to supply the defi-mate of the available funds for the current year.cit of this. It is enough if we permit each year to The receipts of the year are stated at $22,525,665 swallow itself. But, by this report, 1820, after de- Deduct the bank bonus, 500,000 vouring itself, and all the crumbs and fragments of Ditto the bank dividends, 280,000 last year, begins to gormandize upon 1821, at the Ditto money in transit, rate of a bank bonus per meal. The second bonus, due in January last, is carried to the balance in the Leaving available funds for 1820, 750,000--1,530,000 29,995,665 The current appropriations for the same year amount to Deduct the above sum, Leaves a deficit for 1820, of principal, to show the aggregate payable that year 26,299,164 It is useless to deceive ourselves on this subject. 20,995,665 The chairman's plan of finance will leave us without a dollar to begin the heavy reimbursements of 5,303,499 the year 1825. He exhausts the sinking fund every year, and leaves the public faith to rest upon chance, and the revival of trade and commerce. Which accords with the annual report from the treasury department. A single glance at the state of our foreign relations would indicate the necessity The laws of congress, Mr. T. again said, had of a loan for five millions. The secretary, of course, given a solemn pledge that ten millions shall be would only borrow so much of that sum as is want-annually applied in redemption of the national ed. A loan of less than three millions would, in his opinion, lead to a breach of public faith, or a call of congress before December. So much for 1820. The report of expenditures for 1821, is, he said, entirely delusive. The current expenses for the government for the last five years, has been upwards of fourteen millions of dol-cit of 1825 amount to 34,695,277 dollars. It would lars: last year it amounted, including revolutionary pensions, to 16,422,967 dollars; and this year about the same. Add the sinking fund, and the total amount is, at least, 26,000,000 per annum. In 1819 the total expenditure was $24,812,419 This year it is, (including revolutionary pensions,) debt; and he, for one, was resolved to hold it sacred. In the year 1824, the commissioners of that fund could, by law, call upon the treasury for the balances unexpended for the two preceding years; which balances would be 9,384,460 dollars; and, these balances, if called for, would make the defi. have given him great pleasure to accord with the report in all respects, if he could have done so; more especially as it gives a view of our finances quite as favorable as the facts would warrant. What he had said gave a darker shade to the subject, but still he saw no reason to despond; for, notwithstanding the derangements of commerce, and the pres sure of the times, our condition is far superior to that of any other nation. A contrast, for instance, between our fiscal concerns and those of Great Britain, would make the subject safficiently clear to be understood. In the year 1818, her national debt, funded and unfunded, amounted to $5,555,555,555 Our debt is only 88,885,203 The annual expense of her govern. ment is The maximum of ours is only 301,199,473 26,000,000 26,299,164 The unexpended balance of sinking fund makes the only material difference between 1819 and 1820. How the chairman expects to reduce it for 1821, to about eighteen and one half millions, was more than he could conjecture. There is a list of items which the report says may be deducted next year. But there are items of this sort every year, which go off the estimates, and others come on, to an equal amount, and sometimes greater. There are two modes of increasing expenditures, which are always in operation: 1st. By passing laws creating new heads of service, and voting funds to carry Her deficit in 1818 was sixty-one millions of dol them into effect. Pension laws and Indian treaties lars, which she supplied by a loan. Ours, this year, are of this class. 2d. By incidental and miscellane- is only five millions of dollars. The whole amount ous demands, which come up every year and have of expenses of our government from the 4th of to be provided for, (private claims and the like;) March, 1789, to June 30th, 1819, a period of thirty and the experience of 20 years has proven that years, was only $513,567,108; of which sum, more these new demands which come upon the estimates, than two hundred and fifty-three millions was paid exceed the aggregate of old ones which are omit-in discharge of principal and interest of public ted. This very year we have about 750,000 dol. debt, and about two hundred and sixty millions for lars in new items. Besides, the army is put upon the aggregate expenses of government; from which stint and thrift for this year, and, my word for it, we it appears that the people of England pay as much shall next year be compelled to increase the army in one year and nine months as we do in thirty years. appropriation, and I dare say we shall have some To this we must add their poor tax, which is an agdeficits to make good. gregate sum of from twenty-seven to thirty-six mil. lions per annum. The committee of ways and means, he said, had made a reduction in the estimates of this year, of The report of the committee, said Mr. T. gives two millions of dollars; which, if it had been allow-the probable amount of revenue for one year, and ed, would have made the expenditure upwards of various opinions have been expressed on that sub28 millions, leaving a deficit of more than 7 millions.ject. As to the revenue from customs, he had saIf the revenue amounts to only 20 millions for the next four years, we may expect a deficit of about four millions per annum, until the year 1823, when the permant appropriation for the increase of the navy expires; after which the deficit will be three millions, and the figures stand thus by estimate: Current expenses and sinking fund for 1825, tisfied himself that it would be at its minimum for this and the next year, and that it would afterwards gradually increase. He had a statistical table before him, shewing the aggregate amount and value of imports for consumption for several periods, of seven years each, together with the average consumption of each year, and also the annual amount of customs accruing on the consumption of each year. He had selected the period from 1st of Jan. 20,000,000 1794, to Dec. 1800, as the basis of an inference, and upon the supposition that each individual will con3,000,000 sume as much of imports for the next seven years $23,000,000 Deduct the total of revenue, (amount doubtful,) Deficit for that year, Add the public debt and interest, payable that year, as was consumed by each during that period, the 22,310,817 amount of revenue, from the next seven years, will amount to at least $23,000,000. This result is found. 25,310,817 ed upon the tariff as it stood from 1794 to 1800, and he thought it probable that the increase of duties since that time would equal the decrease of consumption. He knew it was impossible to be exact on such subjects, because all the facts are not Total deficit for 1825, The report of the honorable chairman is defective in not showing the amount of interest accruing and payable each year after 1824. The amount for 25 is 3,440,411 dollars, and must be added to the tangible; but it is quite reasonable to suppose that the ratio of population and consumption is about the same now and then. The amount of imports would be determined by the demand for consumption, and the ability of the nation to pay for them; or, take another principle, and say that the amount of imports will equal the amount of exports; and, upon either principle, or any statistical principle, it will be found that our revenue from customs will be about twenty-two millions, and a probable in. crease. Great allowances, however, must be made for the pressure of the times, and the results of past years may afford no criterion upon which estimates can be made for the future. against the appellee, in the Hustings court of the borough of Norfolk. It was founded upon a policy of insurance. That policy was upon a vessel called the TWO BROTHERS, bound from Norfolk, to a port in the West Indies, and warranted to be "American property." The vessel was captured and carried into the island of Jamaica, libelled in the court of admiralty there, and condemned as “enemy's property." At the trial, the plaintiff offered testimony to prove, that the vessel was, in fact, American property; which testimony was objected to, on the ground that the decree of the court of admiralty was conclusive evidence in this case, of the fact of Recurring again to the report, he said that those her being enemy's property, but the court overruled who choose to take the trouble of examining this the objection, and permitted the evidence to go to subject, will find, that, in the year 1816, the annual the jury; whereupon the defendant excepted. The income of the treasury was stated at twenty-two counsel for the defendant also moved the court to millions, and the disbursements at the same sum: instruct the jury, that, the vessel having been sold but the actual receipts have greatly exceeded the under the decree aforesaid, and that the captain estimates, and it appears that upwards of thirty-two having purchased her for the benefit of the plainmillions of funded debt have been paid during the tiff, to whom she was delivered by him, he was Jast three years; and that about thirty millions more not entitled to recover as for a total loss, but only have, in the same period, been expended in dis-in proportion to the sum expended; but the court charge of treasury notes, Mississippi stock, arrears of war debt unfunded, and various other demands, exclusive of the current expenses of each year, which have also been paid. From all which it ap: pears, that the deficit of this year is not owing to any mistake in the estimates of the treasury de-ing of opinion, that the sentence of the admiralty partment, or any failure of revenue heretofore, but is chargeable mainly to the liberal manner in which congress has authorized disbursements. refused so to instruct the jury, whereupon the defendant also excepted. A verdict was found for the plaintiff, and the defendant appealed to the former district court of Suffolk, where the judgment was reversed, and a new trial directed; that court be court was conclusive evidence to prove, that the vessel belonged to the enemies of Great Britain. The parties agreed, in the last mentioned court, to release all other errors than those relied on in the bills of exceptions; and the plaintiff appealed from the judgment of reversal, aforesaid, to this court. With respect to the point made by the second bill of exceptions, we are of opinion, that, when the vessel was captured, the case was consummated, by the offer to abandon, so as to entitle the party to go for a total loss; and that the case was not altered by the circumstance, that the vessel was, afterwards, bought in by a friend or agent, of the assured. We had been flattered with a hope that the secretary had made a mistake as to the amount of the deficit in the treasury; but, after making the reduction of more than two millions from the estimates, there still remains a deficit to the amount stated by him in his annual report. It is now beyond question, that the disbursements of this and succeeding years, will surpass the receipts at the treasury, and any system of expedients will only re-act upon us, at the next session, with additional force. The best way would be to take the advice of the secretary of the treasury, and reduce the expenditures. We inust do so at the next session, or revive the late system of internal taxation. This, he was sure, would not be submitted to by the nation, until reductions are first made, and the sooner we begin the work It is a principle of general jurisprudence, formerthe better. He said he had stated such of his ob-ly held sacred, even by Great Britain herself, that jections to the report of the committee, as are ma- questions of prize, between subjects or citizens of terially connected with the loan bill; in doing which different nations, are to be governed, entirely, by his only object was to have the facts distinctly un- the law of nations, in exclusion of the local or mu derstood before a vote is taken. If the house should nicipal laws of any country: (3 Black. Com. pa. 69.) conclude to use the sinking fund in aid of the reve. It is another principle, that the courts of admiralty, une for this year, he hoped they would raise the loan to three millions, without which, he was sure, the treasury would be aground before the next session. The point made in the first bill of exceptions, requires more consideration, and is deemed, by the court, to be extremely important. of each country, acted within their respective sections, for the great family of nations, in carrying into effect this just and general law. In this state of things, each court was entitled to the confidence of the others, and no laws were acted upon or administered by any but such as were submitted to, and acknowledged by all. In this state of things, also, comity, reciprocity and general convenience, sanctioned it as a genéral principle, that the decrees of each court should be respected by the others. That principle, however, as originally declared, and as, even now, understood, by some of the nations of Europe, only extended to the decree itself, and not to all the facts and questions, wheresoever arising, on which that decree may have been founded. The decree proceeded entirely in rem; and it was founded in general convenience, that the title of the purchaser, under it, should not be questioned. A con It is believed that no nation has refused to accede to this doctrine, to the extent which is now stated, on account of the convenience and utility aforesaid. How far the principle, as thus limited and understood, may be shaken by a system of profligacy in the courts of any country, discarding every rule but that of their own will, or that of their particular sovereign, and violating the clearest principles of justice, may deserve consideration in future. In the case now before us, that inquiry need not be made. trary doctrine would tend to diminish the actual | clusive, without violating the great principle, often price for which the property might be sold, and sanctioned by this court, that no man is to be bound thus, in the event of a restitution, or otherwise, by a decree of judgment, as to which he had not throw an actual loss upon the owner of the pro- the liberty to cross-exainine. The insured are only perty himself. parties to the decree of the court of admiralty, as it were by a fiction, and for the single purpose of effectuating and protecting the sale of the property. That fiction need not be extended both beyond the truth of the case, and beyond those purposes of utility which it was intended to answer. We ought not to adopt, lightly and implicitly, the late decisions of the British courts upon this subject, which seem to have grown up with the new state of things before adverted to. We ought to recollect that Britain is an insuring, while we are an insured nation. We ought not to adopt the British This convenience, however, is not involved in a decisions of the present day, but rather to mount collateral controversy, which exhibits the same up to the days of Hughes vs. Cornelius. At that question, between two individuals in another coun- time the validity of the sale under the decree, was try, touching the construction of their contract-only in question; and all the general expressions in nor is this country at all involved, in such a case. the judgment of the court, should be understood as It is sufficient for the most punctilious sovereign, restricted by it. that its decrees have had their effect and that titles If the question now before the court be a quesderived under them, are not attempted to be dis-tion of the common law, it ought to adapt itself to turbed. Another nation may, even upon the same contract, draw a different conclusion, by means of its courts, between two of its own citizens, without offending the dignity of the power which renders the decree. the varying circumstances of things, by which it is affected. A change, as to it, may well have been produced, by the nefarious conduct of some nations in modern times. If it be a question of common law, we ought rather to refer to that code, as it was understood, upon this subject, at the epoch of our separation from Britain. We ought rather to adopt that construction which conforms to the golden principle, that no man ought to be bound by a decision to which he was not substantially a party. We ought rather to go by the principle which prevails in relation to the municipal judgments of foreign courts. We ought to consider this decree, as in fact, such a judgment. It is founded only on the exparte and particular regulations of the British nation. This is most emphatically the case, when the admiralty court, rendering the decree, has discarded the law of nations from its code, and only goes by the exparte laws, or orders, of its particular sove reign. The case is, further, extremely aggravated, when these laws, or orders, have no other object, than the aggrandizement of the power which promulgates them; and when its courts lend their aid, to further the object aforesaid. In that case, they cease to be judicial tribunals; or, at least, they cease to administer the law of nations. In that case, the court becomes, in fact, a belligerent instrument, and If, on the contrary, this be a question under the its judgments act only upon the local laws or orders law of nations, the British courts are not the excluof its sovereign: and all the cases concur in shew. sive arbiters of it. On a question of national law, we ing, that a judgment rendered in another country, refer to other and more impartial authorities. We in a civil action, is not absolutely conclusive in this. consult the learned on that subject, and resort to Such is the character of the British vice admi- the concurring testimony of general jurists. We ralty courts, and of their decisions, in modern times. act upon the unerring maxim, “potius est petere fonThese facts are not particularly found in this re- tes." It is not new for this court to differ from the cord, but they are known to the court, judicially, courts of England on questions of general law. It as a matter of general history. They have been was done in the case of Reed vs. Reed, in favor of oftener admitted by the courts as well as other de- the great natural right of expatriation. In that partments of our country; and are not denied by case we scouted the slavish doctrines to be found in even the British jurists, themselves. We are to the case of Calvin. If, therefore, Britain has deproceed then upon the assumption of these facts. cided this question one way, France and other naWe are to suppose that the condemnation in questions have decided it in another, and we are to tion, may have been founded upon the arbitrary orders of the English king in council, and upon the ideas of the right of blockade, which are acted upon by that nation. We are to suppose that the ground of the decree may have been manifestly unjust and It is a clear principle, peculiarly fitting the preillegal. If, in the case of Mlyne vs. Walter, [4 Bai. sent times, that the unjust decisions of foreign Abl. 670-Parke on insurance, pa, 363,] it was held, courts, is one of the risks insured against; but this even in England, that where the ground of decision right would be cut up by the roots, if we are not appeared to be a foreign ordinance, manifestly un-permitted, [in this case between the parties to the just and contrary to the laws of nations, the insurer should not be discharged, we ought, in this case, to retort her doctrine upon her. We can admit no difference between a fact brought into a case by a particular finding, and one which is, indubitably, known to the court as a matter of general history. This view of the subject precludes the necessity of deciding how far, under the former state of things, the decree would have been conclusive in the case before us. It could not have been so con choose between them. In making this decision, we are to go by great principles, and not by the conficting and unsatisfactory decisions of British judges. policy,] to shew the decision to be unjust. That right is without a remedy, unless the decision is open to investigation, in this particular. Nor ought it to be forgotten, that, by holding the sentence to be conclusive, which sentence was not founded upon a jury trial, we deprive our citizens of a resort to that tribunal, which is consecrated by our bill of rights. We also deprive them of the inestimable privilege of resorting to viva voce testimony. |