Sec. 2.-Jurisdiction In General Cl. 3.-Jury Trial This clause applies only to criminal proceedings in the Federal courts and does not govern trials in State courts. The trial here referred to is the examination of the accused before a competent tribunal, according to the law of the land; it is the hearing and deciding on a criminal charge, and can take place. only after that charge has been legally made. Congress must first make an act a crime, affix the penalty, and declare the court having jurisdiction. Eilenbecker v. Plymouth County, 134 U. S. 35. U. S. v. Curtis, 4 Mason 232. Nashville, etc., R. Co. v. Alabama, 128 U. S. 101. State law imposing a heavier penalty on a person convicted of felony if he has twice before been convicted of crimes for each of which he was sentenced to at least three years imprisonment does not impair the right of trial by jury, assuming that the constitutional provision on this point applies to State courts. McDonald v. Massachusetts, 180 U. S. 311. Contempt proceedings by the circuit court to enforce obedience to its injunction against the obstruction of interstate commerce, and in aid of the protection of property, are not in execution of criminal laws nor an invasion of the right to trial by jury. In re Debs, 158 U. S. 564. Clayton Act held unconstitutional as encroachment on judicial power in giving jury trial to persons charged with contempt. In re Atchison, 284 Fed. 604. While this clause provides for trial by jury in criminal cases according to settled common-law rules, the sixth amendment declares what those rules are and the two provisions are not conflicting. When the question arises whether the case is one wherein the accused is entitled to a jury, recourse must be had to the principles of the common law which are determinative of that question. Except as to those petty offenses which by common law may be summarily tried, the guaranty of a jury accrues to an accused person the moment he is put on trial. Callan v. Wilson, 127 U. S. 540, in which the act of Congress dispensing with jury in prosecutions by information in the police court of the District of Columbia was held unconstitutional as a basis for conviction for conspiracy. Schick v. U. S., 195 U. S. 69. Capital Traction Co. v. Hof, 174 U. S. 13. A citizen in civil life in no wise connected with the military service can not be tried by a military commission so long as the Sec. 2.-Jurisdiction Cl. 3.-Jury Trial courts are open to hear criminal accusations and redress griev ances. Ex parte Milligan, 4 Wall. 123. The constitutional guaranty of a jury trial applies to the people of the Territories and to the District of Columbia. Thompson v. Utah, 170 U. S. 346. Callan v. Wilson, 127 U. S. 550. This right to trial by jury in criminal cases does not extend to ceded territory not made a part of the United States by congressional action without legislation by Congress to that effect. Dorr v. U. S., 195 U. S. 138. Where the Said Crimes Shall Have Been Committed The provision as to place of trial has reference only to trials in the Federal courts. Congress has the sole power to prescribe the place for offenses against Federal laws not committed within any State; such an offense is not local and may be tried at such place as Congress may designate. The place of trial may be directed by Congress after the offense has been committed and before proceedings have been commenced. Nashville, etc., R. Co. v. Alabama, 128 U. S. 101. Congress has the power to enact laws for the arrest, commitment and custody of persons committing offenses against the United States, and such persons are in the exclusive custody of the United States, and not subject to State process or warrant. An offense committed on the high seas is contemplated by this clause, and an act of Congress providing for the punishment of murder on the high seas or in any bay, etc., out of the jurisdiction of any State means that the bay, etc., must be out of the jurisdiction, and not the offense itself. Logan v. U. S., 144 U. S. 263. The jurisdiction of a court is not affected by the manner in which an accused person is brought before it. Under the act of March 3, 1825, a person is triable for an offense on the high seas in the district into which he is brought, and for this purpose the district in which he is delivered to the marshal is the district into which he is brought, although he is first delivered to State officers in another district for safe-keeping. Mahon v. Justice, 127 U. S. 708. U. S. v. Arwo, 19 Wall. 490. Putnam v. U. S., 162 U. S. 710. There is no principle of constitutional law which entitles one to be tried for a criminal offense in the district where he resides. Sec. 2.--Jurisdiction Cl. 3.--Jury Trial Haas v. Henkel, 216 U. S. 462; but see U. S. v. Jackalow, 1 Black 486, in which it was said that crimes are local if committed within a State, and they must then be tried in the district in which the offense was committed. The physical absence of the accused from the State of Missouri when the acceptance by a St. Louis corporation of his offer to render services in consideration of the compensation forbidden by R. S., sec. 1782, Comp. Stats., sec. 10, 283, was dispatched by mail or telegram, does not deprive the circuit court of the United States for the eastern district of Missouri of jurisdiction of the offense on the theory that the crime was not committed in that State. Burton v. U. S., 202 U. S. 344. Section 3.-TREASON. Clause 1.-DEFINITION. Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court. Power of Congress Limited No other facts than those defined in the Constitution can be declared to constitute the offense. Congress can neither extend, nor restrict, nor define the crime. Its power over the subject is limited to prescribing the punishment. U. S. v. Greathouse, 4 Sawy. (U. S.), 457. U. S. v. Fries, 3 Dall. 515. Constitutional Definition of Treason The two species of treason mentioned in the Constitution are described in it in language borrowed from that of the English statute of treasons. U. S. v. Greiner (4 Phila. (Pa.) 396), wherein the court said that the phrase "levying war" is understood and applied in the United States in the sense in which it has been used in England. Levying War There must be an actual assembly for the purpose of effecting a treasonable purpose, to constitute a levying of war. Ex parte Bollman, 4 Cranch 126. U. S. v. Burr, 25 Fed. Cases No. 14,692. Successfully to instigate treason is to commit it. Charge of Grand Jury, 2 Wall. Jr. (C. C.) 134. It is treason "in levying war against the United States" for persons who have none of the common interest with their fellow citizens, to oppose or prevent, by force, numbers, or intimidation, Sec. 3.--Treason Cl. 1.-Definition a public and general law of the United States, with intent to prevent its operation or compel its repeal. Force is necessary to complete the crime; but the quantum of force is immaterial. U. S. v. Fries, 3 Dall. 515. The commission of acts of violence by a number of persons, with the intention to suppress an office of excise and to compel the resignation of the excise officer, so as to render an act of Congress in effect, null and void, constitutes the crime of high treason in the contemplation of the Constitution and law of the United States. U. S. v. Vigol, 2 Dall. 346. U. S. v. Mitchell, 2 Dall. 348. To constitute the specific crime of treason war must be actually levied against the United States. However flagitious may be the crime of conspiring to subvert by force the Government of our country, such conspiracy is not treason. To conspire to levy war, and actually to levy war are distinct offenses. The first must be brought into open action by the assemblage of men for a purpose treasonable in itself, or the fact of levying war can not have been committed. To complete the crime of levying war against the United States there must be an actual assemblage of men for the purpose of executing a treasonable design. Ex parte Bollman, 4 Cranch 126, discharging on a writ of habeas corpus parties who had been committed on a charge of treason in the case of U. S. v. Bollman, 1 Cranch (C. C.) 373. Aid and Comfort He who, being bound by his allegiance to a government, sells goods to the agent of an armed combination to overthrow that government, knowing that the purchaser buys them for that treasonable purpose, is himself guilty of treason or a misprision thereof. Hanauer v. Doane, 12 Wall. 347. Who May Be Guilty of Treason If war be actually levied, that is, if a body of men be actually assembled for the purpose of effecting by force a treasonable purpose, all those who perform any part, however minute, or however remote from the scene of action, and who are actually leagued in the general conspiracy, are to be considered as traitors. Ex parte Bollman, 4 Cranch 126. An alien, while domiciled in the United States, owes a local and temporary allegiance, which continues during the period of his residence, and he is amenable to the laws of the United States prescribing punishment for treason and for giving aid and comfort to rebellion. Carlisle v. U. S., 16 Wall. 147. Sec. 3.-Treason Cl. 1.-Definition Treason is a breach of allegiance and can be committed by him who owes allegiance either perpetual or temporary. U. S. v. Wiltberger, 5 Wheat. 97. The Confederate government was never acknowledged by the United States as a de facto government in the sense that adherents to it in war against the government de jure did not incur the penalties of reason. From a very early period of the Civil War to its close, it was regarded as simply the military representative of the insurrection against the authority of the United States. Thorington v. Smith, 8 Wall. 1. Evidence Required by the Constitution Of the overt act of treason there must be proof by two witnesses, and if there be testimony by four witnesses that the defendant was at a certain place, at a great distance from his home, and that he was armed, that the conspiracy was formed at that place, and that the defendant was actually passed on the march to the place where the treasonable acts were to be carried out, the evidence is sufficient, even if there be testimony of only one witness as to his actual presence at the place of attack. U. S. v. Mitchell, 2 Dall. 348. When a confession is made out of court it is not itself sufficient to convict although proved by two witnesses. U. S. v. Fries, 3 Dall. 515. Punishment Prescribed by the Constitution What was intended by the constitutional provision is free from doubt. In England attainders of treason worked corruption of blood and perpetual forfeiture of the estate of the person attained, to the disinheritance of his heirs or of those who would otherwise be his heirs. Thus innocent children were made to suffer because of the offense of their ancestor. When the Federal Constitution was framed, this was felt to be a great hardship, and even rank injustice. For this reason it was ordained that no attainder of treason should work corruption of blood or forfeiture except during the life of the person attainted. Wallach v. Van Riswick, 92 U. S. 202. Bigelow v. Forrest, 9 Wall. 350. Clause 2.-PUNISHMENT OF TREASON. The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted. The power to declare the punishment for treason is exclusively in Congress, but in those cases in which this exclusive right of |