34 thorities are not in accord. In some states it is held in accordance with the English cases that if goods are stolen in a foreign country and brought into a state the taker cannot be punished for larceny in the state into which the goods are brought. Other courts hold that he can be punished in the state into which he brings the goods.35 Where the goods are stolen in one of the United States and carried. into another there is the same conflict of opinion. Some courts hold that the second state may punish for larceny," while others hold that the question is the same as where the goods are stolen in a foreign country, and refuse to allow a prosecution in the state into which the goods are brought.37 In many states statutes have been enacted providing that a person who has without the state stolen goods and who brings them into the state may be convicted of larceny. The same conflict of authority is met with in the crime of receiving stolen goods. On principle, in the absence of statute, the goods must have been stolen within the jurisdiction of the receiving, and it has been so held in England; Cr. Cas. 349; Reg. v. Debruiel, 11 Cox, Cr. Cas. 207; Reg. v. Carr, 15 Cox, Cr. Cas. 131, note. 84 Com. v. Uprichard, 3 Gray (Mass.) 434, 63 Am. Dec. 762; Com. v. White, 123 Mass. 433, 25 Am. Rep. 116; Stanley v. State, 24 Ohio St. 166, 15 Am. Rep. 604; Lee v. State, 64 Ga. 203, 37 Am. Rep. 67. 35 State v. Bartlett, 11 Vt. 650; State v. Underwood, 49 Me. 181, 77 Am. Dec. 254. 36 Worthington v. State, 58 Md. 403, 42 Am. Rep. 338; Stinson v. People, 43 Ill. 397; State v. Hill, 19 S. C. 435; Watson v. State, 36 Miss. 593; State v. Johnson, 2 Or. 115; State v. Bennett, 14 Iowa, 479; Ferrill v. Com., 1 Duv. (Ky.) 153; Com. v. Cullins, Mass. 116: Hamilton v. State, 11 Ohio, 435. 37 People v. Gardner, 2 Johns. (N. Y.) 477; People v. Schenck, 2 Johns. (N. Y.) 479; State v. Brown, 2 N. C. 100, 1 Am. Dec. 548; Lee v. State, 64 Ga. 203, 37 Am. Rep. 67; State v. Le Blanch, 31 N. J. Law, 82; Beal v. State, 15 Ind. 378; People v. Loughridge, 1 Neb. 11, 93 Am. Dec. 325; State v. Reonnals, 14 La. Ann. 278. but there are decisions in this country to the contrary where the goods were stolen in another state. 38 FEDERAL COURTS AND THE COMMON LAW 169. The federal courts have no criminal jurisdiction by virtue of the common law ex proprio vigore, and can exercise such jurisdiction only as is expressly conferred upon them by Congress. 170. Where, however, Congress has declared certain acts crimes without defining them, and conferred jurisdiction thereof, the courts may look to the common law for their definition. This question came before the Supreme Court of the United States early in the present century. One Hudson and another had been indicted for publishing a libel on the President and Congress of the United States. No jurisdiction to punish for such an act had been conferred upon the federal Circuit Courts by any act of Congress, and the judges of the circuit in which the indictment was pending, being divided in opinion as to whether such jurisdiction existed at common law, certified the case to the Supreme Court. That court held that the indictment could not be sustained. It was said by the court: "The powers of the general government are made up of concessions from the several states. Whatever is not expressly given to the former, the latter expressly reserve. The judicial power of the United States is a constituent part of those concessions. That power is to be exercised by courts organized for the purpose, and brought into existence by an effort of the legislative power 88 Ante, p. 382. of the Union. Of all the courts which the United States may, under their general powers, constitute, one only-the Supreme Court-possesses jurisdiction derived immediately from the Constitution, and of which the legislative power cannot deprive it. All other courts created by the general government possess no jurisdiction but what is given them. by the power that creates them, and can be vested with none but what the power ceded to the general government will authorize them to confer." 39 The opinion then states that, before the federal courts can punish acts done by an individual in supposed violation of the peace and dignity of the United States, the legislative authority of the Union must first make the act a crime, affix a punishment, and declare the court that shall have jurisdiction of the offense; that the exercise of criminal jurisdiction in common-law cases is not within their implied powers. In view of this decision, to determine whether an act is a crime against the United States, and whether the federal courts have power to punish it, we must look to the acts of Congress; and, unless the jurisdiction be thereby conferred, it does not exist. Common Law Supplies Definitions Though the federal courts derive no jurisdiction from the common law, yet, where congress has conferred jurisdiction of a crime in general terms, without defining it, they may look to the common law for its definition. Thus, an act of Congress declares murder, manslaughter, rape, and other crimes upon the high seas or in certain specified places to be crimes punishable in the federal courts, but does not de 39 U. S. v. Hudson, 7 Cranch, 32, 3 L. Ed. 259; U. S. v. Martin (D. C.) 176 Fed. 110. fine those crimes.40 Their definition, therefore, must be determined by the common law of the place where the court sits.11 JURISDICTION CONFERRED ON FEDERAL 171. As has been stated, the federal courts have such jurisdiction only as is expressly conferred by act of Congress, and Congress can confer such jurisdiction only as is authorized by the Constitution. We have already seen what powers the Constitution has conferred on Congress. We shall now see in a general way the extent to which it has exercised them. Mr. Wharton has collected the various provisions under five heads: (1) Offenses against the law of nations; (2) offenses against federal sovereignty; (3) offenses against the persons of individuals; (4) offenses against property; and (5) offenses against public justice.42 Offenses against the Law of Nations This head includes breaches of neutrality, or hostile acts by citizens of the United States in aid of a foreign state against another foreign state which is at peace with the United States, such as serving against such a state under commission from a foreign state, or fitting out vessels within the United States to cruise against such state, or rendering other assistance within the United States by furnishing vessels or setting on foot an armed force. There are also included under this head offenses against foreign ministers 40 Rev. St. U. S. § 5335. 411 Whart. Cr. Law, § 255. 421 Whart. Cr. Law, § 257 et seq. or ambassadors and their servants, such as violation of passports, or violence, and suing out or executing process against them.48 Offenses against Federal Sovereignty Under this head are included treason and misprision of treason, treasonable correspondence with foreign governments, and certain acts of hostility against the United States; offenses against the elective franchise; illegally holding office; offenses against Indians; offenses by subjects abroad; perjury and forgery abroad; offenses against the post office; counterfeiting; piracy; revolt; and the slave trade.** Offenses against the Persons of Individuals Under this head may be mentioned murder and manslaughter in any fort, dockyard, or other place under the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States; murder, manslaughter, or rape upon the high seas, or in any river, haven, basin or other like place out of the jurisdiction of the United States. 45 Offenses against Property Among these are custom house frauds; burning a dwelling house within a fort, dockyard, or other place under the jurisdiction of the United States, or any arsenal, armory, vessel, or public stores; stealing within any of the places under the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States; larceny, robbery, or embezzlement from the mails, etc.1 43 Rev. St. U. S. §§ 4062, 4064, 5285, 5286 (U. S. Comp. St. 1913, §§ 7610, 7612). 441 Whart. Cr. Law, § 259, where the statutes are collected or mentioned in full. 45 1 Whart. Cr. Law, § 260. 46 1 Whart. Cr. Law, § 261. |