Alexandria advertiser and commercial intelligencer. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1800-1803, 1803-02-24

nlent oil THIS DESCRIPTION o. pef'pES. ou.
ID civil cafes, he had never heard the leah
imputation thrown upon his conduct even
by his enenles. ms laws, under when
ttof. pfoiecutlors were conducted, were
now sAplled, and eonlldering the mid
osIs 81 The p.rtcnt 4dInnittrauon, ne
did NOT con~elye that there was any
danger OF iAllng uadcr tie laih OF me
learned Judge. Il was extremely cyl
dsnt this was a matter with which the
people had nothing to do ; as the only
queition was whether they lhoold nave
Tor their Judge A. or B. Il had oesn
we'll oblerved by gentleman from Mai
lachufetw tMr. Eutis) that The Fo.ie
ought to conhder every judge equally
learned and upright. 1t was, therefore
not regular or celicate 10 make zach, re-
marks. The boon prayed was very inaii,
as in the event OF the death OF any one
Judge, the Judges would thenlieves have
the right Of allotsing then!felves. tie
could lot believe that any gentleman ell
tertained fuch hoitllity to the Judges
as to with TO defeat mcaure ba'ey
becauls it would promote their con-
venience and on which they were all
agreed. :,
Mr.. Holland oblerved tina. he weul !
be in favor of this law, lnalnuch as IT
promoted the convenience ct Judge
Warrington, were it not that It inter
terfered with the convenience OF two ref
| pettable itases.
Mr.. Smile was fotry that he was OBJ
liged to allign the reafons for the opinions
he had advanced. But this became ne
cenary from the remarks Of the gentle
man from Delaware, (Ms. Bayard. -
That gentleman has laid the Judge al!ud-
| ed 70 may have been harlh 10 his treat
ment OF traitors. in{urgents and libel
lers. In the remarks he had 10 make,
Mr.. Smile fad he ihould pats over
whatever related to Iibels ard iedltlon,
and conGne him!eif to the obferva'ions
of the gentleman that related TO tfeai2n-
| He hoped he ihould never fee the time
when the character of any Judge lhould
| be coniidered too lacrcd to be noticed en-
fit location in that houfe. 1t was not
fly fhsf lie had on sals occailon any 'hlrg 70
too ievere upon traitors, inforgents, or Il
bcllers bus becaule he had confirmed
an att Of insurgency into treaion. This
was eiIensially different thing. There
was an infurrettion in Pennsylvania, in
the county Of Northampton.
Mr.. Varnum a1sed if there was any
! propriety in the difcullion of the que&ion
before the committee in commenting on
the character Of Judge.
MIR. Randolph hoped the gentleman
would proc ed.
MIR. Smile proceeded. There was an
infurredion in Pennsylvania, in the coun-
ty of Northampton. A perion of The
name of Fries, concerned in that infur-
rettiou, was tried for tresfon. When
the trial came on, tie counted of Fries ap-
peared, The judge (Chafe) faid the court
would not hear an argument as to what was
or was not treaion. We have, faid he, al
ready decided this point, our opinion is
dlawn out in writing, and you mutt be 60
verned by it. Fries had employed two of
the mott eminent counfelof the Pennfylva-
MA bar, who Ii might be proper to remark,
were OF different political ientiments.-
But, notwithstanding their political diff
ference when the judge behaved in this
manner, they uni;ed!y told him, wa will
nor degrade our profeiional characters, or
commit the rights Of our client, in whole
ieryice we Fave volunteered, by taking
any further part in thefe proceedings
There are rights Of the bar as well as
rights Of the bench and while we refpset
the latter, we will maintain the former.
The effect was that this man Fries was
tried without counle', convicted Of tr-a-
icn and ientenced to death. After the
trial fha attornAv general rPOueffed the