Alexandria daily advertiser. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1803-1808, 1804-03-19

declared as the reason Wy ~
! ance was refused, that Calender had no'
stated in his affidavit that he could prove
| fhs truth of all the charges stated IN the IN.
dictment that it was necessary that
Calender should prove the truth OF all
the charges to obtain an acqnittal,
and that as the witnesses who were
absc It were to give evidence as tic
part of the charges only, their absence at.
! forded no good reason for a continuance.
and that therefore our motion should be
over-ruled. The court having refused to
continue the cause, the jury was called,
and one of the counsel for the defendant
stated to the court, that he wished to ask
the Juror, who was called to the book, be-
fore he was sworn, whether he had formed
an opinion on the work Untitled The Pros
pect-Before U.s." from which the charges
in the indictment were extracted. Judge
Chase saidno such question should be ask
ed, that the only question which would be
allowed was whether the juror had formed
and delivered an opinion on the charges
contained in the Indictment, and that to ex-
clude the. Juror, he must not only have
formed, but also delivered an opinion
The Juror answered that he hadnever seen
the indictment orheardit read. The Judge
directed that he should be sworn In chief.
The counsel then asked that the Indictment
should be read to the inror, which might G.
nable him to decide whether he had form
ed and delivered an opinion on the charges
in the Indictment. Judge Chase said the
court would not permit this; that they had
INDUCED the counsel as far as they could,
and that they ought to be satisfied. It's to
be observed that Mr.. Bassett who had been
summoned on the jury, seemed to have
considerable scruples at serving, and stated
that he had expressed some opinion as to
the 6 Prospect before U.s." Judge Chase
however declared Mr.. Bassett a good iu-
ror, and he was sworn and acted as juror.
The Jury being sworn and several witness
ses having been examined On the part Of
the United States to prove the publication
of the T" Prospect Before U.s." the coun-
sci for the defendant asked that col. Tay-
lor of Caroline should be sworn. The
court decided that col. Taylor should notb
examined, forreasons which this deponent
will fully detail in answer to the fourth In
terrogat0ry. After the exclusion of col.
Taylors evidence, the attorney for the u
nited States spoke at length on the charges
contained In the indictment, and after he
had finished, the counsel for Calender
commenced their defence.
The council who cp.n:d that defence, began
by Eating TO the jury the embarrsfcd fituation
il which be and MS Goa ju5os food; that TIE pr.
fnsr during the fiae s,,in preitneed, indicr.
cd, aTIcaed, srIaIgned snd tiled aud that this
precipitation pFeciudcd the pofibi!ity of obtain.
ing witnefes or making preparations for fuo
lect Of fueh extent. He was here interrupted by
Judge Chale, who fad lie would not fufTer any
thing TO be fad which reflected on the court.
The council then attempted 70 de,noultrlte TO
the jury that the ata of congrels uiuaiy flied
tbc iedition act; was unconstitutional and void
and the Jury were not bound to conf er il as
law. Judge Cha!e interrupted IL couniel and
aated chat arguments mighs be addfeded 10 the,
court on the right Of the jury to confder the con
futonality OF the Edition at, but char fuch ar
gunients thould not be sdd1el1ed TO Tie Jury.
The counicl then attempted to dcmonArate to
the court the right of the jury to enquire into
the conitilutlonality of an atf OF congrels. Ii
the cousfe ofehe dfcuGion of this point the coun-
fel were frcquensly interrupted by jndge Chafe
particularly Mr.. Hay, add that gentleman, who
fpcke Taft, after having received feveral fuccef.
five interruptions from judge Chaie, folded W
his papers and declared that he won't. proceed no
further in the diicilion.
The couafei for the defendant made no further
eff rt at defence, and retifed from The court.
The motive which influenced tic courfclto a.