Alexandria daily advertiser. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1803-1808, 1804-03-22
+ Richard Peters, Esqhires, Or eies 81
then.

them.
Fl. Were you present at the secohdmal
Of John Fries for treason before the cirait 7
ecourt .ofP ennsylvania, at the spring ternof
the year 1900?
2. Have you correct copy Of the opin-
on Of the court delivered in writing to tie
counsellor the prisoner at that trial.
S. How came it in your possession.
q. Are you confdentthat the copy,which
you now produce, is exactly correspondents
with the original
JOHN RANDOLPH.
THOMAS LEIPER,
MAHLoN DICKINSON.
The answers Of William S. Blade to sthe
annexed interrogatorItics, in The case NJ
= Samuel Chase and Richard Peters Es-
CURES.
i. In answer to the first interrogatory
this deponent says that he was present at
the second trial Of John Fries for treason
before the circuit court Of the u. States tor
the districto of Pennsylvania, lnthe spring
term of the year 1900.
9. In answer to the second lnterroSatory
he SAYS that.he has not a correct copy OF
the whole opinion delivered,by the court In
writing to the counsel for the prisoner at
that trial. That the paper now produced
to the commissioners and hereunto annex
ed, was written by this deponent during the
trial aforesaid, and was preserved by him,
among other papers, containing important
law opinions and cases. That the follow
ing extract from said paper, is to the best
of this deponent's knowledge and belief, "a
correct copy of SO mach Of the opinion ex-
pressed by the court before the trial of Fries
and delivered in writing, as he understood,
to the counsel for the prisoner, viz. cit is
the opinion of the court that any insurrec-
ton or rising of any body ofpeople within
the United States, to attain or effect, by
force or violence, any object of great pub
lie nature, or of public and general or ma
tional concern, is a levying Of war against
the United States. On this general posi-
ton the court was of opinion that any In
surrection or rising to resist, or to prevent,
by force or violence, the execution of any
statute of the United States, for levying
or collecting taxes, duties, imposts or ex-
cises, or for calling forth the militia to exc
cute the laws of the Union, or for any O.
Their purpose (under any pretence, whether
as that the statute was unequal, burthen-
some, oppressive or unconstitutional is
levying Of war against the United States
within the constitution" That the re-
mainder of that page of the annexed paper,
and the following page to the words econ
stitute the crime of levying war;" contain
the substance of the principal points of law
stated by the court on that occasion, and
that the residue of the contents of said pa
per annexed, are no part of the opinion of
the court, but are authorities and cases adj
ded by this deponent for his own use and
information.
3. In answer to the third interrogatory
The says, that he was at the time of said tri-
al studying law with VIM. Rawle, Esq. then
attorney of the United States for the dis
trict of Pennsylvania. That he attended
the circuit court during almost all the trials
for treason in that court, in the year 1899
and 1900, and occasionally assisted Mr..
.Rawle in writing down the testimony deli
vered on Those trials. That the annexed
paper Except as to the latter part of it just
mentioned was according to the best of
this deponent's recollection and belief, CO.
pied by him in court before the commence
ment of said trial, from a paper which was
then circulating around the bar, as the OPT
Mon in writing delivered by the court; and
immediately after the same was delivered
by the court.
4 To the 18th interrogatory he answers,