Alexandria daily advertiser. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1803-1808, 1804-03-17
(C9atinued-)

esquire.
i. Were you presenya at the trial Of James I
Calender for seaition
2. When and where did that trial take
place 80,
4. Relate the circumstances Of that trial
4 Did Mr.. Chase refuse to the prisoner the
testimony of witness because he the sad witness
could nor prove the truth Of all the facts set
forth. & upon which the indictment was grsund :
ed
Iaterrogatories exhibited an behalf ef tie
House Of Representatives Of the U'4fe e
States to George Hay, toucl.iag the e98'-
ciaI conduct Of Samuel Ghase.
/ Were you present at the trial OF james
4. Calender for sedition?
Answer. was present when James !.
Calender was tried for libel Oh John
Adams, the president of the United
States.
2. When and where did the trial take
place
Answer. At the capitol, in the city OF
Richmond, in the State Of Virginia, be-
fore Samuel Chase and Cyrus Griffin, sit
;noas Judges of the circuit court. Iteom-
menced in the month OF May, 1900. How
many days were employed in the prosecu-
ton | do not remember.
8. Relate the circumstances of that
trial
Answer. will relate those which ap-
pear TO me to be material.
At the session of the circuit courtln May
1900, an Indictment charging Calender
with libellingthe President OF the United
States, was found by the grand jury to be q
true bill. Process was soon awarded, by
virtue of which he was arrested, III or near
| Petersburg, and brought into court. The
trial it was understood, was to take place
immediately. For this Calender said he
! was notprepared. Nor was |, who had IN.
| dertaken to be one of his counsel, prepared
at that time, to discuss the t1o9 great ques-
| tons which were involved in the prosecu-
ton. I was ready to argue the point cor.
corning the constitutionslity Of the sH, ,.d
law, butnot TO prove, what 49, 80, go 49,
and still believe to be so'''ie - 49,.
the Jury ,:c,'fssscel'lll VIC r. i0o,io =
et aa5 the law unconstitutional Anargu-
ment on this subject was during the trial
hastily composed but was not permitted
10 deliver il, as WILDE hereafter stated. a
motion therefore was made for q continu-
ance. upon the facts stated IN ali affidavit,
now among the papers filed with the in
dictment. The substance OF It was, that
Witnesses were absent whose testimony
was material, and that documents were
wanted which could not be Immediately
nrocured. The witnesses were named
the evidence expected from each distinctly
stated. and the documents wanted clearly
specified. When the afidavitwas present.
ed to the court, it was urged by the coun-
sci that the constitution secured to the pri-
soner a right to process to enforce the at
tendance of his witnesses. He had also a
RIGHT, under the constitution, to the assist
ance Of counsel in his defence; but if he
were tried, when his Witnesses were ab-
sent, and his counsel not prepared for his
his defence, without any default in him, or
them, these important provisions IN the
constitution would be useless
The motion was instantly oyerruled.
The attorney for the United States was told
that it was unnecessary to reply. Nr.
Chase said that itwould be awaste oftime :;
that there was no reason for putting of the
trial; that as the prisoner did not swear
that he could prove al the charges recited
in the indictment, his having testimony as
to part of them, was immaterial he must
prove all, continued Mr.. Chase, and it must
appear that he can prove all, or the trialwill
not be postponed.
In the course Of the argument, for the
.Postponement, | took it for granted, as |