Alexandria daily advertiser. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1803-1808, 1804-03-13

reCOlleCt that we lOThatu lilo - e
withdraw at that timc but thinks we deter
mined that we would insist upon our riSht
to address the Jury, ina criminal and a ca
pital case, both upon the law, and the TACT. !.
Mr.. Chase having said that on the law, the
connsel must address the court alone and
not the Jury. The impression upon my
memory however, remains as have stated
i. corroborated, | conceive, by the letter
which we afterwards wrote to Mr. Lee
the attorney general, and other clrcan-
stances. Mr.. Lewis and myself then went,
tooetl,er. into the bar; and eeing asked By
the court, whether the counsel Tor the pfi-
soner were prepared TO proceed, Mr.lew-
is answered, in substance that there,Was
TO ot,cstion, as to the facts involved in the
case, but only as to- the law arising from
the facts; and since the court had under
taken to predeterninc the law, and to an
nounce their opinion, he could not hatter
himself with being able to change that OPT
Mon; no seyvice could, therefore, be rem
deed to the prisoner: and he was not will
ing TO enter upon hopeless defence, an
der circumstances SO degrading TO hepFo-
fession.'' 4 do collectany illusion at
this time, 20 the light Of the counsel to sd-
dress the Jury, both on the law and facts,
in capital case, though Mr.. Lewis, IN the
recent conversation 70 which / have al,
ready alluded, suggested that idsa, as the
principal source Of the first days alterca-
ton, between the bench and the bar IN
the sentiments, which he then expressed,
hcwever, declared my concurrence. The
aeitation of the gentlemen ofthc'bar CONT
nied, or rather increased. Mr.. Edward
1ilghman, in particular, made several OF
scrvations, calculated to induce Us to per-
sist; and advised US not even to look at the
paper which Mr.. Chase had delivered to
the clerk. When Mr.. Lewis and myself
entered the bar, noticed Mfr. Chase and
Mr.. Peters in conversation on the bench;
and after we had declined proceeding, [
heard Mr.. Peters lay to Mr.. Chase, +" /
It'd yoa what would be the consequence:
/ knew they would take the stud )" or o.
Their words to the same effect Mr.. Peters
appeared to be dissatisfied, or uneasy; and
cndeavored to persuade us to resume the
defence, saving, at that time, think, as
well as on the next day, &C that FOR his part
he did not care what range the counsel
took, either on the law or the fact" I'm
der these circumstances, Mr.. Rawlc, the
district attorney, moved for a postpone
ment of the trial !; Fries was remanded to
prison; and the court was adjourned.
t,1,a :, C. ci-,-y1rlo
ofthe~sane day, lInet Mr.. Peters in the
street, and he gave me, in substance, the
following statement 'sthat Mr.. Chase had
prepared an opinion, on the law of'treason,
which he submitted to Mr.. Peters for con-
sideration, beforethe time Of trial; that al
though Mr.. Peters agreed in the opinion,
vet Mr.. Chase had never suggested, nor
did NJ. Peters conceive that It was be
made public, exccntby way Of charge from
the court, after the evidence and arguments
on both sides were closed that when Mr.
Chase delivered The paper to the clerk,
MIR. Peters had been called to the end Of
the bench by witness, and was surprised,
on enquiry TO find what had happened; and
that he then predicted to Mr.. Chase the
consequence which ensued." Mr.. Peters
told me, think, at the same time, that
the paper had been Withdrawn, ard that
measures were taken to prevent the circu-
lation of copies of it. 1 never read, or
saw, the paper itself; nor, indeed'any CO.
py oft, until few days ago, when Mr.
William S. Biddle, Showed re copy,
which he said he had taken from lie origi-
nal, while it was in the hands either Of the
clerk, or OF the district attorney, with
whom he wa at that time student
Tha, or the ncxt day the conr, beiag op.n.
eds the pritoner Being i,la,ed in the criminals