The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1804-12-29
f ENQUIRE
RICHMOND :
SATURDAY, DECEMBER 20, 1904.

Mot of the readers of this paper will no
doubt recoiiett an article which appeared in the
No. of the 22d init. on " The impeachment of
Judge Chate." Had the fifth paragraph ofthat
article, obtained a more mature confederation.
am willing to confefs that fhouId not pro.
badly have competed and publiihed it at the
Preient period. AT the fame time am bound to
declare, that -ffhoulti have fuppreifed that m.
ragraph, not becaufc il contains any afrrtion.
which fro'2 all the evidence prefent to my mind
believe to De inbhan,ay incorrect, but be-
CAME 1t may TEND to excite or req,ize preiudices
which public juitice would at the preient time.
have covered with the mantle of oblivion.
Judge Chaie, ftanding At this time before the
bar OF his country TO aniwer the articles of inn
parchment which have been already co,Iea-
ed and arraigncd againn him, has certainly
claim upan the impartial and forbearing iudp-
meEt of his opponents. He certainly has a
right to demand that no new rcproaches lhonlj
be accumulated upon his head that no new
charges ihould be brought forth aeainft him.
which however well adapted they might be to
make againit him in the opinion of his Judges.
he could have no time or no means of contro-
verting.
But it was not the ftuatiou of Judge Chafe
alone, which was entitled TO the forbearance of
my lilence. There was fomethinp ALTO in tht.
cafe of Mr.. David M. Randolph, the late Mar
fha of Virginia, which ao.;Id have inft,irr,i me
with limilar fentiment. Had maturely con-
ldered all the circumstances oft gentleman's
ituation: that though he was once the MARTIAL
of the fate, he is no longer TO- and will not pro-
badly be 70 again: that the very power. of
whole improper exercite on the trial of Callen-
der, had heard 10 many and fuch various com.
plants, no longer exiffed in his hands, and that
with ~ I'D rod all thac e -
and all the locations of complaint that of
courte any invefigation into his official conduct
on that trial could no longer exit for his own
amendment or the ufeful information of his
countrynen {: had / coniidercd on the other
hand, how much this gentlenan's feelings had
been formerly 'TanhCcc ,ty fis1,.ar reprosches
how much the fpirit of party had been exafpe.
rated by mutual accufations and retorts on this
very cafe, and how much each of tho{e frpt;
ments would once more be excited by repeti-
ton of this old, obfcure, and unproduttiye tale
on which 70 much can be faid, and 70 little can
be afcertained had all thefe circumstances ben
prefenteti to my view, in that latitude of confc
quences and ftrength of colouring, in which
they now appear to my imagination | have
reafon to beiiesv that the fifth paragraph of that
article would never have been written: that
the name nf Mr. Randolph @l;;iiI,ii moi nave sc
companied the name of Judge Chafe; and that
the original purport of this article nlould have
been ftrictly purified, of giving new arrange
ment to the articles of impeachment, which
have already been urged againit him, and not of
collecting new matter for accufation and re
proach. Thefe reflections have however come
too late. The paragraph which contains theft.
imProvident paiiages, has already been publiil-
ed. The name of Judge Chaie has once more
been ufhcred into the world, covered las thew
IspN with n and yx,eiohtx, .,
Mr.. Randolph has once more been brought be-
fore the public, to meet certain reports, which
were formerly circulated about his Official con.
duo.
What is the conftquence The FEELINGS of
Mr.. Randolph have been once more difurbed
and they have given birth to the following note
which was delivered TO me or Wednefdav
morning, to be publifhed in the next paper
l1r. Ri!rhie,
have obferved in your Enquirer" of the
22d. inf. a communication on the "Iu,neach
ment of Judge Chafe." So far as tits predicated
on rumour which may be deiigned to iniure
my honor or 20 create 4 belief that in my oifici-
al duty upon the trial of Calender, was " oh
fequioully obedient to the extra-iudiciai man
damns Ct the judge" Ideclare to be ,nSfound-
ed and untrue; the refpeaability.of the au.
thorIty rom which your differences are drawn,
d. NJ. RANDOLPH.
December %, 1904.
The paragraph to which Mr.. Randolph
makes his objection, may be diftled into the
following propoitions-lf, That in a CONVEX.
iation which took place between Judge Chafe
and Mr.. Randolph, the former directed the LAT.
ter to ftrike off the names of lthe democrats.
which he had placed on the paune of Jurors,
for trying ]. T. Calender: 2dly. That the
names ofthe iurymen had been deGencdIv tranC-
poied on the pannel I; the democrats, who had
been iummoncd frf not having been called in
court, and the jury being entirely competed of
federalifts, fome of whom had not been FUN
moned until fome Of The democrats had been
and 3dly. That no Juror Cat on the trial, who
was nos at that time the political opponent of
1T. Calender.
llt. The evidence Of the frft faGt will ref I'D.
on the following depohtion of John Heath, Eta.
one Of the Executive Councillors of Virginia.
upon the faith of Whole word, the al1trtion was
originally made:
IL the May Sefiion of the Federal Circuit |
Court for The Middle Diari6t of Virginia, in |
1900, hsld at .he Capitol in the CITY of Rich |
me nd, when Judge Chafe prefded--I vifted
The Ju 'ee at his Chambers, in the houGe of a |
Mr.. crouch, on the fubiea of an Injunction, for
a Mr.. Gordon VS.. Mr.. Smith Of Baltimore and |
during conversation with the Judge ON This |
iableet, flr. David NJ. Randolph, the Martial |
OF Virginia at that time, net)t in with n,ner i,