The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1804-12-13

lowing fhou!d be added:
Mr.. Hay Jays,
"The counirl, who aiIociated with me, in
CallendeI's defence, attempted TO add,ers the
jury on the unconfti:utionality of the law, on
which the indictment was founded. They
were interrupted, and obliged by Mr.. Chafe, if
not ordered, to fit down. / then addreHed MIR.
Cha'e hmfelf, with view, to fatisfy him, that
had right TO diicufS this point before the Jury
told him that what was then about to FAY,
was intended for the court alone. He inter
ruPtcd me he aiked fome quefion which was
anfwered: in very ihort time, after I had re-
famed my argument, was interrupted again,
by Mr.. Chafe. How often | was interrupted
know not, but was interrupted, rudely in
terrupted feveral times. Having ieen in the
courfe of this trial what had never feen before,
having felt what never felt before, and what
certainly expect never TO feel again, and being
impreiied with beleftha MIR. Chate was deter
mined 20 tilence me, if he could, my mind was
overwhelmed by eonfismg Eenfimeuts, and
quilted the bar, my client and the court"
When the queftion was about to be put on
agreeing to the whole of the 4th article.
Mr.. Mott rote and remarked that he WAS not
here when the committee on this fubicSt re-
ported at the laft FELTON,, and of co,mfe did not
get a copy of the evidence, he had however fesn
part thereofin the newspapers and examined
10 much of the fubjett as to have fatsHed him,
that it was proper to vote in favour of two of
the articles, to wit the firft and third, but as
he had not an opportunity lince coming TO this
place of comparing the articles of impeachment
with the teftimony on which were founded, and
hnce he could not make up his mind in hearing
the evidence partially read, and as the Houie
nave refu1ed to put it of for Mort time, and
he was not allowed TO make the examination
for himfelf, he was obliged to inform the COM
mittee, that he was not Etished to vote in fa-
vor of the 4th article, whereas had he been al
lowed time he might join vote with the majo
lily.
Mr.. Niekoifos faid all the evidence on the
tubjeet of this article had not been read, he
would therefore read it hmfelf as the clerk was
indifpofed with hoarfenefs-He read the fol-
lowing
So The additional depoftio,. of P5iHe Nor6oue.
Nicholas taken before George Wytbe and 10
Jtbb Scott, E4uireJ, under tie authority of
tee Hogf Of rtprssatAtia'e5 Of tie Uuited
States.
The faid Nicholas being aG.ed by the faid
commiiiioners what was the general department
and manner of judge Chafe during the trial of
James Thompfon Calender, anfwers--
The general department and manner of
Mr.. Chaie during the faid trial, appeared to
the faid Nicholas to be marked with great vio-
iencc and precipitation and that Judge Chafe
manifefted a folicitude for the conviction of the
prfoner, which, in the eftimation of faid Nj
cholss, was improper in judge fitting in a
criminal profecution.-The faid Nicholas fur
sher itates, that the department of Judge
Chaie to the council, who appeared for Callen-
der, was rude and overbeariDg, and calculated
to prevent that full and free defence, without
which it is impofiible for them to do iuiticc to
their client
PHILIP NoRBoRNE NICHOLAS.
Richmond Feb. z. 1904.
" TIE a1di.ioaI depeftion of5soree Hay, 4v5o
0eing are! evbat sverr tb- n.annsyy and .!el
pertinent Of Samuel Cbals, during fbe trial
Of .fa'"es 1bomajon Callenaey, dep2Jet6 and
jafb,
That it appeared to him at the time of the
trial, and he yet believes that the2nanners of
Mr.. Chaie were Intentionally rude and nfolent.
The deponent thought and fill thinks, that
MIR. Chaie was determined that Calender
fhould, if pofible, be convicted; and that to &C
conp!iih this purpote, he endeavoured to init
Inidate, to deprefs, and to filence his council.
He interrupted them frequently, with wanton
ridenets. He ordered one, if not more, ;;f
them to i.e down. He charged them with adj
vancing doctrines which they knew to be Illegal,
and which they advanced, he faid, only to de-
ceive aud minead the popuIace.-Thc patience
OF the deponent was # length eXhaufed, and he
omitted the court and the caufc, under belief
that further exertions would only tend TO cover
himfeif with ifill greater flame, TO fub et him
10 nill greater humiliation.
"The deponent believes that there did not
efcape from him during the trial, word or gef-
ture, that could have given offence to the Judge.
The conduit of his afiociatcs was, he believes
equally guarded: he does not therefore afcrbe
the lntoleuce of Mr.. Chafe to irritation, occali-
oned BY the conduct of the bar.
The depOnent is und,r no apprehension,
that his Judgment has been much miied, BY the
circumstances attending his own litUation He
knows, and can now name men, whole politics
then differed from mis- own, who exprefed their
adherence of Mr.. Chafe's conduct in terms as
itrong as language ahords.-In fact the public
mind was very much excited, aud aporehenf-
ons were entertained by many. that fome re,i
ous difturhance might take place. Mr. Mum
roe, then governor Of Virginia, was 70 complete
ly convinced of the danger, that he net only
earneft!y recommended moderation and forbear-
ace 70 thcfe who were daily crowding about
hin, but kept his eye conltantly on the capitol.
that Ne might be ready 10 command the peace
at the frit appearance Of commotion.-To him
Mr. Chafe is probably indebted for the fifcty
of his perfon during his refidence in Rich
mopd
"5he fol;citude Of Mr.. Monroe to prefrve
order, aroie from caulestotallyu Red w.'h
Mr.. Ch9fe. The character OF the ftate, he oh
feryed, had never been tarniihed by any op-
Poiiiioo to the laws, or any outrage on perfons