The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1805-02-26

certainly be a disqualification for this Office,
though not crime; but isnorcncs CT : psrti-
cular aGt OF aiembly. OF 4 itate where nc was
An utter Granger, mutt DC confde:ed lis a very
pardonahe error Especially as the counie! for
thc prifoner 90 Whole cafe that law is iuppHtcd
TO have applied, forbore or omitted to cite IT
7fiy' Judge OF The fate, always Teiiiteiit ii it,
and long converiaat with its local laws, either
FORGOT this law, or coniiiered it as inapplica
bic.
Such is the an(wer, which this .etpondent
makes 80 the fifth article OF Impeachment. !;
he erred IN this cafe, it was thro' ignorance OF
the law, and furely, ignorance under fucd cir
cumitances, canno. be crime, much lets
high crime aud mifdemeanor. for which he
ought I" he removed from his of,ice.--if ;ndge
we're impeachahle for acting againf law from
ignorance only. it would follow, that he you'd
ne puulhed in the fame manner for deciding L.
sainlt lawwifuily, & fordecidng againit it thro'
intake. in other words, there woud he no diff
tinaion between ignorance and deisn, between
error and corruption.
And the fad Respondent, for plea 70 the ilid
fifth article OF Impeachment, faith, that he is not
guilty Of any high crime and miflemeanor, as
in and by the ilid fifth article is aedged asaiult
him: and this he prays may be erqu,red of,
nv this honorable court, in iuch manner, as law
and iraice Glal' fcen TO them to require.
The GXth article Of impeachmca; alled yes,
that this Respondent, 90 with intent 70 opurrfS
and procure the conviction Of the iad James
| Thomrfon Calender, did, at the court afore-
faid, rule and adiudge the i;id Cal,ender to TIL
al, during the term at which he, the fad CAL
lender was prefentcd and indicted, contrary to
| the law in that cafe made and provided"
| This charge ALTO, is founded, 1T, On the act
| Of Congreis of Sept. oath, 1889, abovemen,ion-
| ed, which ena6ts, fe6tio- 81, "thlt the laws OF
the feveral ftates, except where the contribution
treaties, or itatutes oe the United States GIall
etherwife provide, flhaii be regarded as therules
of deciiDn, in trials at cogmoT!0ty, in the courts
Of the United States, in CATS where they ap-
| ply" and 2ndiy. on law of the Gate OF Viz
! ginia, which is tuppofcd to provide, 50 that III
cafes not capital, the offender iha,l not be held
to antwer any prcfentment ola grand jury, until
the court next preceding that, curing which
fuch prefentment ihsll have been made" This
law, il is commended, is made the rule of deciii-
on by the aforementioned a6 Of Congrefs,
and was violated by the refufal to continue
! the cafe of Calender till the next term.
in an!wer to this charge this Respondent de-
cIares, that he was at the time of making the
abovcme ntioned deciiion, wholly ignorant of
any fuch law of Virginia rs that in queilion,
that no fuch law was aiiduced Or mentioned
! by he courts! of Calender, in uppo:t of their
motion for = continuance neither when they
fri made it, before this refpondent fettinc- H.
! lone ; nor when they renewed K, after Judge
Griffin had taken his feat in court thatno finch
{ law was mentioned by Judge Griffin who
concurrSd IN overriding the motion for con-
! tnuarcc aud ordering on the tria! which he
could not have done had he known that fiich
. II" rXiGe9, or conliiered it as applicable TO
! tire CAFE; and hat this Respondent never heard
/ Of any fach !av, until the articles OF impeach-
me7t now under confederation were reported,
IN the courf OF the prefent f;.i1ion Of Congrers
, by committee OF the Houic Of Repreienta
tives.
hiudge is certainly bound to uft al proper
and Reasonable means of obtaining knowIetigr
Of toe laws which he IS appointed TO admiu;c
ter but after the NE of tuch means, to over
look, na!nnder.taut, CT remain ignorant of foroe
, particular law, is ar all times 4 very psrt,na
Die error. II is much more 70 in the cafe of 2
Iudgr OF the iupreme court OF the United States
| holding circuit court in particular fate
with which he is = ftraHger, and with tie local
laws Of which he can have enjoyed but very i'm
perie& opportunities OF becoming acquainted
II WAS toreicen BY Concrefs, in eiablifhing the
circuit courts OF the UniJed States, that difficult
ties and Inconvenience NUT fteouentIv ariEa
from this fource and to obviate G,ch difFcrIf;Is
! /: was provided that the diffrf Judge Of each
iid+c, VIM having becn a reiident or the fate
and practitioner IN its courts, had all the me-
cetary means o. becoming acquainted with IFS
local laws, fhou!d form part of The circuit
court in his own Rate. The Judge of the IN.
pieme coGrt is expected, with realon. to he
! well veried in the general laws; but the local
! laws OF the fate form the peculiar province
! Gt the Gliirict judge, who may be iualy conf
dergd as particularly rcfponGb.e fIr their due
ohirrvance. j. in the cafe in queaioD, this ref
lPondent overlooked or mifcohtrued any local
law Of the fate of Virginia, which oIrbt 70
have governed the cafe, it was equally overlook.
| ca and m'fiEderitood, not Only hv the DriCop-
er'S couniel who made the motion, and whoG.
/, peculiar ddtyit was to know the law and brine.
1t INTO the view ofthe court, but alto bv the
dlHrlct judge, who had the beif opportunities
OF knowing and understanding It, and in whom.
nevertheless, this overnight Or intake is conf
dertd As yenal error, while in this refDopdent
Il 'd made the ground of a criminal charge.
| This Respondent further Rates, that after the
mon diIigent and the mof extenGye eno,,;rv
which the time allowed Tor preparing this an
iwer would permit he can fnd no law of Vir-
si"la which expressly enacts, that " in cafes not
capital, the offender llall not be held 70 anfver
any preientnent of grand jury, until the court
next tucceeding that during Which flch oreGnt-
NETT ihall have been made" This princi,ls
| de iupPoieS TO be an inference drawn BY The
authors Of the articles Of impeachment, from
the law OF Virginia mentioned in tie apf,,er to
the preceding article, the'aw ofNoyeuber 9Th
81. Doh -. Al