The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1805-02-19
Dehate,
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
OF THE UNITED STATES,


WEDNESDAY,, FEBRUARY S.
DEBATE on TIE report et'tk. managerial sy5om
ete'e rcft're9tbe e,:f7ve; a Samuel Gl,.,}f..
MIR. ]. Randolph moved thatth hauG. concur
with the managers in their report.
MIR. r. GyJSvold did not know bst what N.
replication was correct. But it appeared r.
him that they were about to act in too precioi.
tate manner. The anfwer of JUDGE ChsGe
nad only been tranimltted TO them that morn
ing' and had been directed to be printed ; il 20.
Peared therefore to him that gentlemen could
not have had fhfficient time to ;udqe nbctb.-
the replication reported by the managers was.
proper one or not-Hc was averfc to DELAY
deciilon of the impeachment, but he was not
prepared to act 10 foon. 1t appeared from the
replication that the anfwer was filpDofed IN r..
indecent. Let the anfwer be printed and +brr
gentlemen would be able to decide that rcin+
In order to obtain fair and full difculIion of tb,.
replication he moved to refer it to q commit,..
of the whole houfc.
Mr.. Elliot did not rife to exprefs furprifc If
the ftile of the replication. After what hal -
ken PIace IN relation to the Impeachment of
Judge Chafe, he felt no furprfe at apv LANGUAGE
that might be ufed. He hoped that the Ian
guage OF the replication would not be fandion.
ed by the houie. In his opinion the ftvle was
undienlhed and unworthy of that bodv. The
eouTie. they were aboui TO r,nr!..e g .h-
motion ofthe gentleman from Connecticut NM
K. Grifwold) ibould be rejected, was unnrecr'
denied and not correGt.-That might he no Ok
lection with the managers, but he truf(ed that
1t would be with the houfe---Hc was in favor of
the motion torefer the report to a committee
OF me whole, and hoped that they ihould a.
aoPr luch a replication as wss worthy of the
noule. 1t the queftion lhould be taken unon a
grselng TO the replication reported by the mana
gers he fhould give it his decided NEGATIVE
ne replication was undignifed and improper
1t aherted that the anfwer of Judge Chafe con.
tanned untru:hs and evafions. This was NOT
the fact. In his opinion, It contained corr.A
ftatement of facts, and with a few executions
principles correct and arguments unanfyerable
The replication declared alto that Iudoc
Chaie was guilty upon every article of impcacb-
ment {: therefore no member who voted apaipA
either article ofimpeachment, could in hjsoni-
mon vote with propriety in favor of the REPLICA.
ton. He hoped they would refer the fnbieq
10 committee OF the whole houfe, in order
that they might not act in a precioitate manner
upon fubie6t of iuch importance.
Mr.. =. RaHdoibb hoped the motion of N.
gentleman from Connecticut (1r. X. GAto re-
FER the report to committee of the whole
nouie would not prevail. lie did believetbat an
agreement to the motion would be virtual re-.
tnial on the part of the homie TO proceed any
farther with the profeCution of the imoeacb.
ment. lie was not furprifed that the gentle
man from Connecticut, who had herctororc
deemed this iubied as unworthy of difruGion
mould endeavour in this manner TO deRrov the
pToiecution' and TO effect that indirectly which
ne could not do directly. What were thefaAs
m the pretent cafe ? Early in the felton,. the
houie OF representatives had exhibited articles Of
impeachment againf Samuel Chafc 10 the e.
nate. After as long A time a, could he ,iven
MN tor the purpofe of putting in his anfwer he
ndd come forward with one, Of which no accu- |
rare redemption could be given. IF they vere
10 go INTO committee of the whole and sdo,,
a replication equally as long as the ar(;ysr
there would &c no Dolibe chance of fnia,ino
me Protecutlon at the prefent fefIior. After
AZ inc IAN ieiioD, coming forward and prcGing
TOT trlal' and complaining Of denial of inf |
tice or account ofits not taking place---th: re-.
ipondent was now endeavourinp 70 ponDope |
me trial until the next fcfion. The mapa,or,
1ad but one OF tive courfes TO purrne, either IN |
nc general replication TO the anf,ver, which
HeJ nad done, or to file a fDecial replication
"b,Ch Wouid have been 2 virtual re1inonifbmerf |
9' INC prosecution for the prefent feiIion. u, |
hoped the houfe would agree 70 file 4 gems, |
tcePHcHt'on ana proceed to the trial \.
'o"p as PQihoie and that the inipeacbmen,
"ou'oipsi Ne wire drawn any more.
Mr.: EMiot was in favor of filing c.n..,,..
phcat'on to The snfiver Of Judge Chat. h,,, -
wac oppoied to the ftyIe Of the one rero-."t e
INC managers Iethey were To- refer ft. go: -,
10 committee OF The whole il X,onI5 r,r,t:t,,'