Berkeley and Jefferson intelligencer. [volume] (Martinsburg, Va.) 1802-1810, 1805-02-22

was IN favor ofth motion 70 refer the
report to committee Of the whole, aud
hoped that they should adopt such a re-
plication as was worthy Of ,hu house. If
the question should be taken upon agrees
ing to the replication reported by the
Managers he should give it his decided
negative. The replication was undig-
ni6ed and Improper. 1t asserted that
the answer Of Judge Chase contained un-
truths and srasions. This was not the
fact. In hi. opinion, it contained .
correct d atement of facts, and with
few exceptions principles correct and ar
guments Inanswerahle.-The replicati-
on declared also that Judge Chase was
guilty up3 every article Of impeach-
ment Therefore no member who voted
against enft~ Article Of impeachment,
could in his opinion vote with propriety
in favour Of the replication. He hoped
they would refer the subject to a COM
mittee Of the whole house, in order that
they might not act in precipitate man
ner upon subject of such importance.
Mr.. J. Randolph hoped the motion of
the gentleman from Connecticut [Mr.
X. G. to refer the report to committee
of the whole house would not prevail.
He did believe that an agreement to the
motion would be virtual refusal on the
part Of the house to proceed any farther
with the prosecution ofthe impeachment.
He was not surprised that the gentleman
from Connecticut, who had heretofore
deemed this subject as unworthy of dis.
cussion, should endeavour in this man.
ner to destroy the prosecution, and to
effect that indirectly which he could not
DO directly. What were the facts in the
present case3 Early in the session the
House of Representatives had exhibited
articles of impeachment against Samuel
Chase to the Senate. After as long 4
time as could be given him for the pur.
pose Of putting in his answer he had come
forward with one Of which no accurate
description could be given. fthey were
to go into a committee Of the whole and
adopt replication equally as long a. tho
answer, there would be no possible
chance Of finishing the prosecution at the
present session. After, at the last sesA
sion, coming forward and pressing for 4
trial, and complaining of denial ofjus-
tice on account of its not taking place
the respondent was now endeavourin8
to postpone the trial until the next seSsi-
on. The Managers had but one Of two
courses to pursue, either to file a general
replication to the answer, which they
had done, OF to file specialoreplication
which would have been = virtual relin-
quishment of the prosecution FOR the pre-
sent session. lie hoped the house would
agree to file general replication and
proceed to the trial as soon as possible,
and that the impeachment would not bo
wire drawn any more.
MIR. Eliot was in favour Of fling a ge-
neral replication 70 the answer sf Judge
Chase, but he was opposed to the stylo
of the one reported BY the Managers. II
they were TO refer the subject to CONE
mittee of the whole it would probably b
taken up Tomorrow, and the discussion
would not last more than one day, and
the trial would not be delayed until the
next session as was said by the gentleman
from Virginia { MIR. J. Randolph;) He
still hoped that the house would proceed
in manner worthy Of that body. 81
- Mr.. r. Gris.poL|asted, ifthe impeaeh-
nient had been wire drawn as was repre-
sen,ed bv the gentlemen from Virginia
(Mr. ]. Randolph by whom had it been
done! I, certainly was not by him.
Since the subject had been first under
confederation he had not occupied thirty
minutes of the time Of the house upon it.
He wished not to protract the trial, as
he conceived that the person accused and
the public were both entitled to an im-
media,e decision. But upon a subject
Of so much importance, upon a report
drawn in such an unusual stile as the pre-.
sent, he deemed it improper to act in so