The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1805-07-02
pleanii,gs Of Ch,n.cet,
ON THE
IMPEACHMENT OF JUDGE CHASE.
FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 90.
(Continmd.J
Mr.. KEY.
Mr. Proficient,
MIR. KEY.

mr.. Proficient,
1 rife to make fome obfcrva,ious on the &.
cond, third and fourth articles of the i'm
peachment. thall not apologize for the man
ner in which | fhal difcharge dp.y which !
have voluntarily undertaken, but merely repre,
mat indiPohtion has prevented my giving The
iubject that attention which it f1crits-It will
he at once perceived, that thefe articles reIafe
to the trial of Calender. Before, however.
go INTO an examination of the fecond article. i,
may be proper TO notice the lituation in which
the Judge found hinfelf and the fate of the
pubic mind at the time. The fedition law was
pated IN the year root immediately arreh-
ed the public attention, and froncIy aeifated
the public feelings. In the fate of Virsinia il
was peculiarly obnoxious many Of the mon
respectable characters confdered it AS uncon-
itItutlonal, and as violation of the liberty of
the preis NOT deemed it impolitic while
Tome Uewe1 1t as falutary reffraint on the IL
centIouineis OF the prefs more calculated to pre-.
ierve than to deffroy it. In this fate of the
public mind, 1t became the duty of the ref1on-
dent, in the ordinary Alignment of judicial die.
trics, to go into the diftri6t of Virginia. where
he was entirely ftranger, to carry the laws in.
10 execution: 1t is fcarcely neceGary TO OBJ
iefVe, that when laws are confdered obnoxious.
nuch Oh the odIum attending them inevitably
tails on thote who carry them into efec. In
May 1900, judge Chafe went TO Richmond r.
hold court and foon after it was in FELTON,
the grand jury found prefentment and after.
wards bill againft James Thompfon Calender
Tor an Infraction of this law, in publi1ino the
book entitled The Profpect Before Us, which
brought into liue its confitutionality. Profef-
hoha men of talents, carried along bv FIN. tide
OF public opinion, volunteered their f.rvices in
defence of;he acculed aud every effort was
e%hauited to wreft the decifion from the refpon-
oeht. Exceptions were accordingly taken at G.
very itage or the cafe, and when the jurors were
oroughtto the book, quefton arofe which
forms the foundation Of the charge contained
IN the iecond article. I will in the frft place
read the article then fate the law and the
tact M the cafe referred TO and thew that If
both are againft us, hiIl the Respondent is not
guilty OF the charge contained in il.
The ieCond article Rates "that, nror,nfed
by iimiIar fpirit of perfecution and iniuGice.
at circuit court of the United States. held AZ
Richmond, in the month Of Nav 1900, for
the ciitnct ct Virginia, whereat the faid Samu.
el Chate preiided, and before which certain
James Il. Calender was arraigned for libel ON
John Adams, then prelidcnt of the United States.
the laid Samuel Chafc, with intent to opprefs
and procure the conviction of the faid Gsller.
der, did oyer-rule the objection of fohn Bl0-rtf.
one OF the jury, who wifhed 20 b. sxcu(ed from
ieryIrg or the fsid trial, becauGe ne had made
up his MUD, as to The publication from ;ghicb
the words, charged to be libeIious, in the in.
dIetment, were extracted and the is,d Raft,
was accordingly fworn and did frce on tie fa;J
iGry by Whole verd'tf The psi(oacr was fobcs.
queotlY conyi6ed."