The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1805-04-02


purpofe if it was true in criminal cafes. Mr..
Hay proceeded very little way further, Before
ne was again interrupted by Judge Chafe. MIR.
Hay, who had been during the caufe frequently
interrupted, then folded up his papers, and ap-
peared to be retiring from the bar. MIR. Chaie
addreiling him, faid, go on fir. No fir, faid
MIR. Hay, l will not go on. What, fir, fad Mr..
Chafe, will not you proceed with your caufe.
No, fir, faid MIR. Hay: my mind is made up,
aud will not proceed. The Judge told Mr.
Hay he need not be captious. Mr.. Hay repli-
ed, he was not captious. The Judge faid go
on, fir; proceed, and you fhalI not again be in
terrupted, you may fay what you pleafe.
Mr.. Hay, MIR. Writ, and myself, left the bar
at the fame moment, and cannot fate what
happened after with any degree of certainty
Calender was however convicted by the Jury.
Mr.. Randolph. When you obferved to the
court, at the time you were directed TO reduce
your queftions to writing, that the attorney for
the United States had not been required to do
the fame, was there any reply made by Judge
Chafe
Mr.. MebOlas-It was, I believe, ftatcd by
Judge Chafe that the attorney for the United
States had at the opening fated what he ex-
peGted to prove by his witnefIes.
Mr.. Randolp6-Did you hear any offer made
BY the court to poitpone the trial of Calender
for month?
Mr.. MeboiaJ-No fir, did not hear fIch an
offer, and never heard it fuggefted until with
IN 4 week or two, that fuch an offer was alledg-
ed to have been made. IF fuch an offer had
been made, am fure we fhould have accepted
1t, as know very well that pofponement
would have been the mott acceptable thing to
us, except continuance until the next term
MIR. Randolph. Did the opinion of the court
appear to be given after confulting with the diff
triet judge.
Mr.. Nicholas. never faw Judge Chafe con-
fult Judge Griffin but once, and that was after
he had declared Col. Taylor's evidence mad
mlfiibe; he turned to Judge Griffin, and ak
ed whether his brother Judge agreed with him,
to which Judge Griffin afIented.
Mr.. Randolph. Did Judge Chafe make ufe
of any rude, mutual, and contemptuous expref-
lions to the council, and what were they?
Mr.. Nicholas. | recolle6t when he over
raed Col. Taylor's evidence, he faid, my coun-
try has made me a Judge, and it is my duty to
pronounce the law, the evidence of the wtnefs
lsinadmif1ible, the councillor the traverfer know
it be 70, but they with to deceive and mllead
the populace. take the Responsibility of this
decifion on myfelf, and fay the evidence cannot
be received
AT another time, Mr.. Chafe told the council,
that they had all along miftaken this bulinefs,
and kept prefiing their miRakes on the court |;
and fad repeatedly that what we urged as law,
we knew not to be law. Many remarks of a
hmilar nature were made, and in many infan-
ces the Judge feemed TO endeavor to throw RI
dlcule on the council. When Mr.. Hay was en-
deavorng to prove that the declaration in the
indictment, that the libel was of the tenor and
effect following, held the profecutor to itri6
and literal recital, MIR. Chafe faid that it was not
law, the council have contended, faid he, that
the recital ought to have been q,er6atim ct Htera-
NM wonder, continued he, that they had not
contended pum6natim alto. In another in
ftance, when Mr.. Hay WAS adducing authori-
ties to thew that the title of the book ought to
have been ftated in the indictment, Mr.. Chafe
obferved he knew there were cafes in which the
title was rccited. / remember one, continued
he, in the cafe called the Nun in her Smock
but though 1t was recited in that cafe, it was not
necehary, nor is it 70 in any cafe 1t is difficult
IN language to convey an adequate idea of Mr..
Chafe's manner; but in thefe and fimilar in
ftances, from the farcafic way in which he ex-
preiied hmfHlf, it was evidently his intention to
throw ridicue on the council.
Mr.. Randolph. You fay that on the rejection
of col. Tayor's evidence, Judge Griffin was
confulted by judge Chafe was he confulted be-
fore, or after the opinion of the court was pro-
nounced?
Mr.. Nicholas. 1t was after
N.Y. NUHHoLPD. IN lpeaKlHg OF the dlftrlct at
torney, who, he faid, had in opening the cafe
ftated the purpofe for which he meant to intro
ducc the witneiies, do you recollea that he
laid zOe were not bound TO do this, and by the
word sOe identifying himfelfwith the public pro-
fecutor?
Mr.. Nicholas. Irecolled that Judge Chafe
IN the courfe Of the trial ufed the term zve in
the manner alluded to; but do not recolleGt
with certainty in what part of the trial it was.
Mr.. Randolph. Were you attorney general
of the fate of Virginia at that time?
Mr.. Mieb0iaJ. was, Sir.
mr.. Randolph. Did judge Chafe apply the
ePIthet young men or young gentlemen, to you
and the other council for the traverfer?
Mr.. Nieboiat. 1 do not perfea recoleet
whether he faid young men or young gentle
men. believe the latter, and as applied to me,
1T was true, for was then very young man.
Mr.. RandoLbb. Is it the practice in Virginia
to Hue capias to take the body of the party
on prefentmentS for mifdemeanors at the term
when the prefentmeHt is made or the indictment
found?
Mr.. NieboiaJ. BY our aet of anrembly the
proceedings on an indictment or information for
a midemeanor, is by luminous returnabIe to the
next term, and if the luminous is returned exc
cuted, and the party does not appear, capias
IS awarded retnrnable to the Proceeding term.
1.-THE party comes in and pleads, his plea is re-
ceived, and the caufe ftands over to the next
term.
Mr.. Raadolpb. Did you ever know the party
~ In. .,f. .f..Ia =