The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1805-06-11

HAL DC pabIiiEed from time to time" Is moi
. the account to be regular as well as the fate
ment! should have deemed It unneceii:,ry
f, TO have ipent word in 10 plain a point, had
not underftood that difficulty would proba
| bly, be made upon it. IF my contribution of this
part of the contribution be not admitted, & the
adjective 'big6" be giSeuexcluGtelyto to" crimes
and denied to- &c miideineanors" this orange alb
furdIty mutt eniue. That twher an officer Of the
government rs impeached for crime, he can
not BE- convicted unieis it proves to be hisl,
crine--but he may nevertheless be convicted
OF a trifdemeaaor Of the moi petty grade.
Obierve, FIR, the crimes with which thefe I" o.
ther high crimes, are claiTsd inthe contribution,
and we may learn forlrtbing of their character.
Ihey ttand IN CONNECTION with Is k,ibery and
corruption J" tried in the Game manner and fub-
Ilees TO the fame penalties. But if we are 70
ioie the. force and meaning of the word " kigb''
IN relation to nii,ieneanors, aud this difcrip-
non OF offences NUT be governed BY the mere
nearing of the term I" m!deIneanors," without
deriving any grade from the adjective, fti NV
petition remains unimpa.ed, that the offence,
whatever it is, which is the ground of mpeach-
ment, mum DC fuch an one as would fupport
an Indictment. MfdemeaBors," is legal
and technical term, well undeItood and defined
IN law ; and IN the contribution of legal inftru-
ment we mutt give the words their legal lignifi-
al
their .iuit and proper deception they are fynon-
imous terms, Is an act committed or omitted in
violation of aipn5He law, either forbidciing or
commencing it. By this tell let the conduct OF
the Respondent DC tried, and, by it, let him ftand
utilized or condemned.
Does not, fir, the court, provided by the
! contribution for the trial Of an Impeachment.
give us Tome idea of the grade OF offences in
tended for itsjurlidieion ? Look around you,
fir, upon this awful tribunal Cfiuffice--is it not
high and dignihed, collecting within itfclf the
iuftice and majefty of the American people ?
Was fuch court created--does fuch 4 court
fit to tcan and puniih paItry errors and indif.
cretions too iniignihcant to have name in the
penal cc3e. too patry for the noticeof a court
of Quarter feiions This is indeed employing
an elephant 10 remove az atom too minute for
the grafp OF An inject. sthe fenate of the u
nited States foemnly convened and held tuse-
ther in the prefence OF the nation to fix fan
dard of potenefs in judge, and mark the
precepts of judicial decorurn The honorable
gentleman who opened the profecution (Mr.
Randolph) has coatended for contrary doc
trine, and held that many things are impeach-
able that are not indiGtable. To iliufrate his
petition he itatcd the cafes of habitual drunken
nefs and profane fwearing on the bench, which
ne held to be objeco of impeachment and not of
indictment. l do not defre to oppofe nv OPT
mons on this court as Of any value. But fure-
| ~ could not heGtate to fay that both of the
cafes Put by the gentleman would be ind etable
] is there not known TO MS Clafs of offences,
not provided for indeed by the letter OF anv
fta'ute, but which come under the general pro-
lection which the law gives TO virtue, dccencv
and morals IN fociety. Any act which is cam
ira 6ono5 moreJ is ind6tabe as iuch. And II i.
10, not by act of Congrefs, but by the pure
| am .i,,l.sf lilo CT
which fome men would mad.y drive from orr
Jurisprudence, but which moi Grcelely pray
may live forever.
| II ] am correct in nv petition that nothing
is Improbable that is not alto indi6table, for
what acts then may man be indicted Ma,.
| 1t be on the mere caprice or opinion of any ten,
! twenty or one hundred men in the community
or mutt it not be on fome known law of the
| iociety in which he relides 1t muft unduefi-
onably be for fome offence either OF omifTion or
commifiion aganff iome ftatute of the United
States-or iome ftatute Of particular e ate, or
aganit the provliion of the common law. A.
! Rainit which of thtfe has the Respondent often
| ded What law of any of the defcriotions
have mentioned has he violated BY what is
he to be Judged, by what is he TO be iuftifed or
condemned, if not by fome known law of the
country /; & ifno fuch law is brought upon his
cafe; if fuch violation rfcs on this dav oftrial
In judgment aganit him, why ftdnds he here
at this bar as = criminal? Whom has he often
ded The Houfe of Reprefentatives-an is
| he impeached for this? l maintain as 4 moN
| important and indifpenlble principle, that no
! man fhould be criminaliy accufed, no man can
hc crimiraly condemned but for the violation
! oi iome known law by which he was bound to
govern himfcif Nothing is 70 neceiary to inf
tice and 10 fafety as that the criminal cod
| ihoald be certain and known. Let the Judge.
as well as the citizen, precifcly know the path
he is to walk in, & what he may or may not do.
Let not the fword trembe over his unconfcious
head, or the ground be fprcsd with duicklands
and deftruttion, which appear fair aud hafmlefs
to the eye OF the traveller. Can it be pretend
ed there is one rule of iuRice for a Judge and
another for private citizen and that while
the latter is protected from furprife, from the
malice or caprice of any man or body of men,
and can be brought into legal jeopardy only by
the violation of laws before made known TO him,
the latter IS 90 be expoicd TO punifhment with
out knowing his offence, and the criminality or
innocence of his conduct is to- depend not upon
tie law exiting at the time, but upon the OBI.
| Mons of a body of men to be collected four of
FIVE years after the trania6tion A Judge NAV
thus be impeached and removed from Office for
an a6t itritlly legal, when done, if any Hcufe
&c De-, Sc = =