The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1805-03-30

whether he ever knew an innanee, in which, in a
cafe imilar TO that of Calender, punhable only by
line and imprisonment, capias ilued.
Mr.. Hay. ought to pren,ife, that this queftion
relates to branch OF Jurisprudence which have no-
much attended TO, although lome time fince acted
as proiecutor for the tare for of its counties
have never known Jingle iuitance, IN which ca
pias has been awarded in the firt nance. believ.
the invarable practice is to iiiue luminous, and |
believe it is not cuitomary in Virginia try caue
at the iecond term, when the party appears and
pleads.
Mr.. Rando,ab. lift is not the practice at the fe-
cond term, do YOU mean that it is at the firft
Mr.. Hay. No Sir, the preentment is found at
the frit term the luminous ifues returnabe to the
next at the fecond term the iue is made up and the
trial comes OH at the ubiequent term-This believe
is the ordinary mode of proceeding in Virginia.
MIR. RG"dopS Finding that the law of Virginia
was not condered as applicable, did you move, and
inpPort the motion by argument, for continuance,
founded on the affidavit filed by the accuied and what
were thoie arguments
MIR. Hay. do not know whether can na,e accurate
y all the arguments urged for continuance The
argument was certainly in part founded the afIida
Wit OF the traverier. He tated that he wanted docu
ments which he could not simultaneously procure. and
material witnefes who reGded at a great dRance.
Ii | recollect rightly, itated when Calender was
hrt carried into court that prepared 10 df-
cuffs the important queition whether a Jury had A
right to determine the conltiturionality of law
alto Hated the cafe TO be one ,har profecn-
ton for libel had never before occurred in VIRGINIA.
and that the gentlemen of the bar were not matters of
the fubjec and that therefore wihed time 70 look
into 10
Mr.. CHARLES LEE was here introduced in,o
court as council for Juice CLaf
MIR. HLrper. In your examination in chief YOU pat
ed that you defended the caue and not the man w.
are not capable of understanding your meauiny and
beu won't m pxr,la tbo f.,
or it fome other caufe?
Mr.. Hay 1t was the caule OF the contribution, and
did not mean to offend Calender farther than he was
connected with thar caufe.
Mr.. Harper. Your objea appears to have been to
Thew that the law under which he was indicted was
unconstitutional
MIR. Hay That was great caule
Mr.. Harper Not the lole one
Mr.. Hay. had prevoufly made IN my mind that
II ppoiecuton ilould take place in Virginia under
that law, for one would fep forward and offer NV
fervices to the peron who ihoud be feeSted as its
firf victim.
Mr.. Harper. You faid that you referred, when ma
king motion for continuance, generally To the law
but not specifically to the law of Virginia
MIR. Hay. My meaning was that did not quote
the prece title of the a9, but made general refer
ence to it.
Mr.. Harper. Without citing the particular law I?
MIR. Hay. Without citing it, made no other than
general reference to the law
Mr.. Harper. Do you recollea, whether on the
fubjea of col Taylor's teimony, Judge Chafe applied
to Mr.. Nelion the attorney of the dfria TO deter
mine whether the teitimony fhoud be admitted?
Mr.. Hay. 1 have fome indifina recollection Of
fome fuch thing
MIR. Harper. Did not Judge ChaCe offer to pot
Pone the cauie for month more
MIR. Hay. have recollection of flch an offer ::
it would have been the with of the council for the ac
cufed to have obtained that delay | know thar, in
consequence OF an impre1iou on my mind that a pon
Ponement could not be obtained devo.ed NV davs
and nights make myfelf acquainted with the fubea
previous to the day when the trial came on have
no recollection ofiuch an offer if had 70 undeRood
1t at the time, ihould have avaied nvlelf of il.
MIR. Harper. Did the counf.l of Calender aOe
for aPoftponement, independently of continuance to
the next term
MIR. Hay. do re-ollea that thew did
The Preiiasnt. You fay fome converration apnear-
ed to pats between judge Chafe and rdge Griffin :
did you hear 70 much to underland the fubftance
oft ?
Mr. Hay. No fir.
Prsjfdsnt. How then did YOU draw the inference ,
Mr.. Hay. From the bulinefs then br,r th.m.
Prsfdent. You fpoke ola witners 60 = Nv the
name of Rind Did he appear willing - eve tea-
monyl
Mr.. Hay. He did not appear unwilling. The
objection to his teltimony made by myfelf
ITO Be continued.