The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1805-04-30
.-itemplatsd alteration of the judiciary law

~Nemplated alteration of the judiciary LAW
at fate Il did not mean to Rate that he |
4 Mr. Jetteifon was weak or feeble, but that
ae admipiffration or the government was 70.
This is the impreifion then had, and now have
with refpee to that part of the charge. But l
did DOT then fay, nor do now, that l ufe the
pyeciie words Of the judge but Ithink fol-
How his fpirit and his meaning.
Mr.. Nieboi/on. At the concluding part of the
charge did Judge Chafe recommend it TO the Jury
when they returned home to ufe their influence
to prevent the paaage of the judiciary bill, or
was that an inference from what he delivered
Mr.. MONTGOMERY. That part of the charge
was in the exprefs words, and not an inference
at all. recollect that ihortly after had a con-
veriation with feveral gentlemen, who concur
red with me in opinion that thefe exprefiions
were Nfed and recolleet that or the very day
the charge was publilhed in the Anti-Democrat,
or the day after, called thefe exprefIions to the
recollection of the fon of Judge Chaie, and OBJ
terved that thefe parts were omitted in the print
cd ftatement.
MIR. Harper. I am dehred by Judge Chafe to
make of this honorable court the requeft con-
tanned in the following letter, which / will
read:
Mr.. Harper here read the following letter of
Judge Chafe:
Mr.. Pre6dent,
remain any longer at this bar. 1t is with great
regret depart before / hear the judgment of
this honorable court. If permitted to retire,
lhall leave this honorable court with an unli-
mited confidence in its juftice; and beg leave
to prefept my thanks to them for their patience
and indulgence in the long and tedious exami-
nation of the witnei1es. Whatever may be the
ultimate decifon of this honorable coart,
confole myfelf with the reflection that it will be
the refut of mature delberation on the legal
teftimony in the cafe, and will emanate from
thofc principles, which ought to govern the
highet tribunal of jufice in the United States.
The PRECEDENT obferved that the rules of the
fenate did not require the perfonal attendance
of the Respondent whereupon Judge Chafe
bowed in very refpectful manner, and with
drew.
Mr.. HAY came again to the bar to explain
the motives which induced him to undertake
the defence of Calender. He fad he was not
without fome hope that his arguments againit
the unccnftitutionaity of the fedition law, al
though they would not be concIufive with the
court, would nevertheless have fome weight
with the jury, and might operate to produce
the acqsittal of Calender.
Mr.. Randolph. On behalf of the managers
have to requeft of the court, that further pro-
grefs in the trial be poftponed until tomorrow,
III order to give thofe gentlemen who follow,
time to dgeit, compare, and collate the great
volume of teftiuiony which has been given. We
ftall be ready to proceed tomorrow. There is
alto another reafon FOR this requet; we expeee
hourly fome important witneffes, and are in
hopes that they will make their appearance in
town before the next meeting of this court. IF
however, this fhou!d not be the cafe, we hall
proceed without them. IF they come, we pre-.
fnne we fhali be permitted to take the benefit
of their teftmony.
Prefdent. Iunderftand that gentlemen have
nothing further to offer.
MIR. Randolph. Not, FIR, at this time.
Mr.. Harper. i beg leave to fate that we do
not join in the motion for delay, though we
do not oppofe it.
Prefdent. Is the courfe of the arguments or
each fide underfood?
MIR. Nichofon. unde,ftand that the ma
nagers will open; that reply will be made by
the council for the Respondent; and that the
managers will then clofe.
Mr.. Key. This is the ufuaI courfe, and we
have no objection to it.
The court then rcfe.