The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1805-03-23

be heard by himfelf council in his defence That
was the conftutonal right of the jury hear
Eel the law well the facts that it was their
constitutional right to pats between the prifoner and
his country both, and that it rhe conitutional
right Of council be heard by the jury the law as
well as the facts. IL did deliver myfelf in thefe
prece words, am confident that the ubitance the
lane and that there is material difference in the
fenfe alto mentioned that conidered this great
conttuona right, which fhould never be furrender-
ed or ficrfesd by Ofthis expreflion 1 am fure.
And added that never had, nor ever would in a
criminal proiecution addres either the law
or the faa. In this find however that I was mila-
ken; for tince recollea though from the hurry of
the moment did not then, ipance where in a cr-
minaicaie didaddrefs thejury point ofaw, which
was feparate and diaina from the facts Judge Pc
tiers remarked that harm could arile from the pa
pers Containing the opinion of the court they, or
the copies had been called in collected and either
burnt or deilroyed. To this anfwered, that al
though the papers might be deltroyed, the O.
pnion which the court had formed, ithout hearing
the ProDers council, tll remained and could not be
eraied from their minds, and would be injurious to
my Client the jurors being prefen and having heard
what had pafed] as if the papers had not been def
troyed.
When Judge Chare faid that we lhould read no
common law authorities or deoifons under the fta-
tute of Edward the third, before the revolution in
England, faid that we meant TO contend that what
was the law of treaon in England under the head of
levying war, not in all refpeas law here that
we did not mean 20 cite any cafes before the Enph
revolution to prove what the law of treafon was or
for any other purpofe than to thew the dangerous
lengths that the Judges had gone while they
rupt and dependla; the crown that, although
hnce the revolution in England the Judges had been
independent and upright they had in variety of par
ticuars held themielves bound by train of former
decons which had taken place in bad times but that
the Judges IN this country in the contribution of
nAxU nttrtit,, t<xF L.E. Il.
trealon, were not bound by any of the decirons or
contributions which had taken place in England un-
der the itatue OF Edward the third and that the a-
thorities meant cite intended as guard a.
ganit the dangerous contributions which had prevail
ed in that country 1t therefore to thew
what the law was, but to guard againt the dangers
OF conitrueive treafon and to thew that our Judges
were not bound by the Engfh deciGons, that we had
read them before & intended to read them again
This principle we contended for BEFORE and
meant to contend for again and we were princi-
paly led to it, from Mr.. Sitgreaves, who had
aied the diitrict attorney the former trial. hav-
ing begun by Eating that the words of conaitu-
tion refpecting treafon taken from the 25th Ed
ward Sd, and therefore the people of this country
had, by adopting the words of that ltstute adopted
all judicial determinations under it," This petition
we could not agree to- and the cafes which had been
read were merely intended to thew and guard aganR
the dangerous lengths which we hould be carried
II 1T were admitted TO be Judge Chafe afked if
the council offered read cafes from any foreiqn
country, mentioning everal with whom we had ne
yer been connecfed) the court to permit then,
We in reply faid that had cited fuch cafes on
the former occaiions, and it was not likely that we
fhoud attempt 1t
Finding that Mr.. Dallas and were determined NOT
60 proceed in the prifoner's defence, JUDGE Chafe
faid if we intended erlbarra the court we hould
md ourielves miitaken, they would proceed with
out us, and by the blqing of God render the pron-
er as much uice, if he had the aid of our council
or ahttanee Beth the Judges, therefore, on the fe-
cord day even took pains induce us TO proceed in
the defence with liberty so through the whole quef
ton rs well in relation the law he facts; but we
absolutely refuie, believing likely that any ar
guments could urge, would change the opnio,, of
the already formed detroy its effects and
afo believing that after what had taken place, the
life of Fries ifhe fhould be convicted, would be
expofed lefs jeopardy without aid than it would
be, if we n,ould engage in his defence.
Mr.. Ni-5syon. You fay that on the frit trial of
Fries you allowed the ulual latitude. What do
you mean by ufnal lattudei
Mr.. Lesci. We were allowed to addrefs the Jury
on the law well the facts We were allowed
the privilege of reading the jury all fuch law autho
rites as thought applicable, and might under
the direction of the tend fatisy them, that
the doctrine contended for the part Of the proec
ton well founded. We met with no ref
traint interruption, having, that know Of given
occa(on for either
Mr.. Nie5oJ0n. Were you on the irft trial allowed
TO read the itatutes of the United States!
Mr. Lryvis. Unquetionably-T have the notes in
my pocket from which fpoke that occaGon, which
/ can produce if delired.
Mr. NieboJou Were you allowed to read cafes
before the revolution well as fnce J
Mr. Le7rit. We were we did it to thew the ex-
travagant lengths which conitru6five treafon had
been carried, and not what the law actually was
In a1l7osy TO an i1feyrogatory,
Mr. Le7vis faid that he didnot read the opinion of
the court which had been handed or thrown down
that he had never read it in his life.
Mr.. RaadoIpb. If not the olde are you not an old
practitioner at the BAR and have you not been fire.
quently employed in criminal cafes
Mr.. Lezvis. ] was admitted to practice in the court
of Common Pleas in November IVA, and in the Su-
prenle in April IT'S, & have been employed in
apretty extenfive practice almoff ever fnce. mmedi-
ately after the Britif left Philadelphia in l77s was
engaged for hundred and fifty three perfons char
ged with treafon mifprifon Of treafon. defended
alnloR every man Of them that was tried and fnce
that time have been concerned in perhaps more ca
pita cafes, particularly for reafon than any other gen.
tlenian in Pennsylvania compared with our bufnef.
in other relpe6s
Mr.. Randoi5b Did you ever fee fuch proceed
ing that which took place the bench in the cafe
of Fries did YOU fee any thing before induce
you &c abandon The defence Of your client
~ L