Berkeley and Jefferson intelligencer. [volume] (Martinsburg, Va.) 1802-1810, 1805-03-29

both moral and legal; to charge him
with ii WAS, therefore, liE,l!ous.
I Admitting, therefore, these two rtra-
: ses to constitute orc distinct Charge, !nd
one entire oE-ncc, this respondent en-
! sld,rs and states TO be law, that tho MS
! tih> alton VIII, h wen: to part oni, Of The
; Cf"nte> Could be received. j he Flea
OF justification must ALWAYS Snswe- the
whole cha Sc, or it is bad on the ,.tmur-
rer; for th;a plain reason, that tie OBJ
81 .lcct Of the plea 10 10 show the part, : in
hoCenCc and he Cannot be innocent, If
tie actus:.ri, n against HIM Lc supported
in part. Where the matter OF offence
be & wen in evidence, without being for
ma!lv pleaded, the same rules prevail.
he defence must be eEthe same nature,
and equal! complete in one case a. in the
other. ! he only difference is in th@ man.
ner Of bringing it forward. Evi:,nce,
therefore, winch goes only to justly TIE
charge IN part, cannot be received. 1t
IS not indeed necessary, that the whole
OF this evidence should be gwen by one
witness. The justification may consist
OF several facts, some, Of which MAY he
proved by on person and some by ano-
Their. But proof, in such cases, must
be offered as to the whole, or it cannot
be received.
In the case under consideration, no
proof was offered as to the whoi7 mat
ter contained in the tw tltth article. No
wltnrss except ;Se a aforementioned Iohn
Tor, Was produced or mentioned.
When witness is offered to a CClrt ana
jury, it is the RI Chg and dn:v Of the :colrt
to require statement of the matters in
tended to he proved bv him. This is
the lnvar!abte practice Of all our courts,
and was done most properly by this res
2ondent and his colleague, on the coca
sion in qur.t10A. From this statement
gwen b, th,,tr cv~r~er'S counsel, OF what
they expected t. prove bv the said Wit i
ness, 1t appeared that his testimony
could have no possible application to any
part OF the ln~!i>'mrnt, except 1hr twelfth
charge aforementioned, and hut very
weak and im..l;trtt application to that
paw" = IN NNN'' ~ Cl'lCN - " " a.
their right and ,5utv, re cues; ! that the
questions Inenht d to " It III ~ VII
ness, should he reduce ! - >.'.@,r, and
submitted to ,he;r !n~~r, ton 50 4, to
enablc them To IuIIe more 2, ,,ps,eiv.
how far those q s~.tio"S acre pr T. r ..nt.
admissible. This h>inE done, IN. o'.c.-
tons were of The fo!lo" lng tenor 40 e.
feet:
1st. Did vow ever near Mr.. hdA~.
express any Es"' tmcnts lH' Durable to mo-
narchN, or 'ariE,o>rA,y, and what were
they"
I'd. " Did YOU ever hear Mr.. Adams,
while Vice President express hi, ul,Ap-
probation OF the funding sHstcm:"
Sd" DO YOU know wneth-r Mr.. A.
dams did not IN the wear 1894 vote a.
gainst the sequc.tratIon of British d,H,s,
and also agains, the Lill for suspcnding
intercourse with Great Britain :"
l he second question, it is manifest,
had no thing to do with the twelfth thIrr-;
TOR MIR. AttAms's appreciation OF eti>-fs-
probation of the funding sv.t-n ,o"ji
IIOE nave VIC uIOSl ICHlOtc lcl zen 70
prove that he was an arrist6,r4t, tr k4L
proved faithful and service ale to the
British interest. In th4trntoilhep u1-
LEGATION with furnishes the matter of
the thirteenth has - in the n.lictrnrn:, |
ii is indeed stated dat Mr.. Ad4m.,
" when but in SECONDARY station, {. r.
cured the funding, sNs1-m,"'. but these
words are in the m.elvc. who'll, inmate
nal and noattemUt was made, nor al, |
evidence "Hrrs 1 or spoken Of, to prov,
the truth Of the other matter cont.nrd ir !
the thArteeHth charge. t~a.trom th,m
{ onne ZION with that ether matter, thu, |
these words could alone derive any I'm
portAHce and consequently their Truth
or ial'ehosd was altogether i'nmteriAl.
while that other matter remained un9ro.
we'd. This question, therefore, whlch
went solely to those immAterisl woods,
was clearly inadmi.sibte. The third