The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1805-05-17
Cyo1unr 8.

ITS performance, and complete in all its hare.
iul consequences. Repentance even had tbert.
been any, conld have afforded 70 relief il CAME.
too late. As well might a man, after he had
. inilieted mortal wound upon another, ak 10
be forgiven, becaufe before the death of the
wounded he was brought to relent, from an
apprehension of the consequences. In nv opi-
mon, Judge Chaic had committed the IN nor
TO be repcntcd of.
AS tothe proffcred permiflion to the council
on the tecond day that they might proceed
without the reitr6tions before impofSd, il has
been my misfortune TO be unable 70 perceive
either any proof of diiroftion to recent on
the part of the judge, or any privileges to
the council which placed them or their client
upon ground more advantageous than that on
which they had before food On the contra
nv, think perceive in the whole Of The iudg-
es conduct taken together, on the fecond day,
deliberate tefgn to impofe upon the Under
Handing of thofe prefcnt, by exhibiting the ex-
ternal form - fairneis, Whit he continued TO
hold on Giccn the fnbltance of iniuffice. For
notwithstanding there appeared from his ey-
Preihons at hrf difpofition to permit the
council to argue the cauie without any refranlt.
yet 1t ought to be kept in conftant recollection.
that when brought to explain hmfef, the pc.
neral permfion which had been thus apparent.
given, was fubieaed to reffriGtions of very
ferrous import. The council were permitted
10 argue the law to the Jury, but the manner
IN which they ihould do 70 would be regulated
ny the court. The council were permitted to
lay down the law, but fhould not read cafes
whicn were not law. That common law ca.
les, and cafes under the aatute of treainns. but
PRIOR TO the revolution in England, wore NOT
law and Mould not be read. Look ut the con.
te9uence! The council might argue the law
to the jury, but were interoliGted from the u!e
or thote authorities, which in their opinion
pore mott ftrongly upon the cafe, and mon
winch, IT was within the knowledge of tb.
Judge, they had principally relied in the nrior
trial. They might lay down the law to the ill.,
ny, but ihoud not read cafes which were nor
law. And who was to determine whether th-
CHiss offered by council were or were not law
he Judge. And pray, fir, was not the right
OF the jury TO determine the law, as cfTe4uslly;
invaded by the judges taking upon himfelf to
determine each cafe as it was offered, as their
right was invaded by the Judges de.errnipin,.
upon the whole together? I maintain. FIR
that 1t is not the right of the Judge in criminal.
and Especially in capital caufes, to determine.
thaf any cafe is not law for if he can deter
nine that queftion as to Jingle authority. and
upon that ground wrcf it from the Jury, he
may do 70 AS to all, and thus as effcStuallv sho.
liih the great privilege of trial By iury. know
1t may be Objected to this reafoning, thai nm
ieis lone reftritton is impofed upon counfeI,
they may abufe their privileges BY reading anv
thing however inapplicable to the Jury. This.
mr., is TO fuppofe an extreme cafe, and it is ne.
yer correct to reafon from extreme cafes. 7.
is no proof aeaiaf privilege, that If is fi,h;ett
to be abufed. And there is fecuritv aqanft
extreme abifc in this privilege, from the regard
which profeiIional men necenarily feel for their
profefiional reputation
Here Mr.. Prefdent, we might clofe the ar.
gument upon the frt article. But it is NOT
poibhle no, fir, not poffibIe here to flop our
reflections. When werevew the ground which
has been already travelled over; when in that
review VIC heheld an American citizen fi1mn,on.
ed to the bar of juftice to undergo trial in
which his life is at fake, when we behold hid
Judge, contrary to all precedents and in viola
ton OF every feeling of humanity, pre-occu-
pying the only ground upon which the caf, ne
the accufed was defenfible, and cloGnp rron
him this only poilble avenue to Eafetv. truly
feel that my feeble powers of language are NOV
competent to Description of the fccne l.
mum re left to the ftrong impreiiion Of 6Isnce
For this tranfaction then in the name of the
merican people we denounce Judge CHAT. We
denounce him for invading their mott valuabI,.
privilege, tie trial byjuy. We denonnce hin,
TOR taking INTO his own unhaIowed hands. th,.
difpofal of the life of an American citizen ..sn3
we invoke the iuRice of the nation to exn;,ts
by the proper psnihment this NOT unholy fin
Tobe Continued.