The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1805-03-26
MONDAY, February ii, 1905.

examining witneiies, and that immediately after
their examination on the part of the profecu-
tion, hey might be predetermined by the coun-
fel FOR the accuied.
Mr. Harbe, hoped that no abfolute rule
would be adopted to that effect, as circumftan-
oes might arife that would juitify departure
frora it. The council for the Respondent would
endeavor to conform to the mode fuggelted,
without any particular rule. After few fur
ther remarks from MIR. Martin and Mr.. Nichol-
fon, it was agreed to wave any fpecific mott
on.
Mr.. Lezvi5 was called in when
Mr.. HARPER put to him the following quefi-
Did you n the fri trial of Fries make diff
tin6tion between retittance 70 particular law,
and the general law of the U. States, or foue
fpecial laws OF A peculiar nature, and fate your
intention to argue that point on the fecond tri-
al?
quetion the other dav precifely. But having
fnce looked At my notes, l find that that diff
tnction made snd urged.
EDWARD TLGHMAN Gtvorn.
was prefent at the circuit court of the Uni
ted States, for the diitr6t of Pennfylvania, held
on the 22d day of April, 1900. A very Mort
time after the opening of the court whether the
general paunel of Jurors had been called over
or not, l do not rscollec) Judge Chafe declar-
ed that the court had maturely conlidered the
law ariling on the overt acts, charged i'm the in
diSfment agaipe John Fries and that they had
reduced their opinion to writing he mention
ed that he underftood that great deal of time
had been confirmed on former trial, and that
in order to fave time, copy of the opinion of
thu court would be given to the attorney of the
diftri6t another to the council for the prifoner,
and that the jury fhould have third TO take out
with them. took no notes of what pal1ed
either on the hrft or fecond day. Fries was
tried on the third day, and having been appoint
ed with Mr.. Levy, council for Heavy and Get
man, indicted for treafon, and who were actual
ly tried on the 9th 2sth, deemed it my
duty TO attend the trial of Fries, to take notes
of the evidence, the arguments and the charge
Of the Judge. | do not r collect that Judge
Chafe faid any more on the frf dav
than what ] have mentioned previous TO
his throwing a paper or papers on the table
round which the bar ufually fit. The moment
the paper or papers were thrown on the table,
Judge Chafe expreTtd hirf.fin thefe words :: &c
Nevertheless, or notwithstanding this. I cam
not recolleet which exprsfiiun he ufed) ecoun
fel will he heard" TIE throwing of the Da
pcrs on the table and the addrefs of the ludce
caufed fome degree of agitation at the bar in
ilort time after the Judge ufrd the laft expref-
fou looked round and fsw Mr.. Lewis walking
from under the gallery, towards the bar, fteD-
oppohle the entrance, into The priGoner's bar.
Thepriforer as well as recolleEf, not being then
in court, hut being brought into court fOrre time
that morning, entered into conversation with
Mr.. Lewis, and as well as 7 can recoiletf, clur-
ing that conversation, Mr.. Dallas came into
court. MIR. Dallas and Mr.. Lewis had fome
conversation in my hearing, after which they
came forward to the bar; the paper as well as
can recOlie6t, was then handed by Mr.. Cald-
well. the clerk of the court n
Lewis cat his eye on the outGde of the paper
and looked down, as If he was coniidering
what 20 fay. He threw the paper from him,
as il appeared to me, without reading it, and
the moment he threw the paper down, fad,
sfmy hand Ihal never be ftaincd by receiving a
paper containing prejudged opinion,
pinior made NJ without hearing council" /
cannot recolIect which was the expre(fion, but
this was the frhtance. / have not tire eaft re-
collection that any thing palled on the frit day,
between the council for the prifoner and the
court for when Mr.. Lewis ufed thefe expref-
6ons, his f,ce was not turned TO the court, and
he fpoke with comfortable degree of warmth
the court FIT in the fouth part of the room, and
Nj Lewis Ct -hink) 'urned his face full to the
weftward, when he ufed thefe expreflions.
The paper law on the table comfortable time !;
after which Tome gentlemen ofthe bar took it
up, and or one copied it. Whether | took
the whole of it, and all the authorities cited,
cannot fay. The prifoner having been brought
into court, his council had good deal of con-
verfaton in my hearing, on the fubieef of fup-
porting or Abandoning his defence that con-
verflton appears 70 me to have been accurately
fated by MIR. Lewis and Mr.. Dallas. / do not
recoleGl why the prifoner was not put on his
trial that day, but the court adjourned between
IL and O'Clock. went home, and after Ia
king walk, on returning, faw the diftriGt at
torney on my teps. He alked me whether
would have any objection to delivering up the
copy which had taken Of the opinion of the
court. faid had no objection, and gave it
to him. That paper was not read on the frft,
or on any other day by the court, or any thing
ftated by the court, as the fubfance of it. On
the next morning, to wit the 23d, the prifon-
er was brought into court. The court a(ked
the prifoner's Gounfel, ifthey were ready to pro-
ceedto the trial Mr.. Lewis rofe and uttered
few words in order TO thew that they did not
mean to proceed with it. Judge Chafe here in
terupted MIR. Lewis-the particular expref-
fions ofthe Judge do not recoIe6t the fub-
ftance of them was, that the council were not
to conider themielves bound by the opinion
which the court had reduced to writing the day
before that the council were at liberty on both
fides to combat that opinion. Judge Chafe as
well as Judge Peters appeared to be very anxi-
Gus that the council fhould undertake the de-