The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1805-03-30
IMPEACHMENT OF JUDGE CHASE.
MONDAY, February IL, 1905.
Continued.
Feb. 10. (ePtds)
GEORGE HAY n,o,.x

SI-O\SC nay JyU0rd.
The greater part of the evidence am TO deliver
relates to what was fad by me as counie for T T
Calender, who wasindcfed for libel on the Pref
dent OF the United States and what wa. faid By on.
OF the judges; Tor do recollecf to have heard
the voice OF Judge Griffin any time during the tri
al In order to make this Gatenlent as accurate as
Poiiibe, as my memory is frong it is ueceary to
relor to itatement made by myfelf and the council
aiiociated with me in the defence of T. T. CaIlender
which now hold in my hand, and every nart 81
which according to my beR recollection !, COR
rect.
Mr. Hayet. here interrupted Mr.. Hay, and faid,
the witneis may refer to any thing done by himfel
at the time the occurrences happened, which he re-
iate' But fubmit it the court how corre4 If is
TO refer to what was not done BY himle or done at
the time.
The Proficient afked Mr.. Hay whether the note,
were taken by him.
Mr. Hay The ftatement WAS mad. by different
Perions. Some parts were made by myfrlf perhaps
the greater part; the ret by Mr.. Nicholas and
MIR. Writ. believe fhal be able to fate from, il
every material occurrence which took place at the
time With regard to thoie parts of the itatennent
not made by me, reference to them will call 70
my recollection the facts mentioned in fch parts If
fate any thing which do not diain6lly recollea
upon adverting to the fatement, | will explain the
actual htuation OF my mind on that point
Mr. NieboyoA If underltaHd the witnefs il is not
his intention TO give the paper in his hand a, evil
defce but merely refer to it for the purpole ol
refrefhing his memory.
mr.. Har6er. ! do not under1and the way in
which 1t is meant to uie the paper. | apprehend
that 1t is rule of evidence that nothing but notes
made at the time of the tranla6ions related can h.
ceived as evidence therefore am of opinion that
reference to this fatement is nadmilIble, becaufe
part OF IT made by Others and none of il made a,
the time.
mr.. ROdaty. When we advert to what ba, been
Hated by the witnes, who fays he does not mean 70
tate IN evidence any thing in the paper, of which he
has not independently OF it, dfind recollection
thnk 1t is within the law admit him to avail him
elt OF It, iaPPrehend that if had attended the trial
OF Calender; and had taken minutes and Others had
attended and not taken notes, if by recurring to INV
notes there ihould be recalled to their recoIee ion
iacts 10 dhtincy that they could lwear to them be-
iorea court, would be competent to admit their re-
terence to fuch notes
mn, CamPJeN enquired whether the objection
were not confined to that part Of the ftatement not
made by the wtnefs.
Mr. Ha,psr iaid the objection related to the whole
oft.
Mr. Campbell believed that witnefs might ufe apv
memorandum to refreh his memory and that il was
not neceiary that it hOud made at the point of
when the events happened. 1t is fucient if made at
time when his remembrance of the facts was corre9
With regard to that part not taken by himfelf. 4
he Peruied at time 70 lbortly after the events re-
lated as to be able determine it to be accurate and
now recognizes the memorandum to be the fame. il !.
lulhcient.
Mr.. Mayfia faid, he had been many years in the
practice of thelaw. Therues evidence were probsbv
different in different Rates. But he had always fun
poied that witnefs could be permitted to ufe a.
ny memorandum not made by himfelf, or at the tim,
OF the events related, it. He may before h.
comes into court eonfult any memorandum for the
purpoe oirelreihing his memory, but not in court.
The P,sfd-1f. The wtuefs propofes tn make uG
OF a memorandum under the circumstances, which he
has Rated The queftion is, fhall the wtneis be per
mltted to make uie Of il ?
Mr.. ddnm5. ann not prepared TO anfGer that
quel!ion at Prefen, not knowing the nature Of the mi
nues the witnefs Propofesto ule. I therefore NOV,
that the Senate retire before the quefon is Ia
ken.
The qusnion on retiring was taken, and, on divi
fion, loa.
Mr.. Hdoms faid he wilhed to fee the paper befor,
he voted.
The P,5fId alked Mr.. Hay whether it was il
his own hand writing
Mv HeJ replied that u was not blu, that II wa
written BY clerk from s,printed natement
P'sli1.n. Have you tlis parts made BY yourCel
fePsratel