The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1805-04-04
IMPEACHMENT OF JUDGE CHASE.
TUESDAY, February 10, 1905.
continued. J
JOHN THOMPSON MASON Ezvo,u.

|
JOHN THOMPSON MASON fzyorn
! Mr.. RandOlbb. 1t has been commended on
the part of the refpondent, that the ouo au;,uo,
or the aniN11' que determines the guilt or inno-
cence CT an action ; now, if the quo amino
with which he went down to Richmond to
execute the fedition law, can be ihown. II
| will have an important bearing on his conduit
L with therefore to af,c the wintefs this ouefti-
on: Did you ever hear Judge Chafe, previ-
Gus to the trial ofCallender, utter any exprefii-
on, and If any, what was it, on the fubie6t OF
Callender's profecution, or refpett.g the bool,
called the Profped Before Us; did he fay
the council at the Virginia bar were afraid to
prefs the execution of any law, and particularly
the fedition law /; did he fay he had copy of
that book, or what did he fay State the cir
c,nntances particularly?
Mr.. MaIou. The qucttion refers to circum-
itances of which I have but an indfinc recol.
lection, and which happened in way, which
rendersit extremely unpieafant on my part to
relate them. Judge Cha!e preiided in the cir
cut court held at Annapolis in the fpring of the
year SOC; during the term man by the name
of Saunders, was tried for larceny and found
guilty. After fentence was palled upon him,
he was taken out of court to receive il. The
preis OF the people being very great, the Judg-
es and myfelf were detained within the room.
Judge Winchefer, Judge Chafe and myfelf had
conversation, altogether of a iocular complex
ion. / think it was juft after he delivered his
vaedi6torv, but how to connect the circum-
| frances at this time, DO not know. remem-
Der, however, that he aiked me my opinion of
the book called the Profpe1 Before Us; told
him had not feen il, raud from the character
had heard of it, Inever wiii:ed to fee If. He
told me in reply, that Mr.. Luther Martin had
TENT COPY tohim, 6; had fcored the parts that
were hbellous, and that he would carry it to
Richmond with him 4 proper fnbieGt for pro-
iecution. There was good deal of converia-
ton beiides, but do not recole9 if. There
was one exprefiion, however, that he ufed.
which jnft occurs TO my memory, and which
will repear, that before he left Richmond, he
would teach the people TO diitinguifh between
the liberty and licentiouinefs of the preis He
faid that he was as fincere friend to the liter
ty, as he was an enemy to the licentioufnefs of
the preis. There was a fentiment, he exprefIed,
which cannot undertake to give in his pre-
ciic words, that ifthe commonwealth or its in
habitants were not too depraved to furniih iu-
ry of good and respectable men, he would Ger
tainly puniih Calender. do not precifelv re-
collect the words never repeated this con.
verfation before, and feldom or ever after il
occurred, thought of it.
JOHN HEATH csvo,n.
During the trial of. T. Calender, attend
ed at the court in Richmond rs one of the bar.
had occation to apply 20 the court for an in
junction. The motion not having been decided
upon, | went round TO Crouch's, where Judge
Chafe lodged, and found him in his chamber A.
lone, ia which thought myfelf very fortunate
We then talked over the application had
made the day before for an injunction while
talking on it, Mr.. David M. Randolph, the
then MARTIAL, ftcpped in with paper in his
hand. The Judge accofted him, and afked
what he had in his hand. He faid that he had
the PANEL of the petit jury fummoned for the
trial of Calender. This was after the india-
ment was found by the grand jury. After Mr..
Randolph had mentioned that it was the Dan-
mel Oft the petit jury that he had in his hand.
Judge Chaie Immediately replied, have you anv
oil thofe creatures called democrats on the pan
nel-Mr. Randolph heftated for moment.
and then faid he had not made any difcrimina-
| ton IN fummoniug the petit Jury. Judge ChaCe
fad, look it over, Sir, and if there are any OF
that defcription, ftrike them Off This is all
know of this affair.