The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1805-07-30


The word 20 crimry' rs diffinguifhed from mfr
demeanor, is applied TO offences of more ag-
gravated nature, tie word "bigh," therefore,
mutt certainly equally apply to mifdemeanors as
10 crimes. Nay, FIR, am ready togo further,
and fay, there may he inifanccs OF very b:g5
crimes and midemeauors, for which an officer
ought to be inipeachcd, and removed from Of
fee; the crimes ought 10 be fnch rs relate to
his Office, ar which tend to cover the perfon,
who committed them, with tmbitnde and inta-
NV fuch as thew there can be no dependence
on that integrity and honor which will fecure
the performance of his official duties.
Biz we have been told, and the authority Of
the Rate Of Pennsylvania has been cited, by one
hon. mans-er (Mr. Rodney in fupport of the
petition, that judge may be impeached, con-
victcd, and removed from Office, for that which
s not indctabie, fo- that which is not violasi.
or Of any law. SIX.
What, fir, can Judge be impea:hed and de-
prived of Office, when he has done nothing
which the laws at his country prohibited Is
not deprivation of office a r lnilhmcnt Can
there he pnniihment inflicted where there is no
crime Snppofe the Houft of Representatives
to impeach for conduct not eyiminaEthe g.
nate to convict, doth that change the law No,
the law can oniv he changed by bill brought
forward by one Hcute ia certain manner, NJ
tented to by the other, and attro7'ed BY THE Pre-
.fDeaf. Impeachment and conviction cannot
change the law, and make that pun;k5abie which
was.nof 6etore criminal.
1t is true, it often happens that the good of
the community, requiresthat laws ihou!d b. PAT
fed, making criminal! and cxpo!ing 70 pun;th-
o,ent conduct, which an.ecedently was not pun
Unable; but even in thofc cafes, government
has power 10 punilh acts anteee3eUtig done !;
IT can only punifh thofe acts done after the en-
astion Of the law. The contribution has dec!ar-
ed, no ex pcf .faflo law fflall be pafied."
Should fteb principle be once admitted or
adopted, could the officers of government ever
know how to proceed Admit that the Honfe
of Representatives. have right to impeach for
acts which are not contrary to law, and that
thereon the Senate may convi6t, and the officer
he removed, you leave your judges and all your
ether officers i; tshe sercjy of he prevailing par
~. You will place them much in the unhappy
htuation rs were the people of England during
the conteit between the white and red rotes,
while the doctrine of constructive treafons pre-
vailed. They mutt be the tools or the victims
ofthe victorious party.
fpeak not, fir, with view to cenfure the
principles or the conduct of any party, which
hath prevailed in the United States ince our re-
volntion, but with to bring home to your feel
incs what may happen at future time. In re-
publican governments there ever have been,-
there ever will be conflict of parties. Mutt an
officer, for inftance Judge, ever be in favor Of
the ruling party, whether wrong cor right ? Or
looking forward to the triumph of the minority,
mutt he, howeve, improper their views, ae with
them! Neither the one conduct or the other is
To be iuppofed but from a tota! derelicton of
principle. Shall then Judge, by honefly per-
forming his duty, and very politely thereby Of
Tending both parties, be made the vitf;m of the
one or the other, or perhaps of each, as they
have power? No, fir, conceive that Judge
ihould always coniider himfelf fafe while he vio-
iates no law, while he conlcientiou(lv difcrar-
ses his duty, qvbon,eser he may diipieafe there
{ BY.
But an hon. manager (Mr. CampbeID hath
read 10 us an authority to prove, that Judge
cannot in England be proceeded aganA by in
dittment for violation of his official duties but
only in Parliament, or by impeachment his au-
thority was the new edition OF Jacobs Law Die
tonary. Let me he INDUCED with reading to
this hon. court the cafe from II Coke, the cafe
OF Floyd and Barker, TO which jacob refers, and
Ii will be found that the reafons there aligned,
however correct they might be rs 10 Judges in
England, can have no poHible application to the
Judges of the United States Here Mr.. Martin
read ,he following part of the third refoluton in
that cafe, to wit:
1t was refoved that the faid Barker who
was Judge of afliie, and gave Judgment on the
did execute him according TO the fad Judgment,
nor the juftices of peace who did examine the
offender, and he witnelIrs for proof of the muir
der before the Judgment, were not to be drawn
In queitlon, in the Star-chamber, for any confpi-
racy; nor any witnefs, nor any Other perfon
ought to be charged with any confpiracy in the
Star-chamber, or ellewhere, when the party in
dlcted is conviftedfor a.taint of murder or felony
and although the offender upon the indictment
was acquitted, yet the judge, be he Judge of az
HE, or jutice of peace, or any other Judge by
commliiion and Of record, and fworn to do iuf-
tice, cannot be charged for confpiracy for that
which he did openly in court as Judge or iufice
of peace and the law will not admit any proof
againit this vehement and violent prefImption
Of law, that iufice fworn to do i,fice, will do
iniuRice, bot if he hath confpired before, out of
court, this is extrajudiciaI, but due examination
of cauies out Of the court, and enquring by tef-
timony, and fnilar, is not any confpiracy, for
this he ought to do but differentiation of wit
nefles, and falfe and malicious protectors, ont
of court, to fuch whom he knows will be indie
tors, to find any guilty, &c. amounts to al I'M
lawful conipiracy.
''And as a judge frail rot be drawn in quef-
ton in the cafes aforefid, at the lit of the par
ties, no more ihall he be charged in the faid caf.
before any other Judge at the filit of the king,
" And the reaf0n and caufc why Judge, for
auv thing done nv him ne iudge nv the ,ntbor;.