The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1805-04-04


juror, and was fworn accordingly. After the
trial had been gone through, the jury retired to
their room. Informed the jury that thought
We ihould have the book read through.
The Prefdenf here Ropped the witnefs, and
informed him that it was an ufelefs waite of
time to relate what took place in the room of
the jury.
The witness, however, continuing the fate
meht he had previouily begun, the PRECEDENT de-
fired him 20 go on, if it were neceilary for the
purpofe of connecting the teitimouy he had to
give but to pats over what occurred among
the jury as briefly as potlible.
Mr.. BaGct. told the jury that / thought
the book ihould be read. The jury did not at
firf agree, but the greater part OF it was after
wards read. In refpeSt to the general progreis,
will fate one point that makes a great impref-
hon on my mind do not pretend, however,
to hyperion recollection, Especially after lapfc
of five years, during which l never dreamt it
would be the fubjett of difcuiiion, but will
give my impreilions. The judge, addreiliug the
council for the traverfer iaid, WHEN my country
invefted me with my facred office, it placed me
under an obligation to admiriiter nfice &C
cording to law this am determined to do,
and have done it. | have decided what the
law is, but this deciiion is not conclufive agant
the travsrier. Ii any exceptions are made by
his couufslto my decilion, they may be redu-
ced to writing, and if have committed errors,
a hyperion tribunal ihall correct them.
MIR. Randoltb. You itated that you had read
extracts from The Profpe6t Before Us in newt
papers, before you were impannesd on the ju-
ry, which impreled you with the opinion that
it was a fictitious publication. After reading
over the book, did it appear to you to arfwer
that defcription
Mr.. Ba6ef. ! thought it was more libeous
than the extracts had ieep.
MIR. Randolph The extracts and the book
did not then Correfpond.
Mr.. BGGs.. cannot fay. could not FAY
the extracts were the fame with what | read in
the book, only recolieet that my imprefiion
was that they were the fame. could II Vi then
nor can now fay, that they were conformabe
to the book, but my impreffion is, that they
were the fame in fubfance.
Mr.. Harper. Did you mean Ia fay that the
contents OF the book were more hoeouS than
the extracts
Mr.. BaGtt. meant to fay, that after had
read the book, my imprefions were that it was
more bellous than l conceived it to be when |
read the extracts.
Mr.. NieboJon. Do you recolleGt at what
time You arrived in town
Mr.. BG0ct. cannot recollea, but believe
loon after the court met-that morning roie
early and rode % miles, about four hours rid
ing.
Mr.. MiebcLon. Was the book given by the
court to the jury?
Mr.. Ba0e!. underftood that it was deli
vered by the court to the jury for their nfpec-
ton, and TO compare the extracts from the book,
and fee whether they were correctly taken, but
do not recolle6 that the judge particularly
called oar attention to the book and directed us
what was to be done with it, but my recolec-
ton is that the book was delivered TO US.
ind 6.
all the jury were fworn?
Mr.. Bagit. l do not recol,e9 that the in
dietment was read till after the jury was iworn.
MIR. Rodney. Had the book given to the jury
any pai1ages lcored?
Mr.. BdGct. think it had.
MIR. Rodney. Do you know whether the PAT
FACES marked formed any part of the indict-
ment?
Mr.. BqGct. cannot fay that recoIle6t.
MIR. Campbell When you were fworn did
you underitand that the charges in the indiG-
ment were taken from the book called the Prof
peet Before Us?
Mr.. BaDft. 1t was fubjcct of general noto-
riety, that the indictment was drawn from the
ProfpeGt Before Us.
Mr.. Campbell. What authority had you for
fuppoiing that the extracts you had read were
taken from the Profpeet Before Us?
Mr.. BaGtf. had no authority but the newt
papers, they purported that the extracts were
taken from the book called the Profpect Before
Us.
Mr.. Randolpb. Have you any reafon to be-
lieve that the extracts in the newspapers were
not taken from the book /?
Mr. BaDtt. firmly believe they were taken
from it.
Mr.. Hobkiajon. Was the book which you
took out, that which was given in evidence du-
ring the trial
Mr.. BaDct. Whether it was the book which
was furnilhed by the proiecutor & handed TO us
by the agent of the court, cannot tell.
Mr.. Hopkigjoa. AT what hour did the court
meet?
MIR. Ba6et. believe about Il O'Clock.
The Proficient. L undertand you as laying
that you never iaw the book, until you Jaw it
in court
Mr.. BqDst. am firmly and fully 70 impreh-
ed.
The PreGdeat. When you were quenioued
as juror, underfand you to have faid, that
if the extracts you had read were correctly Civ
en-, the matter was libellous; did you fay that
you had formed an opinion
Mr.. BaGt. No fir, nor that had delivered
an opinion, but / faid that If the traverler was
the author Of thole extracts, he was guilty of a
breach of the ledition law. Irepeat every ex-
preflion tina, is now remaining on my memory.
l anfwered 70 FAR as to the fact. The enquiries
extended no farther than to- making up my OPT
MON on the extracts contained in the newfpa-
,Jers. 1t had no connection whatever with the
book. do not know that fated TO the court