The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1806-07-11
@be enquirer.
RICHMOND, lltb JULr.
SHOULD Mr.. MADISON ATTEND THE TRIAL
OF OGDEN?

SHOULD Mr.. MADISON ATTEND THE TRIAL
OF OGDEN?
The profecution of Mr.. Ogden is inftituted
BY the government itfelf for the general Good of
the country. But the abfence of Mr.. Madifon
from the feat of government, may produce Fill
greater iniuryto the country than even the COM
plete failure of that proiecntion. He is the
great refponfible agent Of the executive. Into
his hands the mott material intereits Of the uni
on are conGded. Would it not therefore, be
better toencounter the rifk Of fleeing profecu-
tion difmi1ed by the judge, OH account of the
non-atfendance of witneHes, whom he might
even deem ef1entiaJ To the defence of the accu-
Fed, than that the Secretary of State fhould he
abfent, and the wheels of the government itfeIf
politely arrefed
But the evil does not terminate here. The
precedent fet in this inaance by the Secretary of
State, may be conddered as obligatory upon
his fucceffors. But what will be the confe-
quence A Secretary of State may be continu-
ally flying from one part of the continent 70 ano.
Their, TO attend his judicial mandates. Subpoe-
ma after fuhpoena may iumHrop him and re-
turn from GEORGIA may be but a prelude to >
tour through Maine. Bat when an oppofiton
isin this manner created between the judicial
and executive duties ofan individual: whcu a
proiecuton before a court or the department
vi Ndtc HUH one OF tnem Ceales VINO can
heRtate for moment in his choice p
CAN'T however be conceded, that Mr.. Madi-
fon is really a material witnefs in this caufe |?
Mr.. Ogden is charged with afiiiiiug to st out
military expedition ID our ports, againft natl
on With whom we are at peace. L. u. 3. A.
pril 24, 500. Does Mr.. Ogden pretend to
fay, that;Mr. Madifon will clear him from this
sccntation! No ait tina. he can hope for is,
that by, proving the government was CONCERN
ed IN the expedition. it may ferve 70 'eifen his
hne and imprisonment
tits no d ,uht To be desired. that MIR. Madi
fon eouX attend the court 70 reftte the unfound-
ed fhtpicions that have been levelle,i agaimt
our administration, on account OF the Miranda
AFFAIR. But we muit wave the picafure and ad-
vantaees of this event, in confederation OF the
hyperion nterefts ofthe fate.
1t is no doubt too dehrahic thing that no man
fhould be sccufed under our government, who
has not the fnIcft means that can be L.
sally obtained for proving his innocence.
Nay, the conititution i,ieIf declares, thar
:" the accufcd thaa- have eowfuljory proofs
for obtaining witnef,.s in his favour" But is
IT not obvions that even this conititutionai
provificu has its limits Would Judge COMPEL
every man 10 appear before him, whom the ac-
eufed may with to iubpnna Would he COM
pei every inbabitant Of the union to be forth
coming, if this fummoning fpir;t ihould take
cannot be Imported. A Judge may fend his
compulsory procefs to every witnefs, whom he
may Believe necefary to the defence of tie ac-
cnied: But how then is Mr.. Madifon to be
yeemed eflential to MIR. Ogaen's defence !?
Nay: LET Judge even grant his i'lbpnna, ia
IT not ftiii the right of Mr.. Madifon to refufe
obedience He may incur the penalties, which
are attached to his difohedience but is it not
duty, which he owes to the government, to
incur them?
1t isarged, that Mr.. Pitt the then Premier
= OF England, was fubpnnaed OH the Trial of
Horne Fooke in the year 1894. The fboi2ate
Premier even appeared on that trial. Shall the
repuhlicah Mr.. Madifon then, it is vauntingly
atlsed, afoire II an exemption from the law,
which Mr.. Pitt himfeIf never affirmed But
there is marked difference between thefe two
CATS. The trial of Horne Toake was held in
the old Bailey at London; in the very roetropo-
lis OF the Britiih Court. It wasa very flight in
convenience to Mr.. Pi to pafs from his hurcan
TO the public tribunal before whom his tef.
tlmony was TO he given. Intwo or three hours..
the whole buiInefs might he difpatched and
IN the mtan time, the affairs Of the Executive
cepart ment might proceed without the fnaeft
INTERRUPTION. Bat MIR Madifon is funmonfed
60 attendthe DiftriGf Court Of New-York two
or three hundred miles from the department of
nate. Should he obey the fdhpona Of the court,
WIKI HDlSnt DC the rOnteQnence HIS prefence
might be necefary at Wilmington: dispatches
OF the hiKhef importance might arrive from
France or England, which required his imne-
diate fuperintendance. Were tine court held
IN the Diitric Of Columbia there is no doubt
that Mr. Idadifon would obey the judicial pro-
GELS with as much reddinefs, at leaf as Mr.. Pitt
But, FAY the federaliGs, how is it poflibie to
reconcile the doctrine here maintained with the
veproaches which were 70 profufey cat upon
the federal judiciary and federal executive, in
the cafe of Thomas "copper" There, the cVimi.
pal was fhut out Of all the benefits which might
he derived from the teitinony Of Mr.. Adams |;
and yet herr the very fame privilege is claimed
for Mr.. Madiion. But is 1t not plain, that thefe
two cafes are no lefs different from each other,
than the cafes Of Horne ToOke and Ogden I?
that the very circumstances that fufFered Mr..
Pitt to attend at the Old Bailey, & which fl1oud
have led the federal judges to demand the at
tendance Of Mr. Ada ns, nhould exempt Mr..
MadifoD The feat Of government was at that
time eaabhfhed in Philadelphia IN the fame ci-
~ was held the Circuit Court of the United
States. With how little embarranineot then
might the PreGdent have repaired from his
ievee-roon to the public court, from the COM
p1py Of the fycophautic and the vain, TO pub
TIC tribunal, TO give teftimouy in favour Of an
Innocent MANI The court, however, even re-
fnied 10 fnmmon him. Mr.. Adams would not
even dsign to reply 20 Mr.. Cooper's application
To- him for authentic copso of cert ain ,ddrsnsc