The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1807-06-13

- = ~. >~.lt.. .<t
lie at their opticn to fay, whether bills fl,all Ne
laid before The G. Jury or not" Granted, Sir,
III IL in the power of the attorney for IL " s.
] TO lend ~ his bills or not. But fhouid thSf
oils be found tue, ara the trial ONE o., MY
we not be ruled to trial, infeasrr; and with
out the aid of our witne0es! But what was
done TIE otter day, may be hereafter repeated.
Witnenes were introduced on behalf of the u
5. and Others perhaps would have been; on
the motion for commitment This notiouis
for the protest. only fufpended. But if that be
the cafe; may not the teifimony now required
be relevant TO our fence?-The attorney for
the U. S. triumphantly declares, that we mum
do as he pleafcs and that we know not what
ne intends to do. That is true, Sir; but may
not We too do fomething May not Col. B.
move for his dfcharge? AS he is TO remain
here until the court pleafes to diicharge him,
may ne not move for bis recognizance TO be
dlicharged? Have we no right alto to all tn.
means, which are necefiary for the fair admi.
niftration of Juice?
No time is ftipulated for the return of the
iabpnna." This is great difficulty indeed
Ii VIII be admitted, then, that the ccnrt has
right to ifiue fubpGna; and yet becaufc
there happens to be no particular proyifiou a.
bout the day, this r.s,t muit be nece FAIRLY
null. But, Sir, is this objection really iuft,fied
by practice! Has not the court a right 70 fix
day for the return of procefes of this fort
according to their own convenience or the
convenience of parties
But why have we not applied for thefe do
cuments fooner ? Yes; fir, it is afked of US,
why we have not made this application fooner );
and yet even now does the gentleman with to
delayit. He declared that we have made it
too foon and yet he now declares that we
have made it too late. Now it cannot be
both 1t 1t be too late, it certainly cannot be
too Goon. o.
We haveheard Tome remarks upon Col. Burr's
privileges and among others, upon the four
Councillors who are to defend him. But
what kind of an argument is this If we turn
to the Laws of Copgrefs, we fhaIi find there
is one attorney for the U. S. appropriated to
each diftrict And yet there are no LET'S than
three councillors employed on the preient oc-
Gallon. No doubt there is a law providing
for the payment of the two others out of the
treaiury but with what propriety csn ,hefe
gentlemen complain of my client making fuch
arrangements, as may FIT his convenience or
his interef But what are all thefe remarks
to the Subpoena Dnees Tecxm Sir, it is ufe-
efs to multiply arguments on this fubjeet.-
1t is fettled rule 6nce the antient times of
King John; lince the formation of Magma
Charta itielf, that the accufed has right
to Subpoena witneffcs & not only to any other
form, but to Subpoena DuceJ Teena, under
fuch notifications as the court may pleaie to
prefciibe.
Mr.. Martin read an extract from the cafe
OF Smith and Ogden in New York, about the
fiuing of an attao hment.
Mr.. Hay aatrted that this extract did not
prove the petition contended; that there was
no cafe ola fuoptrua's having been ifucd, be-
fore the finding OF an indictment that if the
clerk had ever ifued them, It was mere gra-
tultous act and that he challenged the expe-
renced gentleman from Maryland, to cite
Jingle inGance of an application to court for
fubp9nas, before the finding Of the bills.
Mr. Martin replied, that if there were no
precedents on this very point, it was becaufe
this objection never was made before and Ike
hoped never would be made again.
Here defultory conversation enfued when
Mr.. Hay ohfersed, that gentlemen affected to
believe that the prefent courfc purified by the
profccution was dictated by a with to fIpprefs
the evidence that he conjured the gentlemen
to remember, that he had voluntarily applied
forthe papers which they wanted and had
no doubt OF obtaining them and that he made
tneie remarka to guard any human being from
the iutpicion that there qvaJ any indifpoftion
to refufe the papers that he fhould ex-
ert himielt with not lets zeal to obtain the evil
dence that was wanted for Col. Burr, than
that which might be produced againtt him.
TIE Grief JJfnJ1iee obferved, that he would not
at prefent deliver any decided opinion upon the
point, though he was difpofed to believe, that
the accufed had right TO apply for fubpenas.
He cited the cafe of man, who had been
fome time tcfore brought before him and con.
derucd for counterfciting bank notes in this
cafe the pnfoner had attempted to delay the
trial by pretending that he had wineffes in
Baltimore /; which plea had been rejected by
the court, principally on the ground that he
had not before fummonfed thofe witneGes.-
The Chief Jgfiee however obferved that he
ihouid not decide this quefioa at protest
but reterve it for future deciiion: In the mean
time, the council might proceed with the O.
Their part of the argument.
Some conversation here enfued between Mr..
Botts and Mr.. Hay, on the Interpretation of an
act of Congrcfs, in which the tern, " accufed''
was employed. Mr.. Martin then rofe to fup-
port the propriety OF granting this particular
fubpena:
He laid down as general principle, in all
CIVIL or criminal cafes, that every man had
right to prooefs to etablifh his rights or his in
nocence. McNally's Evidence, Vol. /. p. 25s.
Does there exit Jingle cafe in the Britiih au-
thorities in oppofition TO this doctrines Sure
ly thefe gentlemen Go not intend to reprefent
the prelident as a kind of fovefeign; or as a
king of G. Britain: Heis no more than a fervant
of the people. Bat even the Britiil king may
be called upon to give tetimony to bis people.
1t is true he is not obliged to be fubpe uaed
and to appear in courtof juitice; but bis