Alexandria daily advertiser. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1803-1808, 1807-09-10
COZ EE. 4. BURR.

apvssrd ia mannes worthy OF Us TN Po.1
auces ard with an earnestpess cvincing the
ssrorc sps;ct,on felt BY the counsel on
each side ihstshe!a is With them.
A degree Of espqnence seldom display
ed 90 any occssion has embellished' soil
dry Of Argument aud depth OF research
by which The coert has bsen greatly aided
10 fosmipg The opinionls IS about TO oeh-
2ssr.
The testimony addnced on the part OF
the Uaiic States, 10 prove the overt act
lsid 10 the Indictment, having shown, and
aad lie attorney for the United States hay
ing admitted, that the prisoner was net
Pre- sent when that act, whatever may DC It's
character was committed, cod there belog
no reason to doubt but that he was at a
greas distaace and in dsferentssass,'is is
objected TO the testimony offered On the
part of he Unued States. to conaect Elm
wi.hlhosse who committed the overt acs,
thar such testimony ia totally irrelevant aud
shrrefore mast berejscteS.
The Arguments 10 support OF this mo-
ssson respect in part the merits 81 the case as
il sisY be Supposed 10 stand, indspendenf.of
tie pleadioga, and in part as Exhibited ny
lar pleadings.
On ,hesfirss division Of the sabj@cs Two
pciuis are made.
First. That conformsbly to the consti,
tu,ion OF The United States, no man can
bcsconvicssd of treason whowas not pre-.
sent whsnIhe war as levied.
Second. Thatifthis construction be err,
rsnsaes, no testimony can be received 20
charge one man with the overt acts OF
others. until those overt acts as laid 10 the
Indictment be proved 10 the satisfaction
of the court.
The question which arises on the coD-
ss,rnc,icn of the constitution IN everypoint
az view, IN which il can be contemplated,
is Of infinite moment to the people OF this
country and to their government, aud re-.
ouires the most temperate and most deli
bera,e consideration.
"Treason against the Uoited States
shall consist only IN leyying war agains.
theu,''
s56 What is the nasuralimport OF The words
Isvyinp of war? aadswhe may be said TO
levyit! Had their First application TO srea-
son been made by our consultation, they
would certainly have admitted of some
latitude Of construction. Taken most liz
tsrally, they are perhaps of the same i'm.
port with the words raising or creating
war, bu, asthose who join after the com,
mencement are equally the objects of pua
ishmcnt, there wouldprebably De ageneral
admission, that The term also comprehend.
ed smakirg war, or carrying on war. In
the constructions which courts would be
required TO give these words, it is not
improbable that those who should raise,
create, make, or carry 90 war might BE-
comprehended. The various acts which
would be considered as coming within the
term would be settledby course OF dscl'
sions. and il would be Affirming boldly TO
say. that those only who actually constitute,
ed a portion Of the military force appear
.;nr ia arms could be considered as levy
log war. There is no difficulty IN afflr a,
ING ,hastthere uiustbc war or the crime
of lsvving il cannot exist, but there. would
oiseube considerable difficulty IN affirming
Thar particular act did or did not involve
the person committing i. inthe gull and IN
the fact ofleyying war If for example 40
army should be actually raised FOR the "a
vowed purpose of carrying on open war
against The United States and subvening
their government, the pointmust be weigh
ed very deliberately. before Judge would
venture to decide. that an overt acsofie'
vyiug war had not, beencomnitted by q
commissary of purchases. who never saw
she'army, but who knowing its object and
leaguiug himself with the rebels, supplied
that army with provisions. or by recruiting
officer holding commissions in the rehe
service. who though never 10 camp execat