Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1807-05-27

There the Chief Justice enquired if
there were any parties before the court,
except the United States.1
Mr.. Wickham. | am prepared to
shew, from authority, that any person
standing in the situation of Col. Burr,
has a right to come before the grand
jury and make any legal objection
and that this is the proper time for
that purpose. He cited 2 Hawk. Pleas
OF the Grown, p. SOY, and Bac. Abr.
725, to shew that any person bound in
recognizance to appear and answer
a criminal charge, has a right to APP
pear aud make objections to the grand
jury before they are sworn. Whe-
Their, afterwards. we might not take
advantage, of any error committed, bv
way Of plea in abatement, is not now
to be enquired into. 1t is the most
anxious wish of Col. Burr that this
trial may now finally be closed, aud
that the jury who are to pass upon him
may be free from all exception.
Mr.. Hay then read the law of Vir-
GINA (Kcv. Code, pa. 100, sect 9. and
! contendcd that the construction at.
tempted 20 be put on it was more RI
gid than could be warranted by sound
sense and good policy. The selec-
ton of the jury was left entirely at
the discretion of the returning officer.
The intention of the law was that pa
good men and not liable to any of the
exceptions therein stated should be
summoned. What reason therefore
could be given to prevent the marshal.
IT ne discovered that man whom he
had once summoned could not attend
for sunimoning another, and there
by securing the attendance of the
full numoer required The mar
shall, without knowing any thing of
a man except his character, sum.
mons him on the jury. He knows
nothing of his private affairs. The
man afterwards informs him that he
is subject to urc ontroulable domestic
difficulties; fer example, that he is
going Journey upon indispensable
/ business. May not the marshal, hear
ing his excuse, release him, and sum.
mon another? Is there any principle
otsound sense to prevent II? Where
Is the authority to prove that the func-
tions oft the officer who collects grand
jury cease before the day on which it
is immpannelled When the return
is made, if 4 sufficient number do not
attend, 4 discretion is vested in the
marshal to appoint others in the room
OF the absentees: and is not the prin-
ciPle the same, when he knows that
the d won he had first summoned
coald not attend? 1 appeal to the can
dor OF gentlemen to state the differ
ence, in principls between the two ca
ses.
! But | am inclined to think that the
gentlemen are mistaken in point of
fact. lnave understood that the mar
shall, in the instances to which they al
lude, only enquired of the persons said
to have been summoned, whether they
could attead or not; expressing his in
tention to summon them, if they could
attend and that, upon their assuring
him OF their inability, he applied to
others.
Mr.. Wickham. The counsel for
the United States has not directly met
the question. He seems still to doubt
whether person in the situation of
Col. Burr can avail himself of the OBJ
Jections now made. AS the authori-
ties upon this point are very short, I
will beg leave to read them as decisive
before offer any remarks. Here
var. Wickham read a paragraph from
2 Hawk. 3o7, and another from 8 Bac.
Abr. 725.l nfhe only object of read
ing those authorities, was to shew that
aPerson bound over in arecognizance
to appear & answer a criminal charge,
was entitled to come forward and state
any legal objections to the grand Jury /;
and that as those exceptions were to
be taken before the jury were empan-
nelled and sworn, they could only be
properly made at this time.
| come now to enquire upon the
merits, whether the objection be pro-
perry taken. Mr.. Hay supposes that
the construction Of the law, commended
for by the counsel of Col. Burr, is
more rigid than sound sense or good
policy will warrant. Where the words
Of law are plain, as in the present