The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1807-08-18
Gbe Gnqutrer.
RICHMOND, Istb AvoUsr.
TRIAL OF AARON BURR.

TRIAL OF AARON BURR,
(coNTINuED BY ADJOURNMENT, AND HELD
AT THE CAPITOL IN THE HALL OF THE
HOUSE OF pELEGATEs,) FOR Fl Fl
X II S o " AGAINST THE UNITED
STATES.
THURSDAY, Auguff IS.
SKETCH the arg unuent5 on The qualifications
Of an impariiaijury (coscLUDED.)
Mr.. Wirf faia, it were to be w;fhed that in this
cafe, jury could be got of fuch pure materials as
Mr.. Martin deired; whole minds as pure as
the unfoiled fnow dams lap But does experience
jutify fuch hope The cafe does not exif and the
law does not require it. Mr.. Martins authorities
are elementary; they abfraef; and not
preeiiey applicable points of practice. They are
general phrafes they deal only in generals: Blu,
thefe books to be trued and did not their
generality exclude them from familiar ufe; you will
find that when they ipecify, they exprea particular
reference to the perion of the accufed. To fhow
that theie elementary principles completely
purified in the Englilh courts, he would refer to
ieokes cafe, p 9. ANY enmity, any familiarity, is
| IN Reeves iuffcient caufe for rejection but in
Tooke's trial, Mr.. Thompfons intimacy with Mr.
l. for "a years was faid by the judge to be good
ground of exception. But let felea another cafe
IN our own country. Il is important that the rules of
law fhond be continually fhiftng the waves of
uncertainty, in order that may know how
to iteer his courfe. Well, what Jays the Gale
OF Calender in particular point When Mr.. John
Bafett had objected to himfef, becaufe he had area-
dy made up his mind on the point of libel, he wa.
overruled. But turn to the Engfh laws of libel and
what is the principal point there Is it who is the
author Is it that point that the brghte beams of
eoquence are hed J.? No. But it is on the queftion
whether 1t is a libel not. Then in the language
OF Mr. Belts was not Calender cut off from
than half his defence ?-Let us draw an analogy
between the two cafes. Thefe jurymen might have
laid, that the aiemblage of men Blannerhafett's
Hand was III. Treaion but they knew not whether
col. B. was there. Here this cafe and that of CAL
lender would be ftrikingy parallel In both cafes,
the great facts would be fixed in the mind ofthe Juror
land the only thing that would remain, would be to
trace them up the individual accufed. But the pre-
tent cafe falls far hor of that. Thefe iurymen fay,
that from newspaper publications they have taken up
ioms imPreiilon Burrs treafonable Intentions
but not one of them ays, that the meeting Blan-
nerhafie.ts Hand was ad Of treafon In another
point calendars cafe froRger one than this -
II was ridiculous for T Calender to have attempt
ed TO counteraa the conviction, that lay agsint his
crime. Mr. BafIett's opinion was formed upon the
book itielf and there no other evidence pro-
oace. But IN this cafe, jUryman have feen
thing but the evidence in the newspapers and they
fay there is conflicting evidence the fatt of trea
fon If then you would "Trip Col. B of half oil his
defence, beeauie juryman has made up half of his
I
his!-The kind of jury that MIR Martin contends
for, IS impofiible to be obtained from the very ma
ture OF things. Neceity has often given the law in
other cafes and perhaps it mutt in this. This is
not the only cafe, where purely impartial jury
man mutt have dropt from Heaven or from fome O.
Their planet. Look at the Englifh Rebeons of
l7l5 and OF 49, when the queftion of the Pretender
and the Houfe of Hanover was 70 warmly agitated.
The magazines filled with it: the ut
mott zeal and eDthuGafm animated every man in the
nation ; men not only wrote but fought for it !;
and that in 70 fmall kingdom, that the very clang
and the din of the battle Of Culloden rung to The
other confines Of the country. Is this cafe in
which an impartial jury could have been expelled
! and yet the rebels were tried tried by Brtfh ju-
rors tried by jurors, who had heen perhaps array
ed IN battle aganh them. Perhaps thole who fought
for the monarch in the fields of Cullodcn, were the
very men who decided on the trials for treafon.-
Mr.. Martins rule is good rule, VIXEN il fourhes
IN the mind OF a good man p, it is good rule for
Utopia and Arabia happy & look to the trials of 81
IN Ireland; when men who had fought at the battle
OF Wexford; when at the very focus of pub
lie iHmination to fit on the trial of Alexander
Hamilton Rowan. Could fuch men have gone into
the jury box as if they had never feen the hooks
on which theie charges had been predieated as if
they had been men dropt from another plannet :
From the plains of Culloden and Wexford
from London and Dublin let us come back TO our
own threhoIds. Ee who could perhfe the public
prints OF North America, for the la e months with
adamantine Indifference he who could read the depo
ftions OF Eaton and Wilkinfon without fome inter-
eft ;-caDnot be No man could do it that has
foul, that tan grace the bofom of man. appeal
TO the bench, whether there is that bafe frigdtY of
character in the inhabitant of North America -
Look at this very PANEL; have they taken no inn
pretiions MIR. Writ embraced a variety Of ether
points, which our limits do permit us to detail !;
and in hrain Of sloqnence, which it is impoHibls
for us to transfuie.
Mr.. Wiekbam obferved, that the remarks Of the
gentleman lah up, reminded him of Roman Epi-
gram on lady, who 70 completely covered by the
decorations which enveloped her, tina, fhe was the
leaf part of herfelf. It preeifely 70 with the
gentleman's argument. IL 70 perfe dly envelop-
ed in figures and grace that the argument conRitut-
ed the leaa part Of itfeIf and it was only by lifting
a Aounee here aud furbelow there, that you could
catch glimpfe oft. The gentleman has hurried us
to England and TO the battle of CulIoden, with as
much cafe as If he had waved the wand Of a magi-
clan. He has compared the judicial decGons in that
country the period of the rebellion with the cafe
now agitated before this court; without having at
tended 10 the natural points of dAinelion between
them Every man in England could reafon upon the
cauie OF the Pretender. The BATS Of this deoifon
was chain Of hiRorieaI facts, recorded in books
which resion could appreciate and prejudice could
NOT diitort. Such cafe would have been preclely
limilar the before the court, had this too