Berkeley and Jefferson intelligencer. [volume] (Martinsburg, Va.) 1802-1810, 1807-07-03
[WHoLR No. 42S.l

did actually consider themselves placed
in this very situation. Nowif such an
application had been made ID your honor:
out Of DOORS is there any law in Ameri-
ca or In any part of the civilized world,
to postpone the examination, until =
subpoena hasbeen granted ! II is true
that eyidens on both sides has beer,
sometimes oduced; but this took place
when the fyie1ee happened to Be pre-
sent. and tAsre exists not a simple pre-
ckdent u allths annals of iurisprIdenee.
Where, the course Of an examinations has
been suspended, by. an application for
subPoenas, and the waiting for the Wit.
ne'ses. The present MOTION therefore
i, manifestly premature Mr.. Hay
confessed that his object was to save
time he had no doubt that he docu.
rnents would be forwarded in9a much
shorter time than they could possibly
obtain themby this process. Whywere
they not sooner applied for! True il
is there has been some correspondence
between Mr.. Randolph and Mr.. Smith,
about an order from the navy depart.
ment: but never before yesterday vas
the materiality fgen. Wilkinson's letter
suggested, altho' that letter had been
PuOliekly known to exist, as long ago
asthe 27th Of January. The accused
knew this his counsel knew it & vet
have they never stated its materially.
Mr. Burr addressed the court, and
observed that this was perhaps the most
proper time for renewing the motion
which he had some time ago made 70
the court, about giving more specific
instructions to the grand jury on certain
points Of evidence. These points he
had reduced to writing in the form Of
abstract propositions, which he wonld
take the liberty Of reading to the court
The following is alist Of those propo-
sitions, with the authorities cited
TO support them. y.
!. That the grand jury cannot con.
sistently with heir oath, find bill ex.
cept on such testimony as would justify
apetit jury to ind theprisoner guilty.
Foster $50 sec 8 Sd Institute ~; I'd
Institute Ssl5 Dalton St9j Judge
Wilson's works, vol. Cd. s64 +.
w. William. justice Sd vol. printed
1894 Sd SGe r.4t6 40 and sir John
Hawle's observations, 4 s. T. 1ss;
9TH Black. 02 to SOC ; I'd Hale chap.
8 page 81; Wilson's edition with
Wilson'S, nate I'd Hale chap %
:. page 1sz will Wil.on's note I'd Hall
chap. ~ page 1863 with Wilson's note,
Eunomo's Dici. cd sec. 80 page 124
Sc; state T.page ;; Foster, page
232 sec. 9. =. - @.,;t,,...-. =
2. That nc testimony or witnesses
ought to go TO the grand jury but what
are legal and Competent to. support the
charge about which the enquiry is made
Dan6y 5 case, Leech 443, chap. f87 j;
Dodds ease Leech 50 chap. II;
commonwealth of Virginia 70. Hop
ham, Wales and DAVIS before the {.
court At Williamsburg. 81;
. s. That the grand jury cannot return
a bill for treason tor levying war against
the U. s. unless they have two witness
es who swear to the overt act Of the trea-
son laid in The indictment both which
witnesses are believed by them.
Easts Crown Law chap. I'd see. 81. :
That both must be believed, Sd State
Trials page Sc. .., T. :
4. That there must be two WITNESSES
to the grand1ury Of each overt act, fol-
lows also as consequence from the for
mer petition, that they must have such
testimony a, would Be requisite for the
Petit Jury. - r. ~
S. That the Grand Jury canno. End a
bill for treason in consequence of any
eonfe ssions made, though provedby two
witnesses. Foster 241-3 4 Black.
CONSTITUTION Of the u. S. Article s. Sec.
e-Graydons Digest I1-Judge Ire
dells charge-Friss's Trial l7i-t72
= Fash 90 81. s. T.. 49,.
: s. That as the grand jury only hear
evidence on the part Of the state, if up
On that evidence they. entertain doubt
ofthe truth Of the charge they ought not
10 6nd the bill, as the presumption is