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

/
than belongs to man, l could divest my
self OF those prepossessions; but should
| be wanting in candor to the court and the
I parties, if did not state that / had strong
prepossessions. .,i- ,. - .,r-.~ .. =.
| Col. Burr. doubt very much whether
any gentleman could be found who would
not make a similar declaration.
~ Chief Justice. You do not come within
the rule ofthe court, of having formed and
declared an opinion on the case. s. -,
! = Mr.. Randolph. do not recollect ever
| to have declared ar opinion. certainly
have never declared it upon this case.
/ His excuse was not deemed sufficient. -
J - Mr. John Randolph was sworn as fore
man, and the usual oath was administered,
f, by the clerk, to fourteen others Tut there
not being a full grand jury according to the
laws of Virginia (sixteen at least,) Doct.
William Foushee, whose name had been
erased from the original PANEL, on accocnt
of his being improperly summoned, was =
gain called as by-stander. .,
-. Doct. Foushee begged to be eXcu-
sed. HIS name had once been struck off;
and rs Ear as the influence stated by Maj.
EgSl lesion extended,i it equally operated up
on his mind. 49,
! Col. Burr. 1t seems on former scca-
| sion that the court chose to refer it to ne
to state any objections. Believing that Doct.
Foushee does not stand indifferent, / am
willing, if the court refers it TO me now, 60
pronounce my opinion, IS to the propriety
| OF his being sworn.
| Chief Justice, If Doct. Foushee has not
given an opinion upon the case, he stands
upon the sane ground as others. The court
has already determined that the declarati-
on Of an opinion is necessary as we'll as the
forming of it. I do not understand Doct.
Foushee 10 say that he has pronounced an
opinion.
Wickham. Wilt court permit me to
PROFOUND two questions. Has ne not made
up an opinion andbas he Tot expressed it?
Doct. Foushce. So far as / have seen
the evidence stated in the newspapers, l
have formed an opinion ofthe guilt of Col.
Burr, but no further; other evidence may
come IN which NAV remove the imDressi-
I ons I have received. My mind is open to
conviction, upon the whole case as 1t may
appcarin evidence.
Wickham. Perhaps the questions may
be better understood by asking whether,
without reference to newspapers, or mere
rumors, NE has made up an opinion, in the
abstract, upon the guilt or innocence ofCol.
Burr, not alphabetically but positively.
Randolph. l am sorry to impose upon
with the Counsel engaged on the same side
with mvselE / will not admit that man
lis qualified to serve as juror, even if he
has delivered an opinion hypothe
IN such a case double evidence is requisite
torem0ve the Impressions made on mis- mind.
, 3e forms an opinion positively en- the case,
| if the evidence be true; bat whether il will
turn out 50 or not, depends hpon future in
lvestigation.. The question to be put to a iu-
ror, is, have Won expressed an opinion in
any stage of the business.
| Hay. fMr. Randolph's doctrine be cor
rect, there IS an end to the enquiry and his
client is released. Col. Burr and his trans
actions have been the subject of Newspaper
pHblications'>for several months past
| They have heen teemiug with them from
one cad of the continent TO the other Not
a man nor 4 boy can be found who has not
formed some opinion on that part of the
evidence which has been published. Mr..
Randolph's proposition cannot be correct,
because it would lead to consequences so
incOnvenient and absurd. Theouestions
ought to be put as stated by Mfr. Wickham.
Randolph 1t would be extraordinary
indeed if the expression of hypothetical
opinion would not disqualify person from
being juror. An opinion NAV be formed
upon the law as well as the fact IF the
fact be as stated, he has undertak en- ode
clare the law. should be glad to know
whether person under these cirCumstan-
ces stands different.
Col. Burr, win the court indulge me
with one word 81 should not have svailed
myself OF the right TO make an objection
more against this gentleman, than AGAINST
Maj. Eggleston but I thlUk one exDressi-
on he has uttered is sufficient to set him
aside. He declared that from tire testimony
he had seen he was already prepared to
pronounce on my guilt ); bnt thathis impress
sions might be removed by countervailing
evidence. Now it is certain that, as A
grand jury man, he can receive nothing in
extenuation Of the charges against me-
As all the evidence before him will be on
one side, and that on the part OF my pro-
secutors, he can hear nothing except nv
accident, that will not tend to confirm his
prejudice that ] am guilty.
Z. Justice. The question usuaiIv pro-
pounded TO juror is, wheti er he has made
up an opinion and declared it,
Doct. Foushce. / have i1ready stated,
that if the testimony which I had seen I've
true, had made up an opinion. ] cannot
distinguish between my situation and that
of maj. Egsletou ; and should be glad If
gentlemen would point it out.
G. Justice. The difference between mai.
Eggleston and doctor Foushee is this mai.
Eggleston had formed an opinion upon the
evidence which he had seen, If true not
81 L.