Alexandria daily advertiser. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1803-1808, 1807-08-24

the United. States:
Mr.. Wickham observed, that tue re-.
marks of The gentleman last up, re minded
him of Romsn epigram on lady, who
was so completely covered BIZ the decora
lions which enveloped her, that she wasths'
ie ass part Of herself. Il was precisely 50
with the gen,leman's argument. L was 50
perfectly enyslspsd 10 fgases aud graces,
that the rgunseiaE constituted she least par,
Of ITSELF; and il was only by ltdpg q
\ fonner here and a fufbslow there, tha,you
could catch glimpse OF II lhe genie.
man has hurried us1o England and 10 the
ba.tle of Eu,loden, with as mueh case as
IL he had waved the wand Of a magician.
He has compated the judieia! decisions 10
sthss country al siie period OF the rebellion
viii, the ease pow before tie Court wi.hout
hayire 4ttends 10 the nasusal points Of dis.
ssinc;ion between them. Every manin Egg,
land. coa.d reason upon the cause otshc Pre-
render. The basis Of this decision was
chain Of historical facts, recorded IN books
which reason could appreciate and preja-
dice could aos distort. Such case would
have been precisely similar sothe enc now
before the court, bad this been founded
on the annals Of history or on matters OF
fact. Had II been established that gun.
i boats had descended the Ohio that col.
Burr had had several engagements WITH
.,sep. Wiikinson; and had then been bro't
BEFORE this court for trial. the jury would
have decided upon these fac's, and DOT
moon their oan professions. Eut where
aresthe established facts in this case! The
I, ~ rs;;s,en, has declared thar ct his guilt
sshr,,.ra,nssSe no douhs. YET the psesidens
s;sabns a man and liable tc deception. Cen
Wilkinson too is a witness bu. his crcdi.
ssb,l;v. may be hereafter impsached; and
a.. s.,reme court has already decided that
srh;s ,estimonv is not relative to the charge
nc frsasan. This whole tale then resolves
;,.elf mo general Eason's deposition; OF
which, though we mas not De d'sPosec
IN saw Il is untrue, we may at least as
sers that tits marvellous. Is this accu
.a,;on then founded on historical facts ]!
Is there a7sIng'e document to support u!
No ntst one. How then can the gentle.
man pretend 10 institute parallel between
this case and the case OF the Rebesllons
IN England
81 Il be no disqualification for one ju-
sryman 10 have entertained an opinion OF
,ol pa treasonable intentions, II can be
no disqualification for IL OF toem. What
then would be the situation OF his couo
s.ses! The jury are Unparalleled !; their
minds made up as 10. the treasonao'e de.
signs Of col. B. With what attitude could
his counsel stand before such nsen to Viz
d;ca,s his ipnocenee? Would they pre-.
,ena't onsra,e upor marble? They nigh;
.awell a, once absndoE the cause OF their
c,;ent. These impressions too, respect
mo roll B's ia,eotious would directly tend
to inaoenee their jodgmeats as TO the Q.
i vert acts said TO have'be committed
Z These impressions do directly bear upon
; shr overt act, because The Intention IS the
s.f;rst step towards the acss Itself Gud rem.
s dersit more probable thar that at will De
! committed. What - most probable IS
: .uoness believed to be most likely 60 hap.
i pep; and the map whose Judgment there.
fore madesup as 10 the intention OF COL
~H caunot be said 10 be Impartial Ga any
s%noinr In the cause. Let the case be sup
eresed of 6 iorymsn whose minds are de-
acSded as TO the intentions; aud o 0'nars as.
! "a ii,e overt act. How could the eounsei
sprstsrsi to addresssthem on either OF those.
I points? If they wished to argue 90 Que
of Them, they must abandon IT; Because
s Of the jury are adamant: 1t they turn
ed 10 the other, they woald meet WIN e.
DUAL prejudice and equal resistance. -
was ike the case of the Abbess & sbe Nun
: recordedin TrlssramShapdywhere II ~ QUO
he . $40 for either of them 10 PEonoance
"a certain word enrire; but by spliitlng !.
into swo pieces, they cemPlesesy removed