The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1807-09-05
WEpHEspAY, Sept. 9.

whether
the opinion OF the court correctly, as to what vopd
conititute an overt aa oftreaoa According m b;o
contribution OF that cnon, the evidence of the tr,uC
actions at BlsnDerhaletts and did not amount 20 an
overt act II 10, 1t would be improper to proceed
with the profecution of BlannerhaGet and Smith ON
theindietments now found againlt them He certain
~ Mould not prefs upen the jury, doctrines in opno
l'ion to the opinion OF the court; But fould conf.
der It his duty, TO ne!f proE;,ui and move n,
lend them for trial to the place where an overt AZ
committed
The Chief Junice faid that it was undoubtedly the
opinion OF the court, that the facts proven to have
been committed at BlannerhaiIet ilaud did no, A.
n'ount to an aa of treafon But the court did
not intend that their opinion houd apply to the faas
OF any particular cafe. They only meant to declare
the law leaving II to the Jury determine from tbe
facts inbmistedt TO the whether overt a of trea-
fon had been committed or not. ~
Mr. Kay obisrved, that he fhould enter, a MOLE
P,seqm as to Blannerhae,t and Smith, and move the
court 10 commit them together zvi tbe beys cLo nozO
faadS GSore tbem' indicted of nirdemcanor in order
that they may be fent the place where the overt
act was committed; If the ihouId be of opinion
alter hearing the evidence that il would be proper 70
doio. For this Purpoie he moved that Blannerhaf
lett and Smith be brought into court.--Ce Bvyy CON-
tended, that his cafe and that of Mr. BiannerhaGet.
and Mr. Smith was quite feparate and diRinea and
that the motion could not be blended. To hear them
together would tendto produce confufion He fhould
init that the motion again him be taken up iepa-
ratey He hould alto nlft that there be alpecifca
ton OF the place where the offence sfuspofed to have
been committed.-Mr- Ha, faid, he did NOT know
that he was beD0d TO fpeeiiy the place but hr had
noobJeeton to doing as far his power 1t is
lad that Col Burr was the mouth Of Cumberland.
there he was joined by Blannerhaifett and Smith: &c
from thence defended the river with the forces which
he had been Collecting; their number of men and
military accoutrements inereairrg till the moment
"henithey were finally dhperled. Ii will be in the
power oil the court TO fay alter the evidence ould be
heard, whether they bonld be fent to another place
Tor trial, and to what place. He confeHpd that he
made the motion with great deal ofreluctance He
had pof .ered the fuje6l very much and it was the
courle " mich his confidence asd fenfe Of duty pre-
icrihed. The form Of the motion was obeSted 10.
1t was faid that we had no right to blend the era
nIna'ion OF the three perlons accufed The preprie
ty oil this eourie nun be obvious. B!annerhallett s,
smith would not De bound by evidence which was no,
delivered III their Trelence. II a motion hould be
made ieParately, the Evidence mult be three times
repeated 1t iuPpo!ed that much confufon will re-
lu't iro.u joint examination He did 70, expect TO
nave heard iuth obiervations addrened the COURT
However chaotic however confufed the cafe may be-
the court will have no difficulty in separating the e..
whence and applying each peron. But he belle
we'd the eiiimony would Dear equally upon all for
they were all Prslent. II however, it mould be the
Plealure OF the court to hear the motions iepara,ely
he lhould as.;uefce
Col. Burr remarked that there would he no no.
;eibty to repeat the teG;niony, becaule the eour,
could recolet it and apply the cafe of each ind
Vidual. Bvdes iome evidence might be deemed ne
ceiisry by ions, which would not be by another.
Elr. 6rss iaid, that Col Burr, having gone ,hro'
ono trial for the whole realou. he Good upon differ
emf grounds from any oftLe Others Different,
not only as 1t related to many legal quenions but TO
the evidence which might be addueed When the O..
fhoud he h.
Dir Hays overt ad would be TO himfelf a fubiea Of
rdieuie. Beiides there fpara,e council retain
CO for the ieveral gentlsmen and the examination
ought, as nearly polible afune the fhape of a
hI'al and regular trial.
MIR. WiaAGsm obfeTved, that Col. Burr had been
tried for reaGon; and the Jury had found a vsrdj0 Of
NOT GUILTY lie was coniequenty entitled TO bis
dlieharge, though he had not as yet moved for it.
lie appears as any other innocent man, aud urlefs
~iomething efe Doud be exhibited he could not with
any degree oil proprety be detained longer in cunody
Again ths fceue of action laid by the council for the
proieeuiion, embraces raRge Of fifteen hundred
miles. Suppoie arre0ed by warrant on fnl-
pieion OF treaion felony. Would not the proiyeu-
tor be compelled to defgnate fome place where the
crime was fuPpoled to have been committed Surely
he would
Cbif Jgeiec. With refpea to the verditl no, Gull.
t., that IS queGiOn Of law aud not of faa On tbs
quei'ion Of general charge Of ,reafon or felony,
undrri.lad the iw 70 be tina, the accufation NAV be
brought againis any individuals ard il the duty Of
the judge 90 Enquire whether a crime has been con-.
mied sgsinf the Uni;td States n tie Judge Giall
be 81 opinion that oeuee has been committed bus
net within the jurildon Of ttourt it is the duty
OF the diilrei judge Ire aeculed 70 the DIFF
iritl where the offence was committed That c..
Jury may iind BIZ oonjuinty aganii feversl per-
ions, he believed, there could hc 40 doubt; bu, h=
vas 70; whether thsy could 5e tried togsths,
before G fst'' jar, ,oaoaf their content. ~
NJ. L-..--- -.. p. .E. dr. tL..4 cnr-L ~.