Alexandria daily advertiser. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1803-1808, 1807-11-09
MONDAY, October Is.

10 execution his threats against general "a a. !.
ton 81 81
Mr.. Barr addressed The court 81 have
understood, sir, that their are certain pro-
ceedipgs ola court martial, Of which gen.
Eaton IS the subject, and in which he was
charged with offences, that woHld disquaIl.ss
~ him as a wi,ness. After satisfactory
search, 6nd that the papers were burnt 10
The war Office. have procured a deposit
ton of the chief clerk of the war Office, g
show that such is the fact. This is 60 esta.
blish the loss ofthe papers, with view 70
7lesin oral testimony.
Mr.. Hay objected to tai. proceeding -.
Suppose that this deposition did actually
establish the fact for which twas produced
yg. why est abhsh lin this court? Mr. Il
said he should object TO the production OF
The records Of court martial. He presum
ed that gen Ea.on's trial was ola military
nature, for some neglect or violation Of mi.
lisary duty and not for auv charge ola CT.
vii nature. Takingthis fas. for granted
he presumed that the court would co. per !.
mil The introduction of the original records
The.accused is a. liberty to 60 intoesidence
as to the general character Of q witness, but
not as to any particular fact. Under such
circumstances il was unnecessary to occupy
the time Of The court either with this afida-
Wit or with parol evidence
Mr.. Burr. The affidavit proves that such
papers were burnt in the War CGce We
shall prove by witness, that such a Court
martial was held, and iha, general Eaton
was found guilty of certain crimes. which
would disqnalif him as witness inacourt
of justice We shall prove that he has been
convicted by court martial Of criaaen falsi;
and that the records Of these proceedings
were transmitted TO the war-ofice, where
they were burnt. We shall then produce a
witness 10 prove these charges. Tsen will
arise novel question; how lar man cca-
victed of crime. not in court Of COM
mon law Jurisdiction, is Disqualified from
serving as witness in a couR Of common
law, # it be s.aSh crime as would amount
ito sneh d;sqnali hcaiion ia 2 court OF COM
mon law. Wtaen the court shall hear the
proof, the question will then srise ss TO ge-
neral Eatoa's eredibili;y aud competency.
We shallurge II as TO both these poinls.
We shall show, tia. the crimes were grca;
eEoush 10 sfTrcs his competency, aud if
they were of an inferior dye, they would
affect his credibsliiy.
MIR. Hay PRESUMED Gtha, evidence might
be a, any time brought UP 10 affect The carr.
potency Of witness, but thar If j, was in.
tended 10 impeach his cyeagbisry, il could
only be doue on the ground OF general cha.
rac,er; and ,ha, 10 ui.nsss's crsa,nili:y
could be attacked by any paricular charge,
unless he hsd received previous notice,
and was permitted 70 prepare Tor his de.
fence.
After come disCuss:on, the CHIT 1ustics
over-ruled Mr.. Hays cbjecsion.
Mr.. Baker then read the following aft.
davit: q
District Of Columbia,
Washiagtou Leuntst, IS.
Personally appeared before me, one Of
the justices Oh the peace Of the u. States
il and for the ccantp of Washington 10
the district of Columbia, john Smith, chief
clerk ia tbs War Cfice, who being duly
sworn, depcssih and saish, hat having
searchedsthe reccyds and papers ia the waT
Office, there are no r;ssords os ffsocediDgs Of
courts marshal, OF any papers or proceed.
.inga relative TO the same, aFs.ieus 10 the
year one thousand eight hunss snd Que, and
that he hath understood and ver,svhelleyes,
that all records and proceeding. o. couiss
marshal,vhich were depps;ssG in said ofhcs
precious TO the day of November,
ia the year one housand eight Hundred and
one. were burnsd with the Office and
number Of other papers outhatday. That
having come into the cfiee since the. above