Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1807-09-19
NHuRs0AY. Sept. u.

Mir. nay suggested the great inconveni
ence Of proceed ~ with tins long argument
before eXamining he witnesses, and urged
tic ccur- 10 hear tic evidence first.
The CH{cf 3usiice saw no objection &c
letting the Witnesses be heard, as 20 the
acts iii hcaitcky. II the overt act should
be sufficiently proved in Henfucky for q
Jury To md verdict against the accused,
acts IN the -f3lSise!nLt terrEtory mi,ht
BE shewn as corrobcrative evidence. He
vas not Satisfied, at present. that he could
,omm.tior tia III inc lG68issitEiteryit0rv
MIR. icy. think / can satisfy you, sir.
or that point.
The ChiTf Jasncc Then the argument
had better proceed.
MIR. nay proceeded with the argument
1T large, ana spoke ~ considerable iepgth
with his usu i ability. The rapid success.
son OF events relative TO The trial, and the
want of tlne and room put it cur Of ou,.
power 10 state the substance Of this s3eecb
and If he theirs by which it was succEeded
Mr.. Martin cited some authorities in
support of the positions which had been Ia
ken by MIR. G0tls. The counsel for the U.
=. were then asked whether they desired
70 say any thing in answer to these authc-
rites. They sad they were wiling to SUBJ
HiIt TIC question 20 the court
Mr.. Martin rose again and spoke for
more than an hour. He was followed by
Mr. pFekdam who delivered one OF the
most eloquent and energetic speeches we
nave ever bad the pleasure Of hearing. He
ChiEhy cohfined his remarks TO the import
ant point that the aCquittal OF Haron Burr
by the verdict OF the Jury was bar to the
motion now made BY MIR. Eay. He insist
= ttsea.a
The overt acts of levying war wherever
committed were parts Of that great act !.
and thatan ac9uittal for ons of those overt
aSts, being an acquittal on an indictment for
Me treason, operated as bar to any pro-
Secutlon for any other overt act.
When he had finished, MIR. Han, observ.
ed that Thomas LogqVood had besnytri, Il
and convicted in this court, several DIFF
en- times, for forgery Of several bank notes :.
and insisted that the Ci!ence now CHARGED
IS not the same offence for which col. Eprr
mad been indicted and tried.
Mr.. JlartiH. Each bank note counter
ieited Constitutes distinct offence; but
each overt act oI l-vyng war is not q scpa-
rate oiicace. pa
Mr.. jAt cited 2 Hawk. 1851. &3.
to shew that man can not plead a forme,.
acquittd III bar Of a prosecution, unless
mat acquttal had been for the sqy,e oC-
fence, and unless tie trial had taken Mace
before court having complete Jurisdiction
."i the case, and upon an indictment cor
rectly drawn. lie contended that. At the
former trial, the court having excluded
the evidence of the overt acts conluitfcI
cut OF the District Of Virginia, this circnn-
stance evinccd that those overt acts we're
considered as constituting "a different crime
from an overt act within this district II
the whole treason had been considered nv
the court as one act, the testimony AZ 10
al the overt acts of which it CONSISTED
would have becn admitted to so 20 thc In
ry. He insisted, too, that, since the crnr,
had rejected the evidence on the e,round a..
OF an ai!cdgcd defect IN the indictment. and
vt IT'S jurisdictions not extendiuc IN acts
done cut OF the district, ;hc accused had
not q ri6ht TO plead his acquittal, on tbat
indictments, against any future indictment
tor an overt act Of treason committed out
Of the district.
Mr.. HiTt made many other observo,;-
ons' ADD continued his discourse, with great
force Of argument, Till late in the after
noon.
Mr.. B5tks replied at some length and
the court adjourned between Eve and SIS.
O'clock, '@ ''''