The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1807-06-17
NuMBgR II.

tban after the exhibition of the tetimonv r. ne
with one iet of principles on their mind. the
U. Jory wor',i frequently aik auctions in one
point OK view, which they would not under O.
Their imprcfiions and that the fuppiementaI,
Ike the original charge, ought to precede the e.
'idence.-Mr. Martin ohierved, that therr.
was thia comfortable difference between 4
Grand and Petit Jury, that when any doubt
aroie about the propricty of teftimony before.
Inc Pett Jury, the court would be preient anf
ready to decide; but the Grand Jury has not
Tie fame aid of the judgment of Abe coun in
ieiectine the tefimony.
re Cofsf J.1iee faid, that the uecefity Of
G'Vihg aluppieuenta charge at this time, was
not TO manfeit as in his original charge he.
nao exprehed his ideas the nature OF Trea-
ION; That he ftated this crime to coEf0 in
an actual "levying of war;" and that of courit.
the Grand Jury would have to enquire into
theex'tte"ce oSovert acts that from this Gate
'neht' IL would readily occur TO the Jury, that
no matter what fufpicions were entertained,
what plans had been formed, what cntcrpr;zes
hsd been projected, there could be no Trsaion,
without an overt act and that without ionr
o'ert act, no crime Of Treaion had been COM
mnted.
The difcullion ofthis qucfion was at lene,.A.
waved when the Chief Jufiice delivered the
Following opinion on the motion TO inue fub-
Poena Dmay Tecnnr directed to the P. U. S.
he object of the motion now to be decided
is 10 obtain copies of certain orders undsrftocd
10 have been ifiled to the land & naval officers
OF the u 5. for the apprehension Of the sccufeds
ana an original letter from Cen. Wilkinion to
the Preildent in relation to the accufed, with
the anfNEer Of the Preiideut to that letter.
which papers are iuppoftd to be material to the
defence. AS the legal mode of effr6ling this OBJ
Ject, motion is made for iunpuna duc.s
tecum to be direeicd to the Pselident of the.
U. States. II
In oppo6toa to this motion = prel;m;narv
point has been made by the council for the pro.
fecutIon 1t has been infilled by them that,
until the Grand Jury G,aii have fonnd trne
bill, the partyaccuftd is not aotllcd to ful+poa.
mas or TO the aid of the court to obtain his tet.
timony.
twill not be faid that this opinion ia now
Tor the hrt time, advanced in the United States.
but certainly, it is nov for the hrh time advznc,
co IN Virginia. SO far back AS any knowledge.
OF our jurisprudence is ponenrd, the uniform
Pracuce OF tins country has been to permit any
lhdividual who was charged with any crine.
TO prepare for his defence, and TO obtain the
process or the court, tor the purpoie of enabling
"'n 10 10 90. rms practice is as convenient,
ahH is as contonaEt TO juftice as it is to humani-
~. Hprevents in great meafure, thofe delays
winch are never dehrable, which frequently
occ%hon the lois of tefinony, aud which are.
often opprefiVe, that would be the ineyitabI.
coniequence of Withholding from prifoner
Inc pioceis OF the court, until hrindictment
"gaini' him was found by Grand Jury. The
right or an aceuied perfou to the procsf. of the.
court, to compel the attendance of witne1cs
items TO follow necefary from the RIGHT to sx.
anime thoie witnefles, and wherever tho righs
exits, 1t would be Reasonable that itouIa
be accompanied with the means of rend4ripc,
IL eheetual. Ii is not doubted, thar A reffon
WHO appears before a court, under re-
cognizance, mutt expect thar bill will be nre.
Tered 2palntt i'm hat
the CONTINUANCE CO the recogoizance. will he
brought before the court. In the fra evc,+
ne has the right, and il is perhaps his duty to
prepare for MS defence at the trial. In the fe-
cond event, 1t will not be denied that be pof
iehes the right to examine witneGes on IN.
que'tion OF continuing bis recognizance. In
either cafe, it would ftem realonabIe tb,t NJ.
fhouid be entitled to the proceC, of the co,rr
TO procure the attendance of his witnencs.
he genius and character of our laws and n
iageS' are friendly, not to condemnation a, all
events, but TO fair and impartial trial and
they consequently allow to the accu(ed the ripb,
OF preFsrihg ne meansto fecure fuch trial
i ne oojeetion that the attorney may refufe to
proceed at this time, aud that no dav is Gxes
for the trial, if he ibould proceed, prefents nr
real ulfhcuitJ u would be yeryinfuffjciene
e&cuie TO Priioner who had failed 10 preosr.
for his trial, TO iay that he was not certain The.
attorney would proceed againf him. Had The
ihhictIacnt been found at the lalt term il would
nave been IN Tome meaiure UNCERTAIN whether
there would have been trial at this, and Aiu
more uncertain on what day that trial would
take Place T.; yet fuhPoenas would lave iHued
returndbie 10 the hif day Of the term, and if.
amer its commencement, other fuhpcenas had
oeeh required, they would have iglu-d returnA-
Die as The court might direct. IN fact all pre-
cets TO which the law has affixed no certain re-
turn day, is made returnable at the difcretion of
the court.
General principles then, and general praaice.
are m favor ofthe right of every accuied nrrCon
10 loon as bis cafe is in court, to prepare Tor
MS defence, and to receive the aid OF the pro-
GELS OF The court to compel the attendance Of
his wtnehes.
The contribution and laws of the II. S,atea
WIZ now be oothdered for the puroofe Of az
certahing how they bear upon the qurnion.
The Sth amendment to the contribution qivee
to the acCufed 10 al criminal prDlecutioIs
right 10 iPeedy and public trial, and 10 corr
PniiorJ procefs for obtaining witneIes in b,e
favor. The right given by this article nna he
deemed iatred by the courts, and the articl.
ibopid he 10 conitru,. asto be fomethino n,o,.
than a dead letter. What can more eff efu,I- 4
Iye'ude the right to a fpeedy trial than the :.
el1ration that the accufed ihall be diiabed a
preparing for it, until an indictment ~