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


urw;,n, lts, and il,all have the like proeeis of
the court wher: he or they ihail be tried, to
coWpe, his or their witneiicsto appear al his
OF their nisl. rs is uiualiy granted to compel
"';s"sE<s 10 appear on the proiecution asalnlt
tEem."
This provfon is made for perfons accufed
or indicted From the inperfeeto of human
Language it frequently happens that fentences
which ought 10 he the mott explicit of
d6uhttul contribution, and in this cafe the
words &c accaisd or indicted" may be conftrued
20 he fynonimous, to defcribe a perfon in the
tame fituation or to apply to different hages of
the Profecution. The word or may be taken
in conjun6ture or disiuneture irne. A rea-
ion for uader nsudint them in the latter ienie
's furnlhed by the Sea itfelf. 1t commences
with dec laring that any perfon who fhall be
accufed and indicted of treaion, fhall have CO.
by of the indictment, and at leaft three days
before his trial. THIS right 10 obvoufy to be
enjoyed after an indictment, and therefore the
words are " accuted and indicted" So with
refped to the fubfequert clauie which autho-
rizes party to make his defence and directs
the court on his application to ai!'gn him conn
lei. The words relate to any perion accutcd
a.l indicted. But when the fiction proceeds
30 authorize the compulsory procefs for wit
refies, the phrafeology is changed. The words
are " and every iuch perion or periors accpfed
or indeed" SC. there by adapting the exprcf!I-
on TO the iituaton Of accufed perfon both
before and after indictment. 1t is to be re-
marked too, that the pcrfon 70 accuied Or in
siGsed is to have "the like procefs to compel
his or their wi,nenes to appear at his or their
trial ne is ufualy granted to compel witneiies
40 appear on the prOfecution agant them"
9'be fair contraction OF this claufc would feem
20 he that with refpctt to the means of COM
pe!ling the attendance of witnehes to be fur
niihed by the court, the profecution and de.
fence are placed by the law on equal grohnd.
Ehe right of the profecutor to take out iub-
p0nas or to avail hmfef of the aid of the court
IN any Gage of the proceedings previous to the
indictment, is not controverte6. This act Of
congreis, il is true, applies only to capital ca
Yes but pertons charged with offences not
pitat have a constitutional and a legal right TO
examine their tsltirnony, and this act ought TO
be conhdsred rs decjaratory of the common
law in cafes where this constitutional right ex-
ifs.
Upon immsmorial ufaee then, and upon
whar is deemed a found contribution of the
contribution and law of the land, the court is
Of opinion that any Pcrfon charged with a
crime in the courts of the United States has a
right, before rs well as after indit iment, to the
proceis OF the court TO coCIpel the attendance
o. his wituefl';s. Much delay and much incon.
ven,ence may be avoided by this contribution,
no mifchief which is perceived can be produc-
ed it. The Procefa would only ifue, when
according 10 the ordinary courie of proceeding,
the Indictment would be tried at the term to
which the fubpena is made returnshIe, 20 that
IT becomes incumbent on the acculcd to be rea-
ay for his trial at that term.
This point being ciifpofed of, it rersains to
directed 20 the PRECEDENT of the United States,
and whetherit ought to be directed in this
cafe.
This auction originally coDGted Of two
paris. II was at firt DOUBTED whether, fub-
poena ccuit, iifue in any cafe to the chief ma
citrate Of the nation; and if it could, whether
that fabpRua could do more than direct his
peTfonal attendance; whether it could direct
him r. bring with him paper which was to
tontiiute the gif Of his tcitimony.
While the argument was opening the attor-
pey for the United States ayowed his opinion
shat general flbpnna might iTue to the Pre-
.ident bnt not a tubpu1a Dnces Tsrnm. This
terminated the argument OF that part of the
quedion. The court, however, has thought ii ne
GeiIary 10 Gate briefly the foundation of its
opinion that fIch fubpGna may ifTue.
In the provhons of the contribution and of
the fatute which give to the accuird right TO
the compuIfory proccfs Of the court there is
no exception whatever: i lie obligation, there
fore, OF thOie proshons is general and it
would feen> that no perion could claim an ex-
emotion fromthcm bit one who oud not he A
NitGeis. At any rate, II an exception to the
general principle exits, il mutt be ooSed for IN
the law Of evidence The exceptions furnifhed
By the law of evidence with one only reirrva-
f;on) 70 far as they are peTional, arc OF thofe
only whole teaTony could not be received.
The Gage rcftrya'ion alluded to, is the cafe of
the king. Although he may perhaps give tef-
fimony, il is iad to- be Incompatible With his
6iguity 10 appear uno-r ,he proceis of the
court. OF the many points of difference which
sxif between the Gtf ruagnratc la England
and the FRI macittrae of the United States, in
rrfpeGt of the perIoaal~d'Enity conferred on
fhern by the contribution Of their reflective ma
tions, the court will only felett and mention
two. 1t is principle oi The Eng;i(h conititu-
ton that the king can do no wrong, that 10
blame can be imputed to him, that he cannot
be named in debate.
Ny the contribution of the Urited States, the
Psfdeut IS well Is every other officer of tn
government, may be imPeachsd, and may he
removed from Office on Conviction OF ish crime 5
and miidemeanors.
b. the conaitution of Great. Britain the
crown 10 hereditary aud The monai Oh can never
Become fubjctt
Nv t54t Of ihe United States, the PRECEDENT
is eieaed from The MATS OF the people, and on
me expiration of the time for which he is eIec-
ted. returns TO the MATS Of the people again.
How efT,ntialy this difference Of circum-
RANGES NUT vary the policy of the Jaws OF the
two countries IN reference to the pcrloDal dig