Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1807-08-29
Grial Of 4aron 25urr.
CoNTINUATIoN OF THE SKETcu OF Ma
MONDAY, August %.

lie observed he was not n little nstopieh
ed Mt the confidence of success EXPRESSED
by the gentleman who had made the mott
on but supposed that confidence proceed
ed from his feeling n sincere wish for the
success o. the motion, bv dwelling on which
nc mad at length convinced himself that il
ought to prevail. But none of the authors
ecs cited by him had supported the points
for which he ccntcuded
ne grand position relied on bv Mr.
Utckhan', was that, the accused not hav
ing been present at the commission of the
overt act charged in the indictment, no evi.
dence can be adduced toprove his connexj
on WIN that overt act and he had said
tnat neither by the constitution or laws of
inc United States, the laws of ENGLAND. nor
usage, the prisoner could be convicted.
IL Will be sufficient, said Nr. Msgoe. 70
nave recourse to the laws of England and
Nne constitution of the United States unnn
thus occasion; for usage has nothing TO do
with the question.
Inc definition of treason in tie frderal
constitution, is in the following, words :.
treason against the United States shall
consist only IN !evying war against them,
OF IN aohering to their enemies giving
le" ana arc comfort. No person shall
ne convicted of treason unless on the tes.
"act, or on confession in oDcn court ),
Mr.. Uickh0m admits that tho wor1s NJ
the Statute 25th Edw. 3 concerning Tenn.
"a" Wa ate the Same with those of o1r coy-
sututlon, but SAYS the construction Of tbe
constitution ought to be different from thar
winch In England has always been given
TO that statute. / think il of no co,ec-
qucncc to the present enquiry whether the
United States as such have a common 10 ~,
or not, and whether the common law ol
England IS TO be resorted To or not IF the
construction Of statute in the same words
witl the constitution of the United States
Is reasonable, the same construction cus-ht
""e aPPiied TO the constitution Otherwise
not.
Can it be said that man cannot Le,,,,
war against the United States without he
ing personally present?
Mr.. 3'iSde was about to sDeal- of tIe
evidence which might he adduced to nrove
that .7GToa Burr, although not present at
hiahncEhasset island, at the time char
yea IN the indictment, did in fact Ie1,y zya,.
against the United States at that TIM. and
place when Mr.. Martin interrunted him
ard objected to his saying any thing abouf
the evidence which had no: been beord
Here desultory conversation took Dlace
lnr few minutes ; the counsel for the II
states declaring that they were ready 70 in.
roaGee the evidence if permitted: and
Noi. DUR ana MS counsel ohjeCtine TO the
evidence beng admitted and insisting that
holt5hg should be said concerning It, But
the Chief Justice said that Mr. NJ Rge had
right to sufhoSe the existence of ony evi-
nehce which could by possibility be addr.
ced 10 prove the prisoner guilty, as the mo-
tion was TO exclude ell cpideuce NJ
fn'RGe pToceeGed-can any person doubt.
atter nearing the testimony of Gen. Eaton
Commodore Iruxton, and the More ans. the
reasonable intentions ofthe prisoner. The
CTcdibiiity of all those witnesses is min
peached and Eaton's evidence is ;mme-
diately to the point. There Mr.. lERoe
took review of the evidence which had
been introduced.l Suppose, in addition to-
all TINS, We can prove that the men who
came to Blannerhasset'S island came thi-
ther by aaron BHrr's direction; that he
was waiting for them AZ the mouth Of Cura-
bertrand; that he had sent them orders Ia
ny from the island without DELAY. since
"the Phlistiues" would shortly he unon
them; that they joined him al the month
OF Cumberland, and put themselves uUcy-,.
hiS command and were then all armed
suppose 1t should be proved, that, after
wards, when body of militia were coming
to search his boats, ne sunk all the arms
IN the river, for the purpose of conccalinr
them wonld any rational person doubt that
lac was guilty Of treason We have autho-
rites to shcw that, even in ENGLAND. he
would be considered as principal traito,
and indicted as such. Those authorities
prove that a person WHO tnlists men for
a reasonable purpose Who acts i'm con
cert, and IN league with them ard though
not on the spot, acts elsewhere is a prin
opal traitor; and that all these arc differ
eht oUerf acts OF the same treason
But Messrs. Wickhan and Ran1,Ih6
have introduced certain authorities, on
which they pretend that " must RELY, and
have attacked them as arbitrary and op
Pressivej as sprInging from the cruelty of|
Judges Ike Lord Coke, whom MIR. Nick.
nam declared To- have been without bowels
AID Mr.. RGHdofh without hcart. 7 will
read one Of those cases (IHrockmortou'o
case 81. Ir. COY 20 sbew how differently
constituted the court who tried Ihr,c}moy-
ron was irom tiis court; how widely dissi-
milar the situation and treatment oil
dGron DHrr during this trial has been
from 1hrockNOrton's before the conmissi-
ouers who tried him and To- demonstrate
that that case has nothing 20 do with this
Mr.. h'hae then read p large part of
IbrockHorfou's case from v 1icfi il an
pearcd that 10 counsel was allowed him
books were withheld from him; ne was
mt listened TO by the court and contest
nns ot others were read as evidence against
him vi. hc-t rspOuF &c he -,,..., 90. . 80. !