Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1807-08-12
eIsohmorsa, .Axguet 5e.
TR I II l.
Haron Burr.
MoNphY. August 10.

every circumstance would be too lengthy
for the limits of this paper, we shall fur
nish our readers with sketch Of the most
important only. ..t -
:: Maurice p Belknap, Charles DuvaI, Re-
turn j. Meigs, James TAYLOR, Tunis DiIls,
Bennett Cooke, HczekIah Lewis, and Ca
briel G,Nanhorn appeared and were re-
cognized as witnesses Tor the United States.
{ short time WAS employed by the coun-
sci for the United States in completing the
list of their witnesses, which was delivered,
by them to Col. Burr; the number amoun-
ting to no less than one hundred and thir-
tty-one; of Which large proportion are ac-
tually attending. ,....
Doct. William Wardlaw Of this city, who
was one of the venire, was excused from
serving on the ground of. the bad health of
his wife, which rendered it necessary for
him tn take voyage with her to the north.
MIR, Randolph Harrison of Cumberland,
Mr.. James Henderson of Wood county, and
Mr.. David Bullock ofthe city OF Richmond,
were seyerally excused on account of sick
ness. The rest e he venire were called
over; and were all present to the number
of forty-threc, Mr.. William MsDaniei of
Stafford, being alone absent. They were
then about to be called one by one, for the
purpose of being scverally challenged or
accepted but, before this was done, Col.
Burr desired several witnesses to be called,
whom it appeared he intended TO make use
of for the purpose Of supporting his chal-
lenges against those to whom he had objec-
tions. The names Of those witnesses were,
David Briggs, Richard Adams, John Heath,
Temple Gwathmy, Thomas 'l'insley, James
Scott jr. Allen M'Rae, Neil Nj CouI, James
Clark, jr. and Jcde9iah Leeds. Some of
these who were not in court, were called
at the door,. =.
Col. Burr shortly afterw" rds observed
that he was ready to proceed with the bu-
sinesS; and addressing himself to the gen
tcmea composing the vcDre, said he had
understood that a great number. of them la
bored under bias against him which ought
to disqualify them from serving on the ju-
ry for his trial; and therefore eXhorted
them, as honest and consc encious men, to
declare it openly, as they were severally
called
Hezel,iah Bukcy of Wood COUNTY, being
called, was challenged for cause, and as
ked by Mr.. Bolts (aS counsel COR Gel Rurr)
whether he had ever formed and express
seq an opinion unfavorable to the accused.
Mr.. bukcy answered that he had express
sed an opinion before he was subpoena d,
but not since. :.
., a debate of considerable length ensued
on the prcpriety of the question propound-
ed by Mr.. Bolts; the counsellor the Unit
ed States contending that it ought TO as
sumo more precise and definite form !;
that no Jury Could be got, if the question
was put in such general terms for scarce
" a man in Virginia could be found who
had not (rom the various newspaper pub
LEGATIONS and other sources of information)
formed and expressed an opinion either f.
vorably or unfavorably to Col. Burr that
it ought not to be said that citizens con-
versing OH a subject of universal interest
shall disGualify him rs juror; that the
court ought 10 settle the question to be ask
ed to each yenire-man. as had been done
in the case of James Thompson Calender;
and that it should he, whether he had made
up and declared his opinion that Aaron
Burr had been guilty oftreason, at lie fLace
and on The dan mentioned in the indiet-
Dient. Col. Burr and his counsel insisted
that there was reason to hope that twelve
men could be found, who were candid
enough not to have formed an opinion a.
gainst him. before trial that no precise
form for the question tohe put to the venire-
men ought to be adopted but all such
questions should, be propcunded as would
discover whether any partiality or bias ex-
listed Oh their minds; that Cal!endet's case
was different from this since every per-
sNh i'll that case had the evidence in his
own hands of the books being n libel, but
not as to the point whether Calender had
published it; and the question put by Judge
Chase related only to the fact publication ;
hut, in this case, If a person had formed an
opinion against Col. Burr, he must have
done so without anv evidence, other than
mere report and news paper statements,
and therefore ought to be set aside, on the
ground of.an improper bias and partially
The court decided that the examination OF
the yenire-men should nut.be limited to any
precise question; that it was clear prin-
ciple Of justice that persons intended to
be sworn on petit jury should be deter.
mined TO find their verdict only according
TO law and Justice; and the only point tC
BE ascertaised was whether they were i'm.
partial or not. . -
Hezekiah Bukev, james G.. Laidiey,
james Compton, Hamilton Morrison, Yates
y Council, Jacob Beeson, William Prince
r Nimrod Saunders, Thomas Creel, Antho
ny Buckner, and David Creel, members nj
} the venire from Wood county who were
, present, were all challenged for cause b.
. Col. Burr4 and, upon examination, rejected
except Hamilton Morrison and Ihoma
Creel; respecting whom no decision took
place. Those WHO were rejected declared
2 that, (from the rumors they had heard
+ they believed him guilty Of treason, am
had expressed that belief Jacob Beesot
4, and Williati Prince said that they hat