The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1807-06-13

refort at once TO tnat expcdfcnt, winch mutt
be At laft employed. if the expectations of the
attorney for the u. States, fhould turn out to
be fallacous, aid his application at Wafhiug-
ton il,ouid prove TO be unavailing.--The clerk
himfrlf, If called upon for fubpenas, NUT ifTuc
them abfolutcly. Il was the practice and it
Was the law |; but inftead of applying to the
clerk, they deemed it neceliary in cafe of fuch
importance, to make their application directly
20 the court. They were more willing too to
prefer this courfe; as they did not win the
prefeuce of the Prefident but only of certain
papers; aud it was not therefore their win to
Obtains common fuhpGna for his perfon, but
Fubpeaa Dnees Tefam for thofe papers.
This 10 the firft time have heard, fince the
Declaration of American independence, that
an accufcd man is not to obtain witneffes in
his behalf. What has the gentleman himfelf
done Are there not wtnefies prefent. whom
he has iammoned under the authority of this
will he at lxt admit, that there is to be no kind
Of equality between the accufed and the profe-
cutiou: and that we are to remain here per-
fsctly mute and bound hand and foot, TO wait
the decilion of his own wtnef1ss!
But at what time are we to be entitled to
,hefe privileges? At the period of Col. B's
transportation |? That's mott anwauantable
proceeding there is no fuch cafe recognized
by the contribution and therefore there could
Oc nothing III Iodt COWtuutOu 10 klVC US kuC
right of founding any judicial proceeding on
fuch "a Rep. But, fir, fuch an illegal tranfac-
tion entities us>to Gill more, it entities to the
protection of every citizen in the country as
we'll as of this court.--Suppofe that Col. Burr
was now put on his examination would he
not have right to examine any witnefles, who
were beyond the bar and of courfe to fub-
pUna every man, who would be brought be-
fore you during the term of examination This
&: =. 4 - To-
5 Why not in the preient cafe
II has been faid, that there is nothing in this
country to jufify fuch an application that
!. there are no Precedents. But will quote,
Gr, another trial, which was fimar in lite pro-
ceedings, and Gmilar, truft, in ifSrefuIts.-
refer &c III cafes OF Smith and O sden before
the Circuit Court of New-York. SnbPGnas
were actually taken OUT, before the Trial, for
Meifrs. Madifon and Dearborn: and even ths
expences of their travelling were rendered to
them. But the proceedings did not even flop
here. For motion for an attachment was
Z made before the court, founded upon the proof
offersing thefe Subp2uas; and the proof of
offered compensation. Xhe argument at length
elofed en- this motion for attachment But no
man doubted the right OF the court to ifne
SabpGnas. The only queftion was, whether
at that time an attachment ought to ifiue.-.
The court was unanimous about the right of
fanetion of the Prtfdent's name. Perhaps the
fame farce may be repeated here: and II is for
this reafon that we apply directly TO the p. of
the u. s.. Whether it would have been beft
TO have applied TO the fecretaries of ftste, of
she navy and war l care not. All that we
want, is, the copies of fome papers; and the
original Of another.
This is a peculiar cafe, Sir. Tie Proficient
has undertaken to PREJUDICE my client by de-
inn hal IF ha L.lco
He has affirmed TO hirnfelf The knowledge of
the fupreme being himislf, and pretended to
fearch the heart es my highly rcfpeeted friend.
He has proclaimed bin traitor in the face of
that country, Which has rewarded him. He
has let Zip the dogs of war the bel-hounds of
perfeIutiou to huut down my friend And
would rhis Prelident of the u. S. who has raft
ed all this abiurd Glamour, pretend to keep
back the papers which wanted for this tri-
az; where life itieIf is at fake? 1t is facred
principle, that III all fuch cafes, the accufed has
right to all the evidence which is neceifary
fer his defence. And whoever wiihholds this
information, is fubitsntiay murderer, and is
70 recorded in the regitcrs of Heavcn.-Can it
then be prefumed, that the Prefdent would
be forty to have Col. Bars innocence proved
No. II ia irhpombIc. Would the p. u. S.
give his enemies 0or enemies he has like other
great aud good men) would he give them the
proud opportunity of laying that col. B. is the
victim of anger, jealoufy, and hatred? Will
he net ACT with all poiiiblc candour: When
told that certain papers material to our de.
fence, will not be proud to FAY to us g Srs,
yon may have them; will grant you every
Pofibie advantage" Had this been done, the
attorney for the u. States and perhaps the
Executive, never would have faid that thefe
papers are no more material TO us than the
frf paragraph of the laws of Congress. Thefe
gentlemen forget, that it is not their province
to decide, whether The evidence is material to
AIS or not. II is for the corrt to fay, whether
it bears upon the cafe ana whether it is 10 70
before the Petit Jury, or to come before them
feiges, If the motion TO commit for tIeafon be
Continued,
They fecm TO think, that we are not even
10 be truled with theie papers. But why do
they attribute motives 10 Col. B's couHfel,
which they would themfeves difdain Why
not az much honour to ourfelyes, as to the
Prehdent of the u S. himfef!
It may be fuggeted, that this is a private
AMI confidential letter from Gen. w. to the
Pefdent. 1T was 70 fald, indeed, Yefterday
But ifthe PRECEDENT were here himfelf, the court
would have right TO demand, whether in con.
fdential conversations Gen. w. had not gives
very different rtstemeuts, from thofe which
he might here produce What, fir, if Gen.
w had repofed as much confidence if he
had Untitled as much potion into the ear of the
PreEdent, as Satan himfeIf breathed into the
ear OF Eve the PRECEDENT would have been