Alexandria daily advertiser. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1803-1808, 1808-04-07
CHANIPAGNY.
Senate Of tie Uasted States.
APRIL l, 1903,
CASE OF John SMITH.

This being the day assigned for hearing
81 ecfhsel, the President said the senate were
y rady to hear the counsel OF john Smith, In
= .ny Shing they Lad TO offer why the resolution
FOR ExgELLING Kim should not be adopt
d.
i Mr. .fdcmS submitted 1t to the senate, whe-
herit was not most proper that the counsel
should be permitted to shew cause, why the
) rhdt should not be adopted He remarked
hamlike cases the whole report, comprising
4 6esrOunds on which the final resolution was
bauded, had been the subject of discussion,
adCfapprobatiop or relection.E q He consider
dthis the correct course, that the world and
sOseritY might know the grounds ON which
tressnate acted.
Aslcrt conversation ensued on this sugges-
dOnOI Mr.. Adams, in which the principles of
Rercpor were incidentally noticed. lnreply
Mr. Adams remarks, it was said that Ii
could not be. expected that deliberate body,
aOTeyer agreed 10 the guilt or innocence of
ue accused, would be able to unite in their
Agreement to complicated report embracing
a'alety Of abstract and disputabie princi-
pies.
Mr. Giles minated tn. idea that this dis
riSlon was premature; that as the senase
AdOy their vote determined to hear counsel
q the report it was proper that this course
mould, in the present stage Of the business,
'epursued. After havins; heard counsel, it
Soald De for the senate, as they then should
zee Mt, either to decide on the resolution a.
pae, or on the report connected with it.
saggestion having been acquiesced in,
Without any vote,
Mr.. Sey, of counsel for Mr.. Smith, asked
40 Mopcnas for Messrs. Davenport, Morrow
sua Sturges, Of the house of representatives,
~ y attest the credibility of witnesses; and
"Ae"ise Tor subpoena for general Wilkin-
twas intimated that the usual mode of
rVoeedlns in such case was to request
house. = ~ - - " ' 49,
~. Mr Aey then opened the defence by few
s 81! concise preliminary remarks. He OBJ
a:nea that the counsel of Mr. Smith felt
y gratifed in appearing before the SEN
g. win body of testimony sufficiently
{ sNO"6 10 Halter them with the assurance OF
,>'.rsole result; that all the apprehensions
eAVn mad arisen from the distance and the
s>,sn' Of the testimony were almost removed;
i eat although testimony was still coming
h., h. eey were fully satisfied with that they
'a = aiready received.
~, ,'e Said that they would be able to Slew
~, ue testimony Of Elias Glover was not
80. s.suy OF credit. He admitted that if his
WI ,e,u,qony were correct, JOAN Smith was un--
sr my OF has seat; but they would be able
n Ie'y 70 destroy its weight by destroying
~ efedibility. They would, likewise, be
- ~ 70 shew that there was nothing else in
4 Other testimony which materially affected
~ character of the accused. They would
n 49,, alter this, enter into d consideration of
~ principles on which decision in this case
- 49, 70 be made; and endeavor TO shew that
! !, ueclslon could only be made according
l. ssi evidence thatthe Senate were bound
~ I 5ue'ciai principles, and that the accused
-. consequently entitled to the same privi-
S NJ he would be in court of Justice.
Z, ~, Aey said he should first proceed to Of
Ssposluons to discredit Elias Glover, He