Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1824-06-04

= nc court was, hercupon. cleared, ard il was
. a.'er elaboration decided The accused il
m ~: nho'ion OF yesterday, presented to the cour
.lis alternative, that they should admit, upon
lne record, the paper then presented for their
incarceration, together with The motion 10 ,chich
11gerfed or, In the event of their refusing to
az ~. so mat they would receive upon the record
that paper by itselfas his protest to their dcci-
nou. Inc court have withheld their assent to
ms nrst proposition, and granted it to the last
me ae'ehce to be prepared by the council is
open 70 the admission of any matter tonctine The
record, not offensive in Itself, aud while that
cnannel is free to the accused, they decline any
turther review of their decision.
hpToposition by the accused was hereunon
"a"ucu 10 the Judge Advocate, to deliberate
: upon which the court Was cleared. and tho
same was read as follows:
III, IN my PROPOSAL made on yesterday, there
was any thing indefinite, deeply regret the
trouble ithas occasioncd the court. NV apolo-
) gy must be, the necessity 1 am Under of SUBJ
tfnlttng all my ideas and yisles TO the court in
writing, and the inaccuracy inevitably arising.
IN compositions prepared Oh the spur of the oc.
casion, IN the presence of the court, and with
out opportunity TO weigh the force and preci
sion of every term. My intention, on yester-
day, was to request that my protest, ,ciM the
suggestions an toi'ting and The t,ro acriften mo-
ftoas therein referred to, should in some shane
or other, appear in the proceedings, so as
to afford Inc the benefit thereof before the re-
viewing and appellate power. If my intention
| was not then expressed with sufficient accuracy
and the court misled as to my wishes, by the in
| accuracy of my Expression granted its Assem-,
to receiving my protest, only because they be-
iiered asked no more, Inow apply to have this
motion, and the other papers therein alluded
10, received IN some shape or othe-, most agree
aoie 10 the court, among its proceedings, so as
to be IN condition to avail myself bcfoti fhe
Secretary OF the Navy and the President of the
United States, as well as this court of all leoal
| benefits l may derive from them And 10 pre-
vent all future misrepresentation, as to the intent
OF this my application, hand in, with this mo-
ton, the papers Iallude to, and which wish
to appear among the Courts proceedings, all of
them signed by my hand, and numbered 1, 2.
| ., with the addition of the paper now i'm posses
SION OF the Judge Advocate, in which disclaim-
| ed all design to use Objectionable terms, and
| prayed leave to reform them.
Whcreupon the Court was cleared, and twas
decided,
"The Court have already admitted the paper
'disclaining all design to use Objectionable
terms and the suggestion in writing upon
Their record; they have rejected the motion
precefIng the first of these two papers they
hoW decide, that the accused must not assume
the right of instructing the Court Ia disposition
which they regret to perceive is becoming an
parent on his part-that he must not cnbarrass
their proceedings by pressing on them what they
deem unnecessary matter, and that the counsel
for the accused must confne himself TO the Imi-
tatons presented to him by the rules Of the court
and the court will now proceed to the examinai
ton of the witness,
The Court being opefed and the prisoner
witness, and audience admitted, the above de-
cislon was read, and the accused presented to
the Judge Advocate, the following written re-
quest
81 pray that may be put in possession Of
the papers, which the Court have refused to re-
ceive among its proceedings" And he was
informed that the only paper presented by him
during the trial, which had been rejected, was
then in his possession, having been returned to
him by the same order in which his rejection was
contained
And the examination Of Capt. Porter was re-
sumed.
| Question by accused. You have stated that
on the 18th August, 1923, the date of your letter
to me. "You sincerely desired TO make me
your FRIEND" presume sir you then thought
me worthy Ofyoiir friendship, as YOU sincerely
wished to make me your frienda
| Answer. had the same desire to make any
other man my friend.
Question. You do not answer directly to nv
question, sir, beg leave 10 repeat it. / do not
your friend which you had TO make any other
man your friend, but did you think me worthy
OF your friendship, as you wished to make nc
your friend1
Answer. / certainly did wish to part on friend
ly terms with every officer under my command.
Lieut.. kennon, when he parted with me, GER
tainly carried with HIM my best wishes.
Question. Has any other part of the letter of
the 18th August been in any manner altered
since you signed and sent I'll,
Answer. can observe no alteration in any
other part
Question. Does any other part of the letter
qualify, explain, or revoke tile sentiments ex-
pressed in the clause above cited, or have aIu-
sion therefor If it does, be pleased to cite the
passage or words which you think do so duality,
explain, or alIude to, the passage cited.
Answer. None-It appears to me that the
letter si2nds, in all its parts, exactly as when
/ sent it, with the exception of the envelope.
I Question. rs those other passages in the
letter relate to official duties only, and not to
your opinion ofmy personal and official charac-
ter, would it have been consistent with your
ideas of service, that should, unnecessarily
have published those PASSAGES to the world on
the 18th December, while the 60 Weazeln was
yet sailing under those orders.
Answer / think it would be as proper tc
publish them at one time as another
Question. Is it proper, at any time, for an
olbcer to publish his orders relative to service
/ Answer. don't think should do it.
Question. You admit that you did write Il
me letter containing the very words which
published, on the 18th December, as yours
you admit, too, that the residue of that lette
not only had no alusison to, or influence on, Tx
passage published, bat that, consistently viii
your opinion of service, could not have pub
lishcd, on the 18th Of December, 1928 the resi-
due of that letters what, then, was the guilt in