American watchman and Delaware advertiser. [volume] (Wilmington, Del.) 1822-1828, 1825-08-16
IVY Wilson, No. 400, Market Street.
Volume Nv

power TO remove me from Office. Ills further In
Piled, 1t not laid down in terms, that the Executive
requires not The opinion OF this Court whether the
facts specified under The second charge be true nor
whether they do, 10 themselves, amount to insu-
coordinate conduct, and conduct unbecoming an Off
cer;" both the fact and the coroary being already
established by the opinion of the Executive, mani
tested in the exhibition OF the charges aud the unc-
ton OF this Court being limited to report of any
circumstances OF excuse or mitigation to be offered
on my part-still, the argument of the Judge Advo.
cate, IN answer to the exceptions taken BY my
counsel, concludes with clear and unhesatine
opinion that the charge and specifications are NOT
only sufficient in substance and form bet that they
do specify offences Of military character; for
which the accused may be arraighed and tried be-
lore court martial. Whether punishment be I'M
derstood to be involved in the arragnment and trial.
here spoken of to be deferred to Executive dis
erection SO as 10 reduce arraignment and trial 10 q
mere nquisiton OF circumstances OF excuse and nit
igatlon: or whether judicial power to try and
punish, concurrent with the EIecntire power 10
judge. summarily upon view, and to punish by re-
mova from Office be ahrmed-are questions which
1t would be difficult 10 determine, by any lights in
the preliminary exposition, that has been elected
OF the principles upon which the jurisdiction of this
court may attach itself to the case.
Having still to grope my way through dubious
twilight TO knowledge of what may constitute the
ton, in point both of law and fact. tnust proceed,
by the help of anticipations and coniectures oil the
point OF attack, to defend my self the best may on
every ground.
Though had yielded my conviction, with such
absolute confidence, to the force and concusiyeness
OF the reasons by which the preliminary exceptions
of my counsel to the sufficency of the Cd charge
and its specifications. had been sustained, vet
should not have been in the least Disconnected nor
as | imagined, materially curtaed of my defence,
1t such exceptions had been overruled by any new
and unexpected arguments, which the learning and
abilities enlisted against ne might have suggested
IN answer should, without regret have given IN
disputed sway to the pathological and legal DISGUST
tons, which were supposed to have furnished such
victorious arguments in favor of the charge and spe
cihcaons excepted to. But when / found myself
assailed by species OF nrgamentam nd kominem,
DEPRESSING into circumstances foreign the point il
question:; and proceeding upon the most extraor.
binary Misrepresentation of my language and COM
duct, and OF the motives inferred from them, {
could not orbear 10 discharge myself from the i'm
pntations, and dsclaim the inierences that might
have resulted from this official ard recorded mscons
strnction OF my conduct and motives.
adhere, with undiminished confidence to the
propositions OF law, which have been stated and il.
Illustrated by my COUNSEL acquil OF any necessity
10 answer the I'd charge and its spec fc alions bur
before advert TO the grounds upon which they are
either maintained or contested, must be permit
ted pass, very briefly, under review the collateral
topics OF encouragement, which have been brought
IN aid OF the argument against them.
1. AS an evidence OF my disposition to raise cap.
tious and futile objections, if not Of my want of
candor, 1t has been stated that complained, on the
first day OF the court, Of not having been served
with copy Of the charges and specifications and
yet, the next day produced a copy, with which
had been regularly served and which differed from
I hat hirh haIh ao.,
letters. The fact is well remembered that gave,
as reason Tor demanding fresh copy Of the charg-
es and specifications, difference had discovered
between the copy read and that in my possessio
and my written explanation, the next day, which
hope forms part OF the record, infinitely explains
the difference between the Two. Nor is the stated
result OF the minute calculations, which reduces
u, variance to mere difference Of tW0 letters in
e spelling OF word, by any means correct or
fair. The variance (no matter in how many lpt-
tiers or words 1t conslsed) in The date Of one OF
my letters specified az insubordnale and disrespsct-
ful: the letters were no otherwise specified or dtn-
tined than by naked reference to dates the ore
copy OF the specification gave letter Of one date,
the other copy omitted that, and gave letter OF
another date and so the variance consisted not in
the difference between the spelling OF Mirtseth and
but in the entire letter, which constitut
ed one of the documents of the charge But if it
be true, as has been suggested, that the only Office
Of the Court in this trial, is to offer Precipitation TO
another authority, by which stand already con-
demned upon the strict law and the fact how hope
less The task OF excupation or excuse if he SPIRIT
in which the charges have been instituted, be con-
sentaneous with that by which they prosecuted
% Judgment. For here am charged with litigious-
less, iliberaily, and want of csndor, in my obec-
ion; because had SIMPLY pointed out an impor-
ant defect in the procedure agains, me, all advan-
age from which had voluntarily waived, and had
even conceded to the prosecution an election TO