The Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1822-1829, 1825-07-25

s.''e - ~ &
WAsftxsroS. J,aY iss-At lie Maya
tplfi Martial, on friday tl1e isth ~ si.,
ted Is orr iasi, the reasuns & anillnflfies re-
I'D upen ~ suppari llle OBJECTIONS fffn.rs
u siitcd by The GuanseI sr f'nu,nedor.
'erter 10 The seeoui riatge. md iiis seer4
raj specifications VI H. were rad and hfai-
I'D u laeae Hy tie apnsci rum nfitfrg
aatfs, prepatd vince ilis preceding 80
1nnfefnens Those noirs, nNiAg II the
lnndisiosiiion Of tn Counsel, nsis IT the
tim. stated - be- IN no rough and llpshie
: statc 10 be delivered IL pnisunre to fiie
iaffufr ofdef uf the Court II was there
iare arranged ibgfa fir Transcript siiuult
be prepared Dnd delivered IN tllr next ea,
whnh Vim daDe, atrardihgly. and satur.
das The 7ill ahernapon Tia Cunt nj
tnnfnrd, having pnilef confederation fbn
very inrpftani questions Involved iniliess
objections. which re Judge Atlsoeaa Is
lsApeticd tilhef tu adHiit or nnsner, on
Nonday.
IT., understood, that tummodurc sspr
arr has applied tela trial, under charges
pr fffrrd aaaiust bin concerning lis L,lu
command In the pFlHc. t. ibe Cunt
Marital nom IA sessiap. We Fave uot hpAei
whether II will be IN the power oi thu En- :
eflffisF To- gfattfy III wishesj III This nafltr2
ultf. HilheHo tie Cunt on Ma case bns
ben ,rlrned, we belirvs, On sttount Of
the abs'nee ola nniefial nitlrss in hrs be-
haH Me oSdsanI Oh y liosn death news
having lm.n received, Tie gammodafe -
siid 80 desire no lul,l,ss aslay bon spee.
day triad, f.Not Ut
NAVAL couRf.-Jaly 10
| The Argument al' Com Pefler's { .nnsrl
IL support Of The objections f,tu,rllt stated.
IN the weond ehMsr aud The sprcilieain,ns
nl the same, was again read IN open Casiti.
| lie Court Nas then cleared IA drlfhelatt,
- II appeared whether lie Judge Alb q.
eale's answer 90 ibe algun.ft ~ the Com.
modhrr's Counsel should he delivered i9o-
pen Court aud II being determined that IL
shnnld be so, the Judge Allocate proceed
ed 10 deliver n writers argument contain.
ing very elaborate justification Of this
elnfse aud specifications IN quesiion, 10 an-
aWet "a the various objections taken hs tic
1pnesei and 10 the IeasonB aud auihorf.
lies advanced ny the Counsel IN support VI
The sanr Upon III. conclusion of which,
the court WAS again ecnrpd, aud af.rr con.
siderable delibrrnliou 10 cUncla,r, was Open.
refer the question Of the siliciercy Ut the
charge and specifications, TO the Attorney
General and also nnnih,r question, upon a
point raised by the Judge Advocate IN his
argument, neither tho objections, tahnn by
the Comfnpddrr'y Counsel 10 the lrgal snf-
Jfciency of tins chatgc aud specifications,
were nui 10 be treated ny aemipfer IN q
Court of CammpH Law which admhfrd
the ifp'.r Of the Jucf changed "a that tie
objections ~ llir legal anlIiciftiey af tie
charge were pperrmad, tbr fact was 10 DO
h1d M conciaapdg sdmined, ard ~ be
followed by sentence of condemnation, no
of cbufBr.
request WAS ihcn made 81 ihe plrt "
Com fnfief's Counsel, for leave 10 reply
to The judge Adioeafe. I'lisreqarst WAS
stated rs mere rDeeA III that aubnnred
At The liine The al jeetious wire originally
Gisn IN, aud vas again utgsd, rpoD Now
grounds, sngge8led by The eehtse tHleu by
the Judge ADV Ia bis aoswer, aud by
The resolution of the e nj 70 reFei The
question Ia lhn Atofnpy Geperal. II was
sid tliat the remarks nj the Judge Ad,o-
cate, ~ the enGrsp Of hisatgunatni. insiHa-
ted certain inpifhions upon the een1uct
ofihraccnGtd or his e1nnsfl, ~ TIE flenfs..
Of the Trial md "a those imeatstons nere
90 80 upon The rc1id, II WIS proper tina.
the enph0iie contradiction, which MAS
ready on the pari ct the aeenmd, should
be- recorded aoug side Of lllem that # HE
arguments, for or against the objections.
were to be- laid before ibc Attorney GEMS
raj, Il Wa proper the sntise fiens ofihe ~.
speeliso parties should be submitted -
which could not lir dune. iiilts reply 10
the new gtounds taken by til, Judge Adm
cnir were admitted. Soioe xplsnalons
chslleJ, abont l's snpposcd imp,tsllele up
Oh the conduct efhe deftnce--and il VAS
uodcrslond tia, ihpse explanations amnuI-
ted to - com plrte disasowal IT such inpu-
tnipna, The Court determined (lfpf b.
| ing cleared 10 deliberate not 10 lrteie. nny
/ reply to the argument OF the Judge AlYo-
cate ID.
-~a2D
R1cnMosp, Jolly r.. Fourteen or fr
teen feet oitlle Canal coniignous 10 Bl igga
SlGatpble' + I,ufks. have been Min The iast
few days cafrird away This Is tlt second
tune tllt The stone wall whitli WAS com.
pietrd uDdrr The contract made i,y lhs
Commissioner of the James Ra ~ Ctumpa-
ny with these genliei~au has been tf0l cg
doNn. Soon after the work was received
tIir commissioner Discovered that II MAS so
weak thsu il could not withstand the fnree
cf The water that rushed against v, and he
entered into nsw contract laf Tie erection
Of hliirrsses 10 sappnrtii Bot, except IN
lhoae pnrts immediately adjoining the but
tresses, II IS, Ia the opinion of very eenlpc-
tent Judges Who have recently exulnissd Il
still inadequate 10 the purpose tor Which It
was lpilt, a4ld must give way. We meu-
iion this ciAunlslanee, not with view Of
casing the slightest blame on fbos,' gem
llcheli, s. lpse contract WAS completed, no
doebi, by agents, bnt 10 show the abspnts