Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1829-07-03

euaI the question OF the irregu!arty Of the
-ags had been sufficiently ARGUED.
i Mr. KEY then made sol,u ohserv,, ions -, ,c,,o
Oh inc course OF the proceedings which had how
ADOPTED and pursued by the United States Counsel
inverted 10 the charge which had been made OF q
Vialctive disposition and spirit against DIR Watkins
as nc ad moi know upon what ground TN. decsio,, f
me Court might be placed, bat That it may be nncn
ceG oy the Impression thus eHteuvourcd 10 be STAN,
pea upCl them, IL was necessary tor him t., add some
REMARKS 10 " lat had fallen from Mr. Swami IL
| referred to tie care which had been taknn bv The
~ "u"se' nj tlIe commencement OF the term, in
;; e''ge l" Tie GRAND jury, 10 allay eyvyy preu-
Gice which might result from parlv consi,,ruinus
lie sat. that would have been the lIeght OF folly
III e,n 10 nave suppr." that the result OF ti.i trial
coud De influenced by any hns but the irresistible
weight oil testimony which would be irouohl t,r,vo Ri
against tie accused. To hive su,:p,se,j so yu,d
i;ave been the height of ollv or to Lave slsrectsj
thal conviction could be produced by lnr other con
s'oer toiis' mere. werc the accused brought
u the iiose OF his friends 10 he tried If The
Court believed that there mad been treat r;,ri; IN
Cypress Tue accused, Il uught be influential on the
opinion "i tic Court lie sorry that ai!usion
was made to he rross sanders which had been thrown
out against the Crane! jury in certain ia ners Tt ,,s
TO Ia regretted that the newspapers were not Lett to
!ii"laTe Their matters IL thelr way.-IIc wished
chat the Grand Jury would meet .bos SANDERS lv
manly and independent line ocu,luct lie referred
20 l!SsS,r''gu"9e OF paper, which was calculated to
nave 1nrSaiiar influence one Of the Jury, WHICH
was T:li more likely to affect their deliberations
Than l:.c language which had been Yesterday referred
TO- Inc United States Counsel had urborin 10 echn
the tone OF the papers, bu; such an echo had been
heard on Tie other side OF language which h.I i'm
eeH Inc w"Fss itelngs a.d;.s worst .zotvcs 10 The
Government.
Judge lfEusroN said, lie had seen. nothing OF the
!;l!d - the newspapers.
Mr.: hEf SAID sncb language had been heard cv-
cry Where. 1t had been family echoed in this Court
lIcre some further conversation took ,lac. he.
tween Judge FHRUsroN and the Counsel, III which
INC former discalined any suspicion of npro,,r con
duct the part Of the proscci,tinsr Attorneys and
Ia S;i,
tempted TO inisead OF trcpan the Jury.
. Mr.. Is Ely then went into history Of the procee-
nih9s which mad taken place. lie conLeutled shat the
Ifand Jury had called lof these instructions Inv re-
turning one bill gnorUA4Ds, and the f1dino aroher af
&ef u conversation with Mir. Swami Oh which it was
understood that the question of law as TO the lame
should be lett the Court. lie contcndcd that ;h,
Di!!s taken III conjunction with the conversations with
mr.. Swami, MIS- direct call ontfr Court for instruc-
tons. TO suppose that the Grand jury would not
nave found The second BILL if there had been all ex-
pianatn OF the effect, would be suppose that tLey
would tInd bill which could not hurt an individual
Dur would not find one under Which an individual
might be tried. lie believed therare that 70 have
sent tn eNplana alton would have been iSultinr TO the
5iry lie did nOt nrrogate perfection Tor a:Iv MAN.
anu much as he respected the Grand Jury he did not
consider them superior TO preiudices, and OUT of
tieif influence. According to Tie view taken by the
opposite Counsel It would seem thai the Jury had
considered their legal knowledge superior to that
OF the District Attorney and even TO chat ofthe Court
10 suppose that the Jury did thus believe or did
"tI Oh! SuCl It principle, W1uu reG S.r them liable
to the suspicion of having acted under the influence
ot certain prendices. lie minated, however, that
the Jury did ask Tor the Instructions and could not
therefore, be subjected to such ilnputation in no
other view could the Grand Jury stand justified -
IL suspect that they would refuse to- take th. opin.
Ion OF the court, would be to Inpeach their motives
lie could see no reason TO doubt TO the course
WHICH tho court were called to pursue. There
could be to suppose that the Jury did not
desire the opinion OF the court; ana had 10. in crcL
asked ior Instructions.
lie endcavo ID TO argue away the objection taken the
sends second indictment to the same s:and jury wcl had
returned similar bill gaorGasus That objection not
Apply /" inns cas1; as tho bill only back
mistake lie asked ii mistake be There
could be no objection 10 such Correction lie argued tie go,
That eight bills lad been the grand jury admitted
bn he deied pihat any of those indictments
ofe jury thai the abstract falsely iraudo!eny altered
and was thus tine comptroller by accused. The i
Considered the Chine as fraud and not felony.
Tine proceedings of the United States ie insisted, wese IN
Unison with the uniform practice o the profession They have
been characterized by iObchrancc while the other side
was attempted 10 raise Of political feeling which could
carry tue accused through his trial without punishment lie
denied that the jury had been duclc in their hands
instead OF that hcy had had opportunities of obtaining impress
sons which not lie justified One of the counsel Dr.
atkins, and his also, had been before grand iu
When these individuals before the jury would rot have
been more proper 10 call OIL The TO gc any instructions
Mr. Coke said he had been before the grand jury; not in
Reference the OF Dr. Watkins He had zone before the
grand jury prosecute in in which lie had believed
great crime had been committed, and winch be still believes
have cen committed He required y the I,y to bdrg
forward DR. Watkins his prosecutor This the
only reason for his appeamuce and the appeaauce ofc
Of DR. Watkins before the grand jury. The district attorney
had after giving suppose that would 90 on
with that case declined to DO od requested i 50
, the jury.
| Mr. Swami said few words in explanations
Mr. hey ofopnon that the proper way would have been
to 60 to the court to direct proceedings if the district attorney
had refused to act and thought best get rid this
Charge against DR. Watkins, by knocking down the witness
Mr. Coke said that the greater part of the argument today
had been founded impressions supposed be made upon
the grand jury by improper means nc would suggest the pro-
Icty of examining the grand jury in order that they may have
TIC opportunity TO free themselves from the imputaion.
Mr. Key said there objection 10 ibis course On the
part of the opposing counsel.
Judge Cranch said the satisfied with the state
Gcnts which had been made, and did think necessary 70
examine the jury
| Here the rested.
i s.
.lLore MHeLLlAnn zad nnnLhc. LALLoL LarnranL -.