Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1829-06-30

val Of six weeks, SINCE any testimony had 49, 80
u0 oano July, during which loose reports and nate
e"s Eeve reacsed them from many unofficial .ourc.~
the court snow called TO give an echo to m. .S
accusations which have been against the Jury
by nstructing them do what, on their OATH r. ~
long since refused to do - ~
announcer EVIL on which DO called upon the co,,,t
20 Jay their hand IS this practice of alown, an
n." ~ oe mace the subject of new Indictments
pcsciseu In constant succession, day after day nv,
the sunie Grand Jury. Ue insisted Tint this ,s
osS Viontion OF Justice. ind of the practice ~ Tho
nngish courts, where the throwing out of a hin III
indictment was complete Gischarre Of Tho n.....S
! IL was not allowed to tanper with Grand - H.
Tue manner IN which they have now been tamnorei
Wit any enc tompering in this manner, before
Jury would be liable to prosecution for per-
Jury let, mere, as soon indictment ia gnor.
Ell, new one, tofidem rerbis is presented He S,ir
.aeu tnul' "hen an indictment WINS thrown out the
uScusea was at liberty to so thereof without toy nm
,'i 1'e next tenn and that it would be monsron, II
lie could not. He sustained himself on This 80.
ny reference TO Blackstone and Jacobs Law III
tlonary. o" Dic-
The Presentnent ola jury is recorded 70 nj, ,no -,
.e eSil Oh thelr elaboration under solemn oath: and
they are now called upon to record RI nil ,r,n tha
CONTAMINATION OF their own conscicnces IN, the revcs
SUI SUI o ineiS own solemn decision. He declared in
tue course OF his argument, that were no nm
l'ry he would listen to evidence of crime &C. ~
1t involved the safety of the country unless Tho W..
ness was sworn to the matter of some spccifc acc
eierfns again to the fact, which he re. as.
serted that not particle of testimony was talon r
oath oy the grand jury any of these iudct ms,ts
! ne regarded it on,inous Of n sts,. ~ ,t;"..
"sl disastrous to individual liberty and constitutions
" ''g"e Chucr THIS loose practice of SWEARING, ven
cruiy, much evil might arise. On the second as,
the term, number OF witnesses were sworn in 80
ere terms to give evidence Suppose it was prone
10 sue witness a charge of periurvs or =.
prosecution. You 90 to the Jury and CIV, ..V. sos'
found bill, now tell me upon what evidence ~ -.
whose testimony this was found" Their answer l.
i arG pound ny our oath not 10 disclose whit Won
ASK and bus the object of The prosecution !; 49,.
Cal Tic referred again to the fact that tho ,ccn,
III tNs case hod been imprisoned, merely in conso
H"cNce Oh me ARTIFICIAL manner III which this caso H.
"Ec, 'ahaGed Tor more than two months: and ,b,,
made to suffer Ill the punishment of on;it nus
,.u"i'ed that tue cause of this DELAY is 10 vva t;,
WI uno'"er witness to come from Pensacola: u,;,
rs. W WV. li,,sht nave been here six or seven weeks
aSo: was only produced to day; and thus instead -
| having the head and front of his offence r,aJ %
ana presented against him, the accused is n,oda ~
VS,lm OF protrncted and nterrnimab bic persecnti,
WI. H. > Coke then took upihe argument nm en-. -
lie sad tins motion rhou, any S,,rwl,; a'e
rcs, T. Is no indictment before tho on which can
an entirely new question court, AZ ,c cue pIesenc
AM, ~ nccr OF the tar has right ask OF the cor,
sn,ne matter rs in court which s,.h apnl;c,o nor a
cnu, tn at, any suoh can be made This notion 70 tI
60 ~ eh eT pare Lt ecdiHs ground Of ,be'
on ~ INC grand jury had found What thew had han e
c'I' have permitted counsel for the .ess would DE
MOTION Tor tho cour, TO instruct jury TO take sn
! put this motion time. e''Ao' HiccVant %
u he rai'rc, 10 the influence the C;oyemns,, j.; ,,;
pleasure Of the Government BY whom he MIS- Once at the
s attorney is appointed by the Government and holds Mt
ooe al their pleasure. The proceedings of The % ois p,s
me accused is ignorant of the evidence be are
organs Ty. sn;r Greeted by the Government or their
m oo.ern'cnt IS Paernai and have no Other v;s rs ,,
practice may differ, him to saw E .,snry ana
@ protect the public good the princne. 81
ce ana the equal administration the law the eassr ol JUS
would require aids om the court which arc
'nd s"eh MS an. not given Others All the
Pm" preceding are on the sido ofhc Government and az
me interests of the individual LOST sigh, of IN ~, ao si
apcauon IT the counsel for the accused had be p S;
10 piVncses such as those claimed by tina opp,,iny cn!
moua thoy not have asked the court for nstmc,on.
various other pon, in on 'ah er rofs statements ~,
y 70 guard t'"ir cien, against The mist lefs of er me-,
coloured testimony. &c pare ana
m M tns grand jury agnst the rye ofavir- mic.
"hsn me la1 he eontendcd that they had shown ,h,, .
J1e c ~, ~" ne,cL than The counsel FOR the u S,atss
go ~ % sis'ahe'i inc grand their opinion tina, 70,
eIy mad horn committed That the mere altcra -
sr eoune, @ =" oscy VIII not be pretended by op,o-
~ i?i such Peteice would he in direct oppoSition
" e o'einh Judgment OF this rend IN he ,,S,
which lad already been before court TO ho,
"a 10 mat winch the jury had ignored the same go,nd IS
re argued that, unless it should appear that w,hout s
rinse cms'auca forgery had been Committed ,hs y ,
n 91sd the decision the judgments Of tho couri ana
mere would be an evident ncompatiiliy in giving IN b .
,be 10 come 70 different rcsnlt lie also referred i,
m MfAte oi legal differences drawn nv the ronooi ~ IL
, ~n'n wore mixed up with the facts snoci6ed in the
I Us a OF me subject Of tho instructions asked for
erao ofence, was not sustained 10y the alterations IF H.
' H;'o ne cnended that II bad never been ALLEGED fa,
var CoNe tcn sa1, that after luminous v;ery ,,b -
been taken by Mr. Jones, would NOT rnb,s Ih nan
any further remarks. 49, ""io Tue court with
WI 'wann hcn suggested to the court, that az ba 6e ~
n,ws,, would greatly accommodate him if he cond i
ioWsu un'h Tomorrow morning prepare his arr,mcns
1be court expressed their acquiescence o'''"S
P s On Saturday, Mr. Swami rcplin, to GIN
Jones; and Gen. Jones, ar. Key, aud Mr. Ccxe afso
spoke upon collateral points, Gen. Jones in bi
rophcation' exempted the Counsel for the prosec,>.
ton ifom the force of his observations tho day before
charging oppression upon the prosecutions Air. Ko1
attempted to retaliate, by charging that one o thu,
Counsel for the accused, had in company will, SIM
OF Or Watkins, gone before the Grand jury tho oh
Jcct OF which could only be- 10 transfer publ;c -,
tnntlOn md nAiItta IL