Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1867-11-27
The POsTPoNENE>T OF THE IEF-
fERSON DAVIS TRIAL

INT Po>TPONENtNT OF THE JEF-
fERSoN DAVIS TRIAL.
Our Dispatches from Richmond yesterday
contained an abstract OF the proceedinss ~ tse
opening OF the United STATES Circutt Cour, An
that city, and the postponemsnt Of the trial OF
Jefferson Davis. Prom later dispatches We
CLEAN the following:
Judge Underwood having indicated desire
ioihear from the gentlemen OF ne "a. NJ WI
lam NJ. Evarts, OF New York, on oehaIf OF tae
Government, said.
"If the court please, he case OF ne upit.a
States against DAVIS, which was called A. -as
last term, of the court and the accused m.
under reeoenizsnce for hi. attebdance az tats
term now 10 b. brought 10 your hOnor's ne
ice, observe the counsel OF Mr. Davis in a.
Tendance, and understood that the prisoner
himself is obedient 20 the reQuisitions OF he
court a. any time. The tutentIoa OF the Gov
ernment IN regard 10 that case II 20 proceed
with the Trial at some iIme during The presen;
term OF he court and the considerations upon
which the day would be n xeo would be buttvo
fold. First as 70 the readiness OF the q Svern-
ment IN regard 20 the production OF their
proofs AND the attendance Of witnesses, which.
however, would not require any considerable
postponement OF the trial from the present
day. But there ~ another Consideration. ana
tnat Is, at what time during the present term
the public duties of the Chief Justice of the
nited States Supreme Court would permit o.
MS presiding with his honor, the district
luoee, n the trial IN this circuit II is under
stood that his public duties at washInetou
during the session, which Is 10 Commence
on next MONDAY, Will preclude hgs attend
ance ~ this trial, and the Government pro-
pose, therefore, TO name a day which will be
In the expected order OF business OF the Su-
preme Court OF ths JRited States after the ad-
Journment Of that court, aud then proceed
with the trial. A. the counsel is In atten daHcs
AND the prisoner 10 m attendance upon the or
oefs OF The court. it ~ proper that thew should
both be relieved from any unnecessary incon-
yenience, and that vpe counsel of the Govern
ment also should Understand what call will ha
made upon them for attendance here 4 pro-
some day, say the third wednesday OF Narch.
should be assigned for the trial.
Judge Underwood.-Do 4 understand thai
tn,s Is with the assent OF the counsel for TIE
Mr.. Evarts.-I understand that they hayepo
OBJECTIONS TO that course; but the counsel WILL
speak for themselves.
Mr.. Charles O'Conor. OF New York. on no.
naif OF the counsel for Mr.. Davis, replied that
they were in attendance, and had no desire
Win reference TO the ordinary progress of
business except that IL should be conduc,ea in
tnat manner most likely 10 be attended wi,h
the least en- barrassment and incon yeniepce To
tne DEFENDANT and his numerous friends. and
10 ms counsel They felt themselves bound TO
render such assistance as might be necessary
IN securing 70 him a fair and full hearing
Tner personal wishes and con venience vonid
nave been greatly promoted by q triaI when
MI Davis was first brought before me coprt
IN May last; and in q greater degree was N trus
tnat their personal wishes and convenieuce
Woulo oe consulted by proceeding at this time
he was apprehensive that the term of the Su-
prene Court might continue beyond the time
now indicated for this trial, and that as a con-
Chief Justice then TO be present here In tbat
contingency the defendant and his counsel
would De suoleeted 10 renewal OF the ineon-
venience which they had been Obliged 70
sn!er, and had suffered uncomplainipcIy ON
two occasions.
Judge Underwood expressed entire acgui.,-
cence IN the arrangement proposed on the part
of the Government. a. the presence o: "a.
Chief Justice In the Trial Of the cause was e.
sential upon various grounds. he approved OF
one sneeesuon OF counsel. looking 20 an under
standing by which the attendance OF witnesses
and counsel might rot be required unless the
trlal was 70 proceed on the day appointed He
beheyed IL was due TO the defendant that two
judges should preside ~ the Trial, as in thst
case the defendant would have the ad VANTAGE
OF appeal 10 the higher court in case OF a dlsa-
greement between ,he Judges upon any I'M
portant question. The proposition made on
The part OF the Government and assented 20
oy The defendants counsel, was agreeable 20
the court and the order proposed by defend
ants counsel would be en- erred
Some further remarks were made bv coua-
sci In regard TO the poe necessity OF ne r-
ne~ai ns OF ne ieave OF absence gwen 70 Mr..
zance in the event OF the trial OF the cause
being informally postponed from the time
nxed 10 q more distant day.
Mr.. Evarts caid n at II, for instance on the
lutn DAY OF March IL should be known uhat the
supreme Court would prolong it's session into
April, then n this court, on the motion OF me
District Attorney, and with the aftendance or
MI Davis counsel resident in Richmond
would make another order that the defendant
attend on the 10Th day OF May, for instance
all would be regular. the recognizance would
De binding, and no in inconveuience would ariee
Judge Underwood replied that the court
would take care OF the rights OF the defendant.
and suggested that the necessary order an rbe
case should be drawn by counsel.
The following order OF the court was then
agreed upon by the counsel on both sides
United States rs. Jefferson Ddris- Counsel
having been heard IN this case for the United
States and for the defendant it is here ordered
tnat defendant have leave 10 depart hence uu-
al the fourth Wednesday of March next a. m
clock in the forenoon Of that day. az which
day and hour he is equested personally 20
be and appear in the court, according 10 the
condition Of his recognIzance.
District Attorney Chandler stated tina; the
day agreed upon had been changed from the
thlrd 70 the fourth wednesday OF March an
order that the probability of the presence of
the Chief Justice al that tune might be IN
creased.