A. I was prefent, and attended particu. tarly to the charge. it ? 2. Was it read? A. It was read from a book. 2. Have you a diftinct recollection of A. I cannot pretend to ftate the words. 2. Did judge Chafe fay any thing about the prefent adminiftration being weak and relaxed? A. I have not the flightest recollection bf it. 2. Have you any reafon to fuppofe that you would have remembered fuch expreffions had they been used? A. I was Sitting near Mr. John Stephen, with whom I am very intimate, although we differ in political fentiments ; and we had a long talk afterwards, eoncerning the charge, and had any such expreffions been used in the charge, I am certain it would have been mentioned, but nothing of that kind was hinted at. James P. Boyd favorn-examined by Mr. 2. Was you in court when the charge was delivered, by judge Chafe in May 1803? A. I was prefent and heard the whole charge. I believe I was oppofite to judge Chafe, and I paid particular attention to the political part of the charge, being under the impreffion that judge Chafe was watched. 2. Was it read? À. I believe it was; but I frequently caft my eyes from the judge to Mr. Montgomery, because I thought the charge bore hard on him. 2. Did judge Chafe fay that the prefent administration was weak and relaxed than an inference could be drawn from the 2. Have you any reafon for fuppofing that had fuch expreffions been used you would have recollected them? A. I always thought political charges wrong, and if judge Chafe had reflected on the administration, when he is a component part of it, I must have recollected any expreffions which he used. William M'Mechen warn-examined by 9. Was you in court when a charge wa delivered by judge Chafe, at May term, 1803 ? A. I was in court, and was in fuch a fu tuation, that I could hear the charge diftinétly, being not more than five yards from judge Chase. 2. Did the judge appear to read the charge? A. He did. 2. Were any expreffions ufed again the prefent administration ? A. I have not the fmalleft recollection of hearing the administration mentioned. 2. Had you any converfation with any perfon concerning it? A. In about five minutes after the charge was delivered, I went down ftairs, and on my way I met Mr. Montgomery. I asked him what he thought of the charge he replied, that "for this and many o ther offences, Judge Chafe would be impeached." This caused me to pay fome Some attention to what had been faid. time after this I met with a publication in the Anti-Democrat, which was faid to be the charge-I examined it with atten tion, and it did appear to me to be fubftantially the same which I had heard. 2. Did the publication which you faw in the Anti-Democrat, contain any thing about the prefent administration ? A. It did not. and not feeking the happiness of the peo- William 1. Govane fworn-examined by A. I have not a fcintillation of recollection of any thing of that kind, no further Mr. Harper. 2. Was you in the circuit court when the charge was delivered by judge Chase in May 1803 ? 2. Was any thing faid about the prefent adminiftration? A. If I could fwear negatively to any part, after fo long a time, it would be, that there was nothing of that kind mentioned. I think I must have heard thofe expreffions had they been uttered; and if I had heard them, I must have remembered them, because it was but a fhort time after, when I gave my friend an account of the charge. John Campbell fworn-examined by Mr. 2. Was you in the circuit court, in May 1803, and in what capacity did you attend ? A. I attended the circuit court held at Baltimore, in May 1803, by Judges. Chafe and Winchefter. I was fummoned as a Grand Juror, and was appointed foreman of the jury. 2. Do you recollect the charge? A. I recollect fome part of it. 2. Did you keep your eyes on the Judge! A. I did, and he appeared to read the whole time he was delivering it. I have a pretty good recollection of the latter part of it. Q William Cranch fworn-examined by Mr. 2. Was you in the circuit court of Baltimore, when a charge was delivered by Judge Chafe ? A. I was, and was not more than fifteen feet from Judge Chafe. He held a book in his hand, and appeared to read the charge from it. 2. Did he ever appear to leave off reading and fpeak extempore at any time? A. He often raised his eyes, but I did not observe that he repeated more than part of a sentence without looking at the book: 2. Did you attend to the charge? A. I attended particularly to the latter part. Q. Did you hear any expressions about the prefent administration? A. I have no recollection of any expreffions concerning the prefent administration, further than they might be implicated in his obfervations concerning the repeal of the judiciary system. Thomas Hall sworn and examined on the part of the United States. Mr. Randolph.-You have been called to give evidence about a charge delivered by judge Chafe at a circuit court in Baltimore, in May, 1803. Mr. Hall. I cannot recollect the particular language of judge Chafe, as I paid but little attention to the charge. ftance? Do you recollect the general fub A. I have my impreffions concerning it. Q. Was there any thing faid concerning the prefent administration? A. I cannot attempt to give the language of judge Chafe. I live remote from him, and have never converfed with any perfon on the fubject. Q. Did he recommend to the jury to prevent the law for abolishing the general court? A. I think he ofed language to that effe&t. Q. Did he fpeak of the manner in which the prefent adminiftration acquired their power? A. I do not recollect. I think he Spoke concerning the prefent adminiftration, and my impreffions were, that he intended to convey the idea, that the adminiftration was weak, or wicked. Mr. Randolph. We wish to examine Mr. Hay, in explanation of his testimony. George Hay examined by Mr. Randolph. Q. Did you endeavor to diffuade the late" marmal of Virginia from the execu tion of his duty, when in purfuit of Callender? A. I certainly did not-nor did Mr. Randolph intend to convey that idea. Two reafons prevented me; the one with regard to my own character, and the other was that I entertained a better opinion of Mr. Randolph's integrity. conduct in the cafes of Fries and Cooper were, that it would be extremely unpleafant for me to appear before him. Q. What was the political complexion of the jury that tried Callender ? A. I believe that feveral of the jury lived out of Richmond-my opinion is, that they were all opposed to him in political fentiments. Q. What was the political character of colonel John Harvie at that time? A. I do not know. I recollect that he once made an eloquent fpeech in favor of fome refolutions brought forward by the prefent judge Washington, and voted against the republicans. Q. What was the political character ¿ of William Rudford at that tine A. He was called a very moderate George Hay cross examined by Mr. Harper. Q. What point did you fay you wished to argue in the cafe of Callender? A. The conftitutionality of the fedition law. Q. You mentioned an opinion to him, that Callender had kept out of the way? A. I did tell him that I thought heQ Had you any hopes of fuccefs? would be unable to take him. I underfood that Callender had gone to a place where the marshal would not have accefs. Q. Did you mention to him that Callender would furrender at the next term? A. I believe I did. A. I candidly confefs that I had no hopes of convincing any of the circuit judges, and I had but feint hopes of convincing the jury; but I meant to have argued it to the public. Q. For what purpofe, to acquit the Q. Was you then retained as counfel party? for Callender? A. Not then nor ever. Q. Wes you averfe to appear at that term, and for what reason? A. I was averfe to arguing the caufe before judge Chafe. The impreffions made on my mind from hearing of his A, I had but little hopes of doing Callender any good, and I wished to addrefs the public on the conftitutionality of the law. Q. Did you not ftate as a reason to the marthal why you wished Callender not to be tried that term, that he could not be not be in my power to ftate the language Q. Were there not bille of exception in they are fo now. that cafe? A. I do not recollect. David M. Randolph examined by Mr. Harper. Q. Did not Mr. Hay inform you that the reafon why he wished Callender not to be taken at that term was, that there would be more chance of his obtaining a pardon if tried at the next terin? A. I do not recollect Mr. Hay's ex. Philip Norborne Nicholas examined by Q. Do you recollect the cafe which came up to the high court of appeals from Winchester, of a clerk for bribery ? A. I do. I profecuted the cafe, and Mr. Hay was engaged with me. Q. At the clofe of the charge did judgą Chafe give to the jury an exprefs charge to prevent the enaction of the law for the abolition of the general court, or was it an inference ? A. It was in exprefs words, not an in ference. I will ftate further that I never had a converfation with any gentleman who heard the charge, but who coincided in opinion with me as to the latter part. A few days after the charge was published by judge Chafe, I had a converfation with his fon, Mr. Samuel Chafe, in Mr. Evans's tavern, and I then told him the latter part of the charge had been omit. ted. Mr. Harper then prefented the follow ing request from judge Chafe : Mr. President, The ftate of my health will not permit me to remain any longer at this bar. It is with great regret I depart before I hear the judgment of this honorable court. If permitted to retire, I hall leave this honora ble court with an unlimitted confidence in its juftice; and I beg leave to prefent my Q. Were there bills of exception in the thanks to them for their patience and inrecord? A. I believe there were. Q. Was this cafe decided fubfequent to the trial of Callender? dulgence in the long and tedions examina. The prefident obferved, that the rules of the court did not require the perfonal prefence of judge Chafe, and that there was no objection to his withdrawing. Mr. Randolph faid, that on behalf of the managers he must request of the court a poftponement of the cafe until the next day, in order to give time to digeft the evidence, and that perhaps fome of their witneffes would arrive by that time. The court then adjourned. WEDNESDAY, February 20, 1805. The court having met as usual, Mr. Nicholfon obferved, that one of the witneffes on behalf of the United States had arrived, and he wished him examined. Philip Stewart sworn-examined by Mr. Nicholson. Q. Was you not a member of the grand jury to whom a charge was delivered by judge Chafe, in the circuit court at Baltimore in May, 1803 ? A. I was, but I have a very imperfect récollection of the charge. Q. Was there any particular reason why you paid no attention to it? A. I did not feel well pleafed with a part of the charge. Q. Did he throw any cenfure on thofe who had voted for the fuffrage law? A. I felt hurt at fome expreffions which were used in allufion to it, as I had been a member of the legislature at the time the law paffed, and voted for it. 2. What expreffions did he ufe about the fons of men who had erected the fair fabric? A. I think be ufed the word "degeneracy." 2. Was there a recommendation to the grand jury, to use their influence to pre tion of the general court? vent the paffage of a law for the aboli A. I think there was. Here the evidence was clofed |