answer interrogatories before that judge? No, sir, nor had the judge any legal authority to act as he did. Afterwards an order was given to the marshal to transport him hither to give evidence.

pur

Let me, in a few words, state the improper manner in which the government, or its agents, proceeded. Wherever they suspected any person of being able to give information, they carried him before a magistrate, and forced him to give testimony, all on one side; and wickedly interfered with the purity of the stream of justice. What, sir, would a court of justice permit ex parte testimony to be read? A witness, who can give testimony on the side of the defendant, and for that reason does not suit their pose, is passed by and never heard. They take the evidence for the prosecution in such manner as they think proper, and designedly trammel and shackle the witnesses so as to be bound by their own ex parte testimony, when confronted with it on their examination in court. I heard one of the gentlemen, who prosecute, (Mr. Wirt.) the other day, with great delight, expatiate on the nature of ex parte evidence. He made a most eloquent and correct speech, to prove, that such evidence is not dictated by the witness, but by the person who takes the depositions, and that it ought not to be trusted. If ex parte testimony be so improper, when only a motion is made, or when trivial collateral points are discussed, how much more improper must such testimony be in an all-important case, where the honour, reputation and life of an individual are at stake? Was it for the sake of the government that general Wilkinson did all this? I will admit, that holding an important and lucrative office under the government, he might think, that he would retain his present advantages and obtain future favour by this conduct. But this was not his only motive. He had every thing at stake himself. He was most deeply interested. All those acts of tyranny and oppression, which he committed: the violation of the constitution, the prostration of the judiciary, the arbitrary imprisonment and transportation of individuals, are to be justified, by such testimony, against the gentleman for whom I am now concerned. Would he not, when thus interested, procure testimony in so garbled a state, that he would be able to prevent the disclosure of the whole truth on the crossexamination of the witnesses?

Then, sir, having shown that all these acts had a tendency to obstruct and divert the pure stream of justice, let us see what were the immediate and direct acts of general Wilkinson. He invites Knox to his own house. Serjeant Dunbaugh told him that he had invited him. Dunbaugh was surprised that this great god of New-Orleans, who trampled on their rights, and who confined and transported suspected persons, should condescend to converse with such a man as Knox. He thought that it would be an intrusion for such a man as Knox to approach so august and sacred

a presence. Knox at first declines going; but afterwards goes. Wilkinson invites him to take a seat, and began by asking him if he knew Dunbaugh; not that he really wished to know any thing about Dunbaugh, whom he already knew well, and concerning whom he knew it was probable that Knox knew nothing; but he used it as an introduction. He then proceeded in an insinuating manner, about his coming down the river. "Have you got your money yet?" "No." "How much is due you?" "One hundred, or one hundred and fifty dollars." "Well, I can oblige you with as much money myself." Kind affectionate man! What was all this for? To make interest with Knox, and to induce him to favour his views. "Well, what did you know in all your trip coming down?" Knox answered, that this was not the business he came on. He wants Knox to show him all he knew, and offers him one hundred or one hundred and fifty dollars as a bribe. It was a direct attack on the honesty of the man; to be sure, it was done very smoothly, as general Wilkinson does every thing, when he chooses. A charming opportunity of getting one hundred and fifty dollars, for only telling a few lies!

Mr. MAC RAE. I hope the gentleman does not mean to insinuate, that general Wilkinson solicited him to say an untruth; there is no evidence whatsoever to that effect.

Mr. MARTIN. I state facts, and insist that its direct tendency was to get him to swear to what was untrue. I do not say, that general Wilkinson said, in downright plain terms, "I will give you one hundred and fifty dollars for telling what is untrue;" but that the direct tendency of his conduct was, to induce him to swear to a falsehood, if he were capable of such baseness; and Knox declares, that the offer was made in such a manner, that he considered it as a bribe. He begins again to ask him about his affairs; he takes pen, ink, and paper, and notes down what he said; but so differently from the real meaning of Knox, that he disapproved of it, and would not proceed further.

The next thing we hear is, that he receives subpoenas, to fill up the names of the witnesses. That he requests lieutenant Gaines to find out Knox and summon him; and that he did summon him under a military order. When summoned, did Knox attempt to refuse to come hither? He was willing to come, and made no other objection, except that the notice was too short; that in his situation, he was not prepared to set off on a journey of twelve hundred miles, and that he had no money, but expected to get some soon, and then he would come. He only refused on account of his want of preparation, and of money. Was this criminal in poor Knox? Because he does not wear a sword and epaulets, and wants the means to enable him to come, he is to be treated as a felon! (It was not then known that the military chest was to be drawn upon, for the purpose of hiring witnesses to VOL. I. 2 X

come.) Why did not general Wilkinson come sooner? He had been subpoenaed before Knox. Why did he not obey the process of the court promptly? He takes his own time; and only comes when he finds it convenient. Was. there any attachment sent against him after his great delay? The court, grand jury, and all of us, must wait from day to day to suit his convenience and pleasure; but poor Knox, because his convenience was to be a little attended to, was treated like a felon, thrown into gaol, with negroes and criminals; from whence he is sent on board a prisonship, as soon as it is ready to sail, and brought hither by force. All these are general Wilkinson's acts. He filled up the subpœna with Knox's name, and therefore caused him to be summoned. Here there is a chasm in the chain of the evidence; but it is easily supplied. We find him, in the next place, in the hands of the sheriff. How he came into that situation is not absolutely certain; but no person who hears me can doubt, that it was by general Wilkinson's contrivance; as also that he was carried on Sunday before judge Hall, who found him in the hands of the sheriff, and the next day put him into gaol, because he refused to answer the printed interrogatories. General Wilkinson applies to judge Hall, to know how to compel Knox to come to this court. The answer was, that some person must make an affidavit, that he was a material witness for the United States; and this affidavit is made by general Wilkinson. The very man who is endeavouring to bring him by force, is the person who does the act, that was said to be necessary to carry that purpose into effect.

It is said, that general Wilkinson directed Mr. Gaines to consult the attorney general and some other lawyer. The attorney general is the person whom general Dearborne, the secretary at war, directed Gaines to obey. The other lawyer consulted, is Mr. Duncan, general Wilkinson's aid-de-camp; who marched before him when he went into a court of justice and bade defiance to the civil government; insulted and resisted the judicial authority of his country, and placed the laws at the feet of the military. Mr. Gaines found Knox in jail among thieves, felons, and negroes, and placed under a guard. It is said, that Gaines took out Knox in his civil garb, and acted as a deputy marshal; but in truth his military garb hid it all. The gentlemen express doubts whenever rights are to be supported, but on all other occasions, they entertain no doubts at all; indeed I was astonished, that they did not get up and say, it was the clearest case in the world, that the commitment of Knox was legal. We know who wanted to bring him to this place. It is said, that on the subject of acting as deputy marshal, Gaines had no previous communication with general Wilkinson. I believe it, because Gaines says so. But the marshal had given a deputation to Gaines for the very purpose of

bringing Knox to this place; and therefore it is reasonable to presume, that it was contrived by Wilkinson. They say, that a deputy is not obliged to give bond; but I say, that in the first place, a deputy marshal is bound to give a bond for the faithful performance of the duties of his office, and in the next place, to take the same oath that the marshal takes. It is required by the act of congress, (See Graydon's Digest of the Laws, p. 247.) that before a deputy marshal acts, he shall take the same oath with his principal, and must give bond. Gaines was unwilling to do it himself, and he was informed that he might do it by another. Now no principle is more clear, than that a deputy cannot make a deputy, and this act being performed by Dunbaugh was therefore illegal. But it is said, that there was no collusion, but on the contrary a variance, between Wilkinson and Hall. This was the strongest reason in the world, to make Hall dread to give Wilkinson offence; a man, who but a short time before came into a court of justice and looked proudly around to the court, insulted the judges, set at defiance the writ of habeas corpus, and told them, that every man whom he suspected, he would take up and transport in like manner as those, whom he refused to release in obedience to the writ; and denounced two gentlemen of the bar, as traitors to their country, because he knew that they were the most able and determined to oppose his military usurpation. Judge Hall had therefore great reason to dread his displeasure, and a repetition of the same treatment.

Now let us see how this poor fellow got out of gaol. It was by a deputation by deputy Gaines to serjeant Dunbaugh. The counsel for the prosecution examined the order in court, and they say, that Mr. Gaines did not sign it in his military, but in his civil character as deputy marshal, because he did not sign himself "captain" at the bottom. The order to Dunbaugh is not signed by him as deputy marshal; on the contrary it commanded him. "You are hereby requested and commanded to take &c." not " you will oblige me by taking, &c." It is addressed "to serjeant Dunbaugh," and it commands him, and being from captain Gaines to him as serjeant, it must be in his military character. The order authorised and commanded him to take Knox out of goal and carry him on board the vessel. If ever there were a military order in the world this is one. Let us examine the civil and military character blended. As deputy marshal, general Wilkinson had no right to order Gaines to do any thing; he was as free from his authority as I am. As a citizen of the world, he had no right to order him, except he chose to exercise an illegal power. Dunbaugh was as free, as a citizen, from the authority of Gaines in his character of lieutenant, as any other citizen of the United States; and, as a ser

jeant, he was as free from his authority as deputy marshal, as I am; (and God knows what I should have been if I had been then at New-Orleans,) and yet lieutenant Gaines told us, that he was so much under the command and in the power of Wilkinson, that if he had ordered him to put Knox in irons he would have done it. What sort of civil authority was it, by which a military officer was employed to bring the witness to this court, and that officer bound to put him in irons if his general ordered it? Was it not under that authority that he was brought round without a shirt, except a borrowed one? These are the methods by which testimony is to be obtained! Instead of using the legal means of subpoena and attachment to obtain evidence, witnesses are thus illegally forced to come and give testimony in a court of justice! Has not this a direct tendency to destroy the purity of trials?

But it is said, that this court has no right to take cognisance of the offence, because it happened at New-Orleans. If general Wilkinson, after having committed this offence, had not come hither, this court could punish him, the first time it could find him within its jurisdiction for affecting a cause depending here. His interfering with the pure principles of the administration of justice was a contempt of the court. It is a principle of law, that every interference with the administration of justice is a contempt of the court, and punishable wherever its process can reach. Why is it improper and punishable by attachment to insult a judge sitting in court? Because it tends to intimidate him and prevent an impartial judgment. Why are publications in news-papers concerning any cause depending in a court prohibited by law? (This has been lately done in this very place.) Because it tends to make impressions unfavourable to one of the parties, and its immediate tendency is, to obstruct the pure sources and channels of justice. Most of these things had happened at New-Orleans; and the offence was incipient there, but was not completed till they arrived here. It was a continued act. Knox wished, but was not permitted, to come on shore to get clothes, and not to be brought into a court of justice like a dirty beast.

But serjeant Dunbaugh went on shore with him, confessedly to prevent him from missing his way, but in reality because they did not choose to trust him alone; so that he still was confined, for they would not trust him by himself. The conduct of general Wilkinson in the first movement was most artful. He asks him, "Why Mr. Knox, are you not afraid to appear before me?" Why should he be afraid of him, unless he referred to his military despotism? for he had nothing to do with him; and as to his being with colonel Burr, it was the civil magistrate that he should have been afraid of: he could not be afraid