Page images
PDF
EPUB

president. He submits it to the discretion of the attorney. Of course, it is to be understood that he has no objections to the production of the whole, if the attorney has not. Had the president, when he transmitted it, subjected it to certain restrictions, and stated that in his judgment the public interest required certain parts of it to be kept secret, and had accordingly male a reservation or em; all proper respect would have been paid to it: but he has made no such reservation.

As to the use to be made of the letter, it is impossible that either the court or the attorney can know in what manner it is intended to be use The declarations therefore made upon that subject can have no weight. Neither can any argument on its materiality or materiality drawn from the supposed contens of the part in question. The only ground laid for the coort to act upon, is the affidavit of the accused; and from that the court is aduced to order that the paper be produced, or the cause be continued.

In regard to the secrecy of these parts which it is stated are improver to give out to the world, the court will take any order that may be necessary. I do not think that the accused ought to be prohibited from seeing the letter: but, if it should be thought proper, I will order that no copy of it be taken for public exhibition; and that no use shall be made of it but what is necessarily attached to the case. After the accused has seen it, it will yet be a question whether it shall go to the jury or not. That question cannot be decided now, because the court cannot say, whether those particular passages are of the nature which are specified. All that the court can do, is to order, that no copy shall be taken; and if it is necessary to debate it in public, those who take notes may be directed not to insert any part of the arguments on that subject. I believe myself, that a great deal of the suspicion which has been excited will be diminished by the exhibition of this paper.

Mr. HAY stated that he would consult general Wilkinson and if he consented, he would produce the letter under the restrictions ordered by the court; preferring that to a continuance of the cause.

The court ordered a jury to be summoned, and that a copy of the panel should be furnished to defendant.

On WEDNESDAY, September 9.

A jury was empanneled and sworn and the trial proceeded. The indictment consisted of seven counts. The first was as follows, viz.

[blocks in formation]

could be insisted on. I admit, that in such a case, much reliance must be placed on the declaration of the president; and I do think that a privilege does exist to withhold private letters of a certain description. The reason is this: letters to the president in his private character, are often written to him in consequence of his public character, and may relate to public concerns. Such a letter, though it be a private one, seems to partake of the character of an official paper, and to be such as ought not on light ground to be forced into public view.

Yet it is a very serious thing, if such letter should contain any information material to the defence, to withhold from the accused the power of making use of it. It is a very serious thing to proceed to trial under such circumstances. I cannot precisely lay down any general rule for such a case. Perhaps the court ought to consider the reasons, which would induce the president to refuse to exhibit such a letter as conclusive on it, unless such letter could be shewn to be absolutely necessary in the defence. The president may himself state the particular reasons which may have induced him to withhold a paper, and the court would unquestionably allow their full force to those reasons. At the same time, the court could not refuse to pay proper attention to the affidavit of the accused. But on objections being made by the president to the production of a paper, the court would not proceed further in the case without such an affidavit as would clearly shew the paper to be essential to the justice of the case. On the present occasion the court would willingly hear further testimony on the materiality of the paper required, but that is not offered.

In no case of this kind would a court be required to proceed against the president as against an ordinary individual. The objections to such a course are so strong and so obvious, that all must acknowledge them. But to induce the court to take any definitive and decisive step with respect to the prosecution, founded on the refusal of the president to exhibit a paper, for reasons stated by himself, the materiality of that paper ought to be shewn.

In this case however the president has assigned no reason whatever for withholding the paper called for. The propriety of withholding it must be decided by himself, not by another for him. Of the weight of the reasons for and against producing it, he is himself the judge. It is their operation on his mind, not on the mind of others, which must be respected by the court. They must therefore be approved by himself, and not be the mere suggestions of another for him.

It does not even appear to the court that the president does object to the production of any part of this letter. The objection, and the reasons in support of the objection, proceed from the attorney himself, and are not understood to emanate from the

pre

president. He submits it to the discretion of the attorney. Of course, it is to be understood that he has no objections to the production of the whole, if the attorney has not. Had the sident, when he transmitted it, subjected it to certain restrictions, and stated that in his judgment the public interest required certain parts of it to be kept secret, and had accordingly made a reservation or em; all proper respect would have been paid to it: but he has made no such reservation.

As to the use to be made of the letter, it is impossible that either the court or the attorney can know in what manner it is intended to be use The declarations therefore made upon that subject can have no weight. Neither can any argument on its materiality or materiality drawn from the supposed contens of the parts in question. The only ground laid for the court to act upon, is the affidavit of the accused; and from that the court is aduced to order that the paper be produced, or the cause be continued.

In regard to the secrecy of these parts which it is stated are improver to give out to the world, the court will take any order that may be necessary. I do not think that the accused ought to be prohibited from seeing the letter: but, if it should be thought proper, I will order that no copy of it be taken for public exhibition; and that no use shall be made of it but what is necessarily attached to the case. After the accused has seen it, it will yet be a question whether it shall go to the jury or not. That question cannot be decided now, because the court cannot say, whether those particular passages are of the nature which are specified. All that the court can do, is to order, that no copy shall be taken; and if it is necessary to debate it in public, those who take notes may be directed not to insert any part of the arguments on that subject. I believe myself, that a great deal of the suspicion which has been excited will be diminished by the exhibition of this paper.

Mr. HAY stated that he would consult general Wilkinson and if he consented, he would produce the letter under the restrictions ordered by the court; preferring that to a continuance of the cause.

The court ordered a jury to be summoned, and that a copy of the panel should be furnished to defendant.

On WEDNESDAY, September 9.

A jury was empanneled and sworn and the trial proceeded. The indictment consisted of seven counts. The first was as follows, viz.

[blocks in formation]

Circuit Court of the United States of America, for the fith
Circuit and District of Virginia.

District of Virginia, to wit:

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

ty of New-York did, on the tenth day of thousand eight the United St called Blani erbe the district of Vthis court, wid

The grand inquest of the United States of America, in an 1 for the body of the district of Vugima, now on their oath, do present, that Aaron Burr, late of district of New-York, attorney at December, in the year of our Lord dred and six, within the jurisdiction: to wit: at a certain island in the river Ohi set's island, in the county of Wood, with ginia aforesaid, and within the jurisdiction force and arms, begin a certain military expedition, to be car ried on from thence against the dominions of to wit: the dominions of the king of Spain: the said Ud Foreign rice, States then and there being at peace with th said ng of Spain. against the form of the statute, in such case, made and provided, to the evil example of all others, in like cast offending, and against the peace of the said United States and their dig

nity.

The second count charged him with setting on foot a military enterprise to be carried on against the territory of a foreign prince, viz: the king of Spain, with whom the United Sures were at peace.

The third, is the same as the last, except, that the prince of Mexico, is stated as the territory of the king of 52, against which the expedition is intended.

The fourth count, charges the defendant with pre ting de means of a military expedition against the dominions of t king of Spain.

The fifth is the same as the fourth, except that Mexico 15 particularly mentioned, as the province against which the expedition is intended.

The sixth is the same as the fourth, except that the foreign territory is said to be unknown.

The seventh, charges him with setting on foot a military enterprize against the dominions of a foreign state, to the jurors unknown.

All the counts laid the offence to be committed at Blannerhasset's island, in the county of Wood, in the district of Virginia. The indictment was founded on the 5th section of the act of congress of 5th June, 1794.

In the course of the trial, the counsel of the prosecution offered in evidence declarations of Blannerhasset tending to implicate colonel Burr; and endeavoured to support it by alleging, 1st, A conspiracy between these two and others; and that

the declarations of one conspirator were evidence against the others; or 2. That they were accomplices. They also offered in evidence acts of the nature laid in the indictment, committed by the defendant in Ohic and Kentucky; all of which was objected to. After argument, the chief justice rejected the testimony and concluded a very able opinion with the following positions, viz.

It is then the opinion of the court, that the declarations of third persons not forming a part of the transaction and not made in the presence of the accused cannot be received in evidence in this case.

That the acts of accomplices, except so far as they prove the character or object of the expedition, cannot be given in

evidence.

That the acts of the accused, in a different district, which constitute in themselves substantive causes for a prosecution, cannot be given in evidence, unless they go directly to prove the charges laid in the indictment.

That any legal testimony which shows the expedition to be military, or to have been designed against the dominions of Spain may be received.

The attorney of the district finding in the progress of the cause, that this decision excluded almost the whole of his testimony, on the 15th of September, moved the court to discharge the jury. This was objected to by the defendant, who insisted upon a verdict. The court being of opinion that the jury could not in this stage of the case be discharged without mutual consent, and that they must give a verdict, they accordingly retired; and not long after returned with a verdict of "NOT GUILTY."

In the end, Colonel Burr was ordered to be committed to Ohio to answer there on charge for setting on foot and providing the means for a military expedition against the territories of a foreign prince with whom the United States were at peace. He gave bail for his appearance there to answer the charge accordingly.

THE END.

« PreviousContinue »