« ForrigeFortsett »
John Trigg, Philip Van Cortlandt, Isaac Van Horne, Joseph B. Varnum, Daniel C. Verplank, Matthew Walton, John Whitehill, Marmaduke Williams, Richard Winn, Joseph Winston, and Thomas Wynns.
Those who voted in the negative, are,
Simeon Baldwin, Silas Betton, John Campbell, William Chamberlin, Martin Chittenden, Clifton Claggett, Manasseh Cutler, Samuel W. Dana, John Davenport, John Dennis, Thomas Dwight, James Elliott, Thomas Griffin, Gaylord Griswold, Roger Griswold, Seth Hastings, David Hough, Benjamin Huger, Samuel Hunt, Joseph Lewis, junior, Thomas Lewis, Henry W. Livingston, Thomas Lowndes, Nahum Mitchell, Samuel L. Mitchill, James Mott, Thomas Plater, Samuel D. Purviance, Joshua Sands, John Cotton Smith, John Smith, (of New York) William Stedman, James Stephenson, Samuel Taggart, Samuel Tenney, Samuel Thatcher, George Tibbits, Killian K. Van Rensellaer, Peleg Wadsworth, and Lemuel Williams.
Whereupon, Messrs. J. Randolph, Nicholson, J. Clay, Early, R. Griswold, Huger, and Boyle, were appointed a committee pursuant to the foregoing resolution. 7
On the 10th of January, the committee were authorised by the House to send for persons, papers, and records; and on the 30th day of the same month, they were authorised to cause to be printed such documents and papers, as they might deem necessary, previous to their presentation to the House.
On the 6th day of March, Mr. Randolph, in the name of the committee, made a report, "That in consequence, of the evidence collected "by them, in virtue of the powers with which they have been invested "by the House, and which is hereunto subjoined, they are of opinion, "Ist, That Samuel Chase, esquire, an associate justice of the supreme "court of the United States, be impeached of high crimes and misde66 meanors.
"2d. That Richard Peters, district judge of the district of Pennsyl"vania, hath not so acted in his judicial capacity as to require the inter"positi of the constitutional power of this House."
This eport, accompanied by a great mass of printed documents, embracing various depositions taken before the committee, as well as at a distance, was made the order of the day for the Monday following.
On that day the House took up the report, and after a short debate concurred in the first resolution by the following votes, Yeas 73...Nays
Those who voted in the affirmative, are,
Willis Alston, junior, Isaac Anderson, John Archer, David Bard, George Michael Bedinger, William Blackledge, Walter Bowie, Adam Boyd, John Boyle, Robert Brown, Joseph Bryan, William Butler, Levi Casey, Thomas Claiborne, Joseph Clay, Matthew Clay, John Clopton, Frederick Conrad, Jacob Crowninshield, Richard Cutts, John Dawson, William Dickson, John B. Earle, Peter Early, James Elliott, William Findley, John Fowler, James
Gillespie, Peterson Goodwyn, Andrew Gregg, Samuel Hammond, James Holland, David Holmes, Walter Jones, William Kennedy, Nehemiah Knight, Michael Leib, Matthew Lyon, Andrew M'Cord, William M'Creery, David Meriwether, Andrew Moore, Nicholas R. Moore, Jeremiah Morrow, Anthony New, Thomas Nervton, junior, Joseph H. Nicholson, Gideon Olin, John Patterson, John Randolph, Thomas M. Randolph, John Rea, (of Pennsylvania) John Rhea, (of Tennessee) Jacob Richards, Casar A. Rodney, Thomas Sammons, Thomas Sandford, Ebenezer Seaver, James Sloan, John Smilie, Henry Southard, Richard Stanford, Joseph Stanton, John Stewart, David Thomas, Philip R. Thompson, Abram Trigg, John Trigg, Isaac Van Horre, Joseph B, Varnum, Marmaduke Williams, Richard Winn, and Joseph Winston.
Those who voted in the negative, are,
Simeon Baldwin, Silas Betton, John Campbell, William Chamberlin, Martin Chittenden, Clifton Claggett, Manasseh Cutler, Samuel W. Dana, John Davenport, Thomas Dwight, Thomas Griffin, Gaylord Griswold, Roger Griswold, Seth Hastings, William Helms, Benjamin Huger, Joseph Lewis, junior, Henry W. Livingston, Thomas Lowndes, Nahum Mitchell, Thomas Plater, Samuel D. Purviance, John Cotton Smith, John Smith, (of Virginia) William Stedman, James Stephenson, Samuel Taggart, Samuel Tenney, Samuel Thatcher, Killian K. Van Rensselaer, Peleg Wadsworth, and Lemuel Williams,
The second resolution was agreed to unanimously.
Whereupon it was ordered, that Mr. John Randolph and Mr. Early, be appointed a committee to go to the Senate, and at the bar thereof, in the name of the House of Representatives, and of all the people of the United States, to impeach Samuel Chase, one of the associate justices of the supreme court of the United States, of high crimes and misde meanors; and acquaint the Senate, that the House of Representatives will, in due time, exhibit particular articles of impeachment against him, and make good the same. It was also ordered, that the committee do demand, that the Senate take order for the appearance of the said Samuel Chase, to answer to the said impeachment.
On the 13th of March, Messrs. J. Randolph, Nicholson, J. Clay, Early, and Boyle, were appointed a committee to prepare and report articles of impeachment against Samuel Chase, and invested with power to send for persons, papers, and records.
On the 14th, a message was received from the Senate, notifying the House, that they would take proper order on the impeachment, of which due notice should be given to the House.
On the 26th, Mr. Randolph, from the committee appointed for that purpose, reported articles of impeachment against Samuel Chase. No order was taken on the report during the remainder of the session, which terminated the next day.
At the ensuing session of Congress, on the 6th of November, on the motion of Mr. J. Randolph, the articles of impeachment were referred to Messrs. J. Randolph, J, Clay, Early, Boyle, and J. Rhea, of Tennessee.
On the 30th of November, Mr. Randolph reported the following articles of impeachment against Samuel Chase, in substance, not dissimilar from those reported at the last session, with the addition of two new articles:
Articles exhibited by the House of Representatives of the United States, in the name of themselves and of all the people of the United States, against Samuel Chase, one of the associate justices of the supreme court of the United States, in maintenance and support of their impeachment against him, for high crimes and misdemeanors.
(That, unmindful of the solemn duties of his office, and contrary to the sacred obligation by which he stood bound to discharge them "faithfully and impartially, and without respect to persons," the said Samuel Chase, on the trial of John Fries, charged with treason, before the circuit court of the United States, held for the district of Pennsylvania, in the city of Philadelphia, during the months of April and May, one thousand eight hundred, whereat the said Samuel Chase presided, did, in his judicial capacity, conduct himself in a manner highly arbitrary, oppressive, and unjust, viz.
1. In delivering an opinion, in writing, on the question of law, on the construction of which the defence of the accused materially depended, tending to prejudice the minds of the jury against the case of the said John Fries, the prisoner, before counsel had been heard in his defence:
2. In restricting the counsel for the said Fries from recurring to such English authorities as they believed apposite, or from citing certain statutes of the United States, which they deemed illustrative of the positions, upon which they intended to rest the defence of their client :
3. In debarring the prisoner from his constitutional privilege of addressing the jury (through his counsel) on the law, as well as on the fact, which was to determine his guilt, or innocence, and at the same time endeavoring to wrest from the jury their indisputable right to hear argument, and determine upon the question of law, as well as the question of fact, involved in the verdict which they were required to give:
In consequence of which irregular conduct of the said Samuel Chase, as dangerous to our liberties, as it is novel to our laws and usages, the said John Fries was deprived of the right, secured to him by the eighth article amendatory of the constitution, and was condemned to death without having been heard by counsel, in his defence, to the disgrace of the character of the American bench, in manifest violation of law and justice, and in open contempt of the rights of juries, on which, ultimately, rest the liberty and safety of the American people.
That, prompted by a similar spirit of persecution and injustice, at a circuit court of the United States, held at Richmond, in the month of May, one thousand eight hundred, for the district of Virginia, whereat the said Samuel Chase presided, and before which a certain James
Thompson Callender was arraigned for a libel on John Adams, then President of the United States, the said Samuel Chase, with intent to oppress, and procure the conviction of, the said Callender, did over-rule the objection of John Basset, one of the jury, who wished to be excused from serving on the said trial, because he had made up his mind, as to the publication from which the words, charged to be libellous, in the indictment, were extracted; and the said Basset was accordingly sworn and did serve on the said jury, by whose verdict the prisoner was subsequently convicted. 7
That, with intent to oppress and procure the conviction of the prisoner, the evidence of John Taylor, a material witness on behalf of the aforesaid Callender, was not permitted by the said Samuel Chase to be given in, on pretence that the said witness could not prove the truth of the whole of one of the charges, contained in the indictment, although the said charge embraced more than one fact. /
That the conduct of the said Samuel Chase, was marked, during the whole course of the said trial, by manifest injustice, partiality, and intemperance; viz.)
1. In compelling the prisoner's counsel to reduce to writing, and submit to the inspection of the court, for their admission, or rejection, all questions which the said counsel meant to propound to the above named John Taylor, the witness.
2. In refusing to postpone the trial, although an affidavit was regularly filed, stating the absence of material witnesses on behalf of the accused; and although it was manifest, that, with the utmost diligence, the attendance of such witnesses could not have been procured at that term.
3. In the use of unusual, rude, and contemptuous expressions towards the prisoner's counsel; and in falsely insinuating that they wished to excite the public fears and indignation, and to produce that insubordination to law, to which the conduct of the judge did, at the same time, manifestly tend:
4. In repeated and vexatious interruptions of the said counsel, on the part of the said judge, which, at length, induced them to abandon their cause and their client, who was thereupon convicted and condemned to fine and imprisonment:
5. In an indecent solicitude, manifested by the said Samuel Chase, for the conviction of the accused, unbecoming even a public prosecutor, but highly disgraceful to the character of a judge as it was subversive of justice.
And whereas it is provided by the act of Congress, passed on the 24th day of September, 1789, intituled "An act to establish the judicial
courts of the United States," that for any crime, or offence, against the United States, the offender may be arrested, imprisoned, or bailed, agreeably to the usual mode of process in the state where such offender may be found: and whereas, it is provided by the laws of Virginia, that, upon presentment by any grand jury of an offence not capital, the court shall order the clerk to issue a summons against the person, or persons offending, to appear and answer such presentment at the next court; yet, the said Samuel Chase did, at the court aforesaid, award a capias against the body of the said James Thompson Callender, indicted for an offence not capital, whereupon the said Callender was arrested and committed to close custody, contrary to law in that case made and provided.
And whereas it is provided by the 34th section of the aforesaid act, intituled "An act to establish the judicial courts of the United States," that the laws of the several states, except where the constitution, treaties, or statutes of the United States shall otherwise require, or provide, shall be regarded as the rules of decision in trials at common law, in the courts of the United States, in cases where they apply: and whereas, by the laws of Virginia it is provided, that in cases not capital, the offender shall not be held to answer any presentment of a grand jury until the court next succeeding that during which such presentment shall have been made, yet the said Samuel Chase, with intent to oppress and procure the conviction of the said James Thompson Callender, did, at the court aforesaid, rule and adjudge the said Callender to trial, during the term at which he, the said Callender, was presented and indicted, contrary to law in that case made and provided. ]
That, at a circuit court of the United States, for the district of Delaware, held at Newcastle, in the month of June, one thousand eight hundred, whereat the said Samuel Chase presided, the said Samuel Chase, disregarding the duties of his office, did descend from the dignity of a judge and stoop to the level of an informer, by refusing to discharge the grand jury, although entreated by several of the said jury so to do; and after the said grand jury had regularly declared, through their foreman, that they had found no bills of indictment, nor had any presentments to make, by observing to the said grand jury, that he, the said Samuel Chase, understood "that a highly seditious temper had manifested it"self in the state of Delaware, among a certain class of people, parti"cularly in Newcastle county, and more especially in the town of Wil"mington, where lived a most seditious printer, unrestrained by any prin"ciple of virtue, and regardless of social order...t .that the name of this 66 printer was"....but checking himself, as if sensible of the indecorum which he was committing, added, "that it might be assuming too much "to mention the name of this person, but it becomes your duty, gentle
men, to enquire diligently into this matter," or words to that effect: