Activate Javascript or update your browser for the full Digital Library experience.
Previous Page
–
Next Page
Full Title
The trials of William S. Smith, and Samuel G. Ogden, for misdemeanours, had in the circuit court of the United States for the New-York District, in July, 1806.
Author
Lloyd, Thomas, 1756-1827.
Date Added
11 January 2014
Language
English
Publish Date
1807
Publisher
New York: I. Riley and Co.
Source
ACHS Historic Papers Lloyd Family.
Topic
Smith, William Stephens, > 1755-1816 > Trials, litigation, etc. Ogden, Samuel G. > (Samuel Gouverneur), > 1779-1860 > Trials, litigation, etc. Venezuela > History > Miranda's Expedition, 1806. United States > Foreign relations > Spain. Spain > Foreign relations > United States.
About
More Details Permanent Link
Disclaimers
Disclaimer of Liability Disclaimer of Endorsement
OCR
i
t
a nemeptn
Aosta Sein WARES,
WILLIAM S. SMITH. 33.
If I have succeeded in -any degree, j inthe .preceding
-part.of my. argument, Ihave. shown that the testimony of
the absent witnesses. is altogether immaterial, and could.
not be received if they were.-now present. . Tf. this. be.so,..
it, would,seem to bea ‘strange. absurdity, « that ‘the court -
should be bound of course to issue. attachments against
persons who are absent, who could not testify if. they were
‘present... And unless T deceive myself, it.is now. presented.
to the court. as. a naked question, : whether the court shall _
issue the attachments of course, against: absent’. Witnesses:
who have been summoned, merely because they have been
summoned, when it appears to the court, from, the state.
ment of ithe party who calls: for them, that they could:not .
have testified in the ‘cause if. they had attended. -If: it be
discretionary i in.the court, to grant or refuse ‘the attach-
ments, as we contend it is, this is ‘surely: a case in which
they ought to be refused. It. was an abuse of the. process .
of the court, to summon persons who could: not be. wit-
nesses, It: would be intolerable: to subject those persons
to imprisonment, not for any purpose of justice, but
merely because they were summoned by a process, which,
issues of course.at the pleasure of every partys ©
I admit that the court: have power to issue attachments, :
but they will undoubtedly « exercise it in sound discretion,
for fair purposes,-and to promote justice... "They will take
care on the one hand, to. enforce obedience to their, process,
in all cases where the purposes of justice requiré. it, and’
on the other: they will take equal care,. that this process
shall never be turned. to improper’ purposes, or employed.
to harrass men who know nothing of the transaction oe
which they are summoned to testify.
‘In addition to this, it appears that the absent ivithedses'”
have not failed to attend, from any contumacy or. contemp=
tuous disregard of the authority of the court. ‘There |
are documents before the court, which exhibit the reasons —
of their absence, and show. that they intended no contempt _
of the court, even if. their. testimony. had been material.
- Calden.’ if the' letters in the possession of , the court. whictt
have not been'réad are alluded to, and are to be made any use.
of in this argument, I shall pray that they may be read. There
are,some parts of them.which we think material for us, par-
ticularly when one.of -the gentlemen who write these letters,
says he was: present, -when ‘the president of the United “
States ordered these prosecutions. eee Ts .
‘ Map eee 2 neg e
8