00000656 |
Previous | 656 of 684 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
IMPEACHMENT OF JUDGE CHASE. 613
determine Avhether there was not ground for an impeachment. On the 26th
of March, the committee reported six'articles of impeachment; though, in
order to find sufficient grounds, they had to go back to acts done nearly five
years before and during the Federal administration; his conduct in the cases
•of John Fries and James Thompson Callender, tried in 1800 under the odious
" Sedition Act," being selected by the committee as his most vulnerable point.
An impeachment was ordered by a vote of about two to one, notwithstanding
the earnest opposition of the federalists, Avho regarded the whole proceeding
as mere party spite and vengeance. The session closed on the 27th of March,
leaving the trial to the following session.
President Jefferson, the democratic candidate for re-election, received one
hundred and sixty-two of the one hundred and seventy-six electoral votes in
the election of 1805, and George Clinton was chosen Vice President by the
-same vote. The electors of Marylandx cast the eleven votes of the State, as
follows : nine each for Jefferson and Clinton, and two each for Pinckney and
King, the federal candidates.
On the 2d of January, 1805, Judge Chase appeared at the bar of the
Senate, and the 4th of February was assigned for his trial. On this occasion
the Senate chamber was fitted up in an appropriate manner, and writh places
for various official dignitaries. The accused appeared with Luther Martin,
like Chase himself, originally opposed to the constitution, but who had
"become long since a warm federalist. Charles Lee, late Attorney General of
the United States, Robert Goodloe Harper,2 the former distinguished federal
leader in the House, and Joseph Hopkinson, though then a young man,
acquired for himself an exalted reputation, as his counsel. " For these," says
Mr. Hildreth, " the ablest advocates in the union, to take no account of
Chase, who was a host in himself, the managers on the part of the House were
no match. Martin's massive logic, and Lee's and Harper's argumentative
■eloquence, directed ahvays to the point, stood in striking contrast to the tingling but desultory surface strokes of Randolph, upon Avhom the main burden
•of the prosecution fell."3 The managers on the part of the House, were
Messrs. Randolph, Rodney, Nicholson, Clarke, Campbell, Boyle and Early.
Aaron Burr, who had returned from his flight southward, for the killing of
1 They were: John Parnham, Tobias E. Stans- resumed the practice of the law in Baltimore,
bury, Joseph Wilkinson, John Gilpin, John where he soon became eminent in the profes-
Johnson, William Gleaves, Edward Johnson, sion. His defence of Judge Chase, when im-
Perry Spencer, John Tyler, Ephraim K. AVilson, peached by the House of Representatives, was
;and Frisby Tilghman. a masterpiece. He was subsequently elected by
2 Robert G oodloe Harper was born near Fred- the Legislature of Maryland to the United States
ericktown,Va., in 1765, and graduated at Prince- Senate in 1815-16,and was made a Major General
ton in 1785. While young his parents emigrated in the State militia. He took great interest in
to Greenville, N. C, and during Greene's cam- the colonization of the colored race and in the
paign in the South he acted as quartermaster. promotion of works of internal improvement.
He studied law at Charleston, S. C, and was A volume of his addresses and speeches was
elected to the Legislature, and in 1794-1801 was published in Baltimore in 1814. He also pub-
a member of Congress. He married Catharine, lished a number of pamphlets.
a daughter of Charles Carroll, of Carrollton, 3 History of the United States, Second Series,
and at the'expiration of his term in Congress ii., p. 542.
| Title | History of Maryland - 2 |
| Creator | Scharf, J. Thomas (John Thomas) |
| Publisher | J. B. Piet |
| Place of Publication | Baltimore |
| Date | 1879 |
| Language | eng |
| Type | Books/Pamphlets |
| Title | 00000656 |
| Type | Books/Pamphlets |
| Transcript | IMPEACHMENT OF JUDGE CHASE. 613 determine Avhether there was not ground for an impeachment. On the 26th of March, the committee reported six'articles of impeachment; though, in order to find sufficient grounds, they had to go back to acts done nearly five years before and during the Federal administration; his conduct in the cases •of John Fries and James Thompson Callender, tried in 1800 under the odious " Sedition Act," being selected by the committee as his most vulnerable point. An impeachment was ordered by a vote of about two to one, notwithstanding the earnest opposition of the federalists, Avho regarded the whole proceeding as mere party spite and vengeance. The session closed on the 27th of March, leaving the trial to the following session. President Jefferson, the democratic candidate for re-election, received one hundred and sixty-two of the one hundred and seventy-six electoral votes in the election of 1805, and George Clinton was chosen Vice President by the -same vote. The electors of Marylandx cast the eleven votes of the State, as follows : nine each for Jefferson and Clinton, and two each for Pinckney and King, the federal candidates. On the 2d of January, 1805, Judge Chase appeared at the bar of the Senate, and the 4th of February was assigned for his trial. On this occasion the Senate chamber was fitted up in an appropriate manner, and writh places for various official dignitaries. The accused appeared with Luther Martin, like Chase himself, originally opposed to the constitution, but who had "become long since a warm federalist. Charles Lee, late Attorney General of the United States, Robert Goodloe Harper,2 the former distinguished federal leader in the House, and Joseph Hopkinson, though then a young man, acquired for himself an exalted reputation, as his counsel. " For these," says Mr. Hildreth, " the ablest advocates in the union, to take no account of Chase, who was a host in himself, the managers on the part of the House were no match. Martin's massive logic, and Lee's and Harper's argumentative ■eloquence, directed ahvays to the point, stood in striking contrast to the tingling but desultory surface strokes of Randolph, upon Avhom the main burden •of the prosecution fell."3 The managers on the part of the House, were Messrs. Randolph, Rodney, Nicholson, Clarke, Campbell, Boyle and Early. Aaron Burr, who had returned from his flight southward, for the killing of 1 They were: John Parnham, Tobias E. Stans- resumed the practice of the law in Baltimore, bury, Joseph Wilkinson, John Gilpin, John where he soon became eminent in the profes- Johnson, William Gleaves, Edward Johnson, sion. His defence of Judge Chase, when im- Perry Spencer, John Tyler, Ephraim K. AVilson, peached by the House of Representatives, was ;and Frisby Tilghman. a masterpiece. He was subsequently elected by 2 Robert G oodloe Harper was born near Fred- the Legislature of Maryland to the United States ericktown,Va., in 1765, and graduated at Prince- Senate in 1815-16,and was made a Major General ton in 1785. While young his parents emigrated in the State militia. He took great interest in to Greenville, N. C, and during Greene's cam- the colonization of the colored race and in the paign in the South he acted as quartermaster. promotion of works of internal improvement. He studied law at Charleston, S. C, and was A volume of his addresses and speeches was elected to the Legislature, and in 1794-1801 was published in Baltimore in 1814. He also pub- a member of Congress. He married Catharine, lished a number of pamphlets. a daughter of Charles Carroll, of Carrollton, 3 History of the United States, Second Series, and at the'expiration of his term in Congress ii., p. 542. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| B |
|
| C |
|
| G |
|
| H |
|
| M |
|
| T |
|
