Newspaper Page Text
DAVID FULTON, Editor.
OUR COUNTRY, LIBERTY, AND GOD. VOL. 1. 1L Fit EMM ML. PRfCE AND Pro p bi btobs. MMMtMMM JFUETOJ WILMINGTON, JV. C., FRIDAY, JANUARY 17, 1845. NO. 18. . PUBLISHED EVERY FRIDAY MORNING. TE 11 MS OF THE y " WUI stateu on the trial, that Mr. Sanders tv of tht -,, ,.. n.:.. o.i r.. r.,.,o I . r ij .. a i. r n i - v. ijiiu, u m ui. ictc-. phciv irom ins uock to me iiui'K oi d, anu certificate. P v'o D dlar. md fifty cpnts if paid in advance. f vo 3 00 3 r)0 t i i . ... . IIHO. V Ilf'tl cvannimil I -. ,l. :. ........ t" - The iindersiimed will now nrorl ,rt .,. .rJZLTT " .n.,,.,,.- reports oi the supreme Uourt, page : b drives them up with his own flock and state liie rested and fans which form ,Ip I y WaS wn- . 1 hl case was this : Britt, the de- shears them. B was held not guiitv, be ground, ofther belief! ! u T he fe',(,ant' Was f"nd ia l!,e Pipn of a cause he might not have suspected thei al the end of three months. at the expiration of the year. 6.,.u.,u ... men wriiei. vnrertnin whi!..r .. v i , . . -- ii vt (u Oil UUd Y KJl .VJUII' I he proof shortly Stated, was, that Mr. day. FlvVk'TT l-l'l IhlllVu Kn.lo. . PI -.lit. 1 .1 i- . ...ncr discontinued until all arrearage, are , Z "7T conn- wouie proni men established these ail. eVpt at the option of the pnhlUhers. No Uenl ,,e,ICI ar expectation, of receiving iajMsa 1st, that Mr. Ennett's three sever JJbiriptw" received for less than twelve months, j his certificate of ejection in time to take l statements of the manner he got posses ADVERTJSE.HEyTS his aea ton Moriday, the ffitili of November, i"n of the spurious certificate, was not lhe,dayKf lh? meeliUg f ihe Mature unnatural or improbable-that he was that su-reeJi i? insertion. 25 per cent will bs deduc- j Jial he ad assurances to this effect from od, honest, simple, confiding man, that ted froai an advertising bill when it amounts to j the Sheriff and two other persons that he' might easily have been imposed upon in a thirty dollars in any one year Yk v;lt st urning ; was advised before lib left home, and after! City where he was a stranger and did not hy several members of know the habits of intercourse. 2d, That .r ",e Legislature, that his ceitilicate was not be hatl no motive to palm a forged certifi- - i r : . : . 1 i n , I i , ...... Kl ... t.:. . i ' . .! .. It tae numner n insertions :ire inn. iiiar.-u . -in ins lawiug ois seat, out uaiB "pon me oenate, as he Knew hecould that his colleagues or others, would be ooiain his seat by other proof of his elec heard to prove his election as had been the ti n. 3d, That as soon as he heard ttru prarticein other cases that he had men-1 mored that its genuineness was suspected. proceed. The counsel then remarked, upon the embarrassment which surrounded his cli ent's defence against such charge at this time; that sll men, in all ages, were subject forged order in his own favor, haJ preen-; were not his sheen, and it was better that! to the infirmity of enterutinino- nreiudices. ted and obtained on it money or goods, 99 guilty persons should escape than that j however honest might be their hearts and and UnOn heitia plinnrPil With I tlf C.riarV nna innncpnt nonnn cKtnlt o.i Oo linlanlinnD ttni lk mna Vimi.i( , ....... .iiw t - . fK. i I , i .n MIIH'i I III I-IOWM CMUUIU BUUCIl I I Ii It II I IVJHC, tUOk lilt II I Uc i UUlltSl OllU I UIIU said, he hadrintended to take up the or aer oefore it ivas discovered." In this case, the rule of the Committee was ap-1 ground of belief according to human expe- The coincidence of many circumstances j ding men were sometimes the most insen- pointing to one thing, forms o natural a 'ible to its influence; that he imputed no ' . - - .i " 1 1 i i -:t on tt.c advertisement, tney win nc omiinueu uniu 0rJcr?J out, anJ charged for accordingly. -l,tter3 t the proprietors on business con Bected with this establishment, must be post paid. ilFFit'E on the south-east corner of Front and Princess streets, opposite the Bank of the State. A V. HICK, Printer. more infirmity to tiie Senate than our own experience, than the laws, than the Bible and the decalogue imputed to all mankind. plied by the Court, because, the defendant ! rience, that it is upon that very ground. did not attempt to account for the way he; that the rule of evidence has been so well ' .. acquired the possession, by any aceompa-; established in law, that handwriting may land to himself, (the counsel.) Therefore, nymg statement of his own, or otherwise; be proved by a person tvJw has received a ihe begged leave to assume the province of nor did he impute any other agency or letter from a stranger to him, in the dueliUa Preacher as the Preacher's congrega concurrence than his own in obtaining it ; course of business, from whom he e xpe cted j tion ought not and could not take any of on the contrary, he stated, that he intended to receive a letter on that particular busi-fence, when the decalogue was read to OP EVERY DHlSCtllPTIO.V. Neatly executed an I with despatch, on liheial terms for cash, at the JOURNAL OFFICE. " can JULIUS JHYERS, fiianufaciuret & scaler tu HATS ANfi CAPS. WHOI.E8At.fi AM) a ETA 1 1., MARKET STREET Wilmington, N. C. G E 0 ft fi W . B A V Tf, ITIJBRsJHAffT, LOD'N'S VVHA.KP, Wilmington. N. C. Oct. 4th, 1844. 3-iy Receiving and Forwarding Agent, A D General C j n nlaion Merchant, Sex' door Xvrth of the New Custum-houst, Wilmington, N. C. GILLESPIE t& R03.SOiXr. Ji W J2 . iw T S For the lc of Timber, Lumber, and all other kind of Produce Sept. 21, 1844. 1-tf Honed it publicly, on the day he arrived here, (Saturday,) that he had come without his certiticate that on Monday morning he informed his room-mate, Mr. Jackson, and also VI r. Melv.n, and stated publicly in a company of gentlemen at vir. Hotden's office, that he bad received his certificate on the night before (Sunday night) that the statement he then made to Mr. Melvin of the way and manner lu had received it, corresponded substantially with his two statements, one made to Mr. Stone on Tuesday morning after, aTrd the other to the Senate on the 29th of November, altho the latter was not so full : Which were iti substance, that a stranger called at his room on Sunday night, about 8 o'clock, said he had a letter for htm, did not make himself known to Mr. Ennett he asked him to walk in the stranger replied he was in a hurry, and handed htm f .VI r. E. the letter, and immediately retired in the dark that Mr. E. at first supposed it to be a letter from some office-seeker, but on opening it discovered it contained the cer tificate he expected of his election. The proof was also, that the signature to the certificate resembled the handwriting of Sheriff Averett, only slightly, but enough to make a person acquainted with it, sup pose it might have been written on his knee; that on Monday after Mr. E, pre sented the certificate and took his seat in the Senate, Mr. Senator Hellen obtained possession of the certificate from the Clerk, JHCT HALL, j Mr. Stone, without any order or authori- COMMIKio M tiH ANT U, fi 'om the. Senate Look it out. kpnt it o j r - Auctioneer Jc Commission Merchant, WILMINGTON, N. C. Liberal advances wade on shipments to his friends in Ncto York. September 21, 1844. t-tf. F Wholesale ciail iruist WILMIXOTOK, N C. Second brick building, on Water, South of Mul berry Street, up stairs, for some time, shot ed it to sevetal per sons marked their initials on the certificate, I'UOTI-T among them Mr. Gartber (afterwards cho- Of Senators, against thr Resolutions to sen Speaker) and Mr. Senator Boy den expel t'le Senator from Onslow. that it did not enjpear that this movement 'fhe undersigned, members of the Sen- on the part of Mr. Hellen and others, in- aie, availing themselves of their Comiu-timafing their suspicion, was made known tional privilege, as secured by the 4mh section of the Constitution of the State, to dissent fro.-'t, and protest against any net or resolve of the Senate, which they may think injurious to the public, or to nni individual, and to have their reasons for suck dissent entered upon the Journals of the Senate, Do here now present to the Senate, their most solemn dissent awd protest a gainst certain acts and resolves of the Sen ate, in the case of Mr. Exnktt, Senator iroin Onslow, wit'.i their reaso s therefor, ttut the sanr- iia he eutered on the Jour nals of the Senate. The committee appointed to investigate bis case, reported the following Resolu tions: lie.-i'tlced. That the certifwrite of the Senator from Onslow, and by him introduced to t!ie Senate as genuine, t He- fust d iy of the session, is a forgery. Rttolved further. That inasmuch as no evi dence has been offered before the C minittee to implicate my other person in the. transaction, hat the Senator himself has either been frail ty of the f.irirry, or procured it to be done, or ' at least aware that it was nnt genuine; ami tiier fore, practis d a fraud upon the Sen ate and ought to be expelled. lies dved, That for the reasons aforesaid, the Senator from Onslow be, and is hereby excel led from the Senate, and his seat therein vaca ted. The first resolution passed lh Senate to Mr I lit time thai as soo; of the suspicion of its F . . I, mi ll u as Mr. E. heard genuineness, which was either on Morulay night or Tuesday morning, he repaired to Mr. Stone, the Clerk of the Senate, on Tuesday before 10 o'clock, and asked to see the certificate, Mr. Stone handed it to him, a :d after examining ii, he slated to Mr. S. that he was mt sufficiently acquain ted with Mr. A verett's handwriting lo sav. that the body l it did resemble Mr- A.'s hand writing, but pans ol the signature ni so much anil then gave Mr. Sione the . ... account as anove set kmii ol ihe manner he had gotten pisession of it that this statement of Mr. St. me was made alter he had takea his seat, but before the Senate had organized on Tuesday morning the 2d day ol the Session that on the 29-th of November he had received the certificate of his election in a tat er from Sheriff Av erett, enclosed u him in a letter from Mr. Marnle, and on that day piesented the cer tificate and the two letters to the Senate, made his statement ho-w the possession of the alleged spurious certificate had been put upon him, and that he now believed, from comparing the two, he had been im posed upon, and asked the Senate to raise a committee of investigation on the matter. The Hon. U rn. II. Washington, of the House of Commons, proved, that Mr. E.'s Unanimously, the two last by the casting jjeneral character was that of a)i ignorant, vte of its Speaker, (Mr. Gaither.) inoffensive Ji armless man. without a blem- The undersigned protest against the pas- ish resting on it. Mr. Tho. D. Meares, sage f the two last resolutions, because. I of Wilmington, that he stand as fair as l rule of evidence which that majority ol we committee in their report applied to "i rase, was laid down in too broad, harsh aid unqualified a sense; because, the evi dence was not correc.tlv reported because. any man in Onslow. Mr. Jeremiah Nix on, ol the Ho. of Commons, that he has known his character intimately for 10 years, that his general character was that of an honest zood man. without a Mem- 'hat repoit was accompanitd by an argu- j ish, simple and confiding, a domestic Stent against Mr. Ennett, based upon un- j man in his habits, a sober, moral, indus founded assumption, and tended to prejo-1 trious farmer, a kind father and an nbli dice his trial because, that renort. and ! pi-, r benevolent neighbor. No one dis- . 0 -------- o "te principle contained in the second reso- puted this testimony. town threw upon him the burthen of es- The proof was also, that the committee of Wishing his own innocence, because his j investigation had incorrectly reported Mr. counsel was denied that liberty of speech ; Sanders' testimony before the committee. wntGh is indisnensible to fair and imnartiai ; ti ..i .u. t - c? :,i ur.. i i nev rcuoncu. uuu mi. o. ouiu ucmic j lrial; and because, Mr. Enmett's ovn ac cunt of the way he was put in possession tbe alleged spurious certificate, and hich was part of the evidence reported y the Committee, being uncontradicted aiQ fully supported by the whole evidence Pul in on his trial, and corroborated by un nuestioned proof, of his having the most -"blemished character, formed a weight of them that he thought it was on Monday. morning M. Ennett told him that he had not received his certificate, whereas, Mr. Sanders when breught to the bar of the Senate swore, that he told the Committee several times, that he was uncertain wheth er it was Sunday or Monday, and that since his examination before the Com mi t- tec, unpon reflection, he was still uncer- on I uesday morning before the Senate was organized, he called on the Senate's officer, Mr. Sione made a full and open statement ol the matter, which, if he was a guilty man, it is improbable he would have done, as the officer by reporting it to the Senate placed it in the power of that body to rescind the order admitting him to his seat, and thus have defeated his whole pur pose. 4th, That as soon as he received the genuine certificate from the Sheriff. whereby lie was enabled to form a belief as to the true character of the first certifi cate, he lost no time in stating that belief to the Senate and asking for a Committee of Investigation. The Committee of Investigation rested their belief of Mr. Ennett's guilt upon three principal points; 1st, the general maxim of law that he who is in the possession of a forged instrument, and gives no satisfacto ry account of the manner he got the pos session, nor the person who did it, and u- ses it for his own benefit, must be presu med to have forged it himself. 2d, That the manner that Mr. Ennett got possession of the certificate, was so suspicious in it self, that every other man would have sus pected it under like circumstances. 3d, That Mr. Ennett's statement ought to be discredited because he did not inform his room-mate, Jackson, he had received it. We shall examine these points in their or der. 1st. As to the maxim of (aw. We say dial its application to Mr. E.'s case was too hart fi and unqualified, and ihat even as harshly as they applied rt,it only raised a technical presumption of guilt, which under theexerctse of a small degree of the ordinary benignity of the law, was com pletely repelled by the fart, of all absence of motive on hi part to forge a certificate; bv his consistent and reasonable account of the wav it came into his possession; and by the pt oof of his unblemished, simple, confiding character, which latter fact, his good c huracter, the committee do n t al lude to in their report, and therefore we must presume did not enquire into it, not withstanding in their report, they express such a greed an die y to find out awl re port to the Senate all the evidence that might establish Mr. EnnetCs innocence. The ride ol evidence which the Com- mktee ought to have applied to his ense, is this. "ihat w here th4 possession, is of such a kind, as manifests that the stolen goods (or forged certificate) have come to the " possessor by his own act or with his ' undoubted concurrence,1' it affords pre sumption of guilt. (See Judge C as ton's opinion in the late case of the Suite vs. Smith, 2d Iredell's rep.) In Mr. Ennett' case the evidence did not manifest that the spurious ceFiifieaie came to his possession by his oivn act, nor by his own concur rente, nor, that no other person could have had a motive to put the possession upon him. His statement being that ol an honest man, anil made part of the evi dence in the case, showed, thaf a LE I -TER was put into his possession, by an unknown hand, and that until he opened , he did not know what it contained; and that before he opened it, the unknown bearer of that letter was gone. He had no suspicion of any thing being wrong. because letters are often times handed by unknown hands because office-seekers a bout Kaleigh are in the habit of sending letters to membt rs in every form and way, and he expected at first that it was a letter from an office-seeker, and after he opened ii, and found it contained a certificate" of his election, it was what he also expected to arrive every hour, although he did not know certainly in what way, by hand or bv mail ; and he had enquired that night at the post office, and had not obtained it, before this letter was handed to him. His statement then showed, that he did not ac quire the possession of the certificate, by his own agency, but that it was put upon him under cover of a leitur not by his own concurrence, for he did not know what the letter contained, until opened nor, that no other person had a motive to do it, for office-seekers had a motive to do so, as he had besQ a day in Raleigh, and had made known he was without hie cer tificate. The rale of evidence which the. Cum- to have taken up the order before the for-ness, although he tiever before had seen gery teas discovered, which manifested, his writing. So strong were the coinci that he had come to the possession by his j dences in Mr. Ennett's case, that he wa own act and concurrence, not only in law and according to common The next authority cited in argument bv-! experience, warranted in believing thecer- the majority Committee, was the State vs. 'tificatc to have come from the Sheriff, Mr. j ken, possession there, lis spoke of the Morgan, reported in 2d Vol. Dev. &, Bat. j Averett; but it would have been thought latitude allowed in this respect in Courts of page 348. That case showrd that the de-jstrange indeed if he had suspected it had 'Justice, where, not only it was made the them, so the triers of a man charged with an infamous crime, could take no personal offence at being respectfully warned and cautioned to examine their hearts, and guatd against any prejudice insensibly ta- duty of cousel, but also of the Judge, to warn the jury against the danger of enter taining any prejudices, or participating in fendant had himself presented a forged note j not- 11 ,,ane in a letter which he ex to the Bank at Salem for discount in bis pected at that time and purporting to own favor, and had received the money be from the person he expected to send it no statement of the defendant imputed! resembled that person's hand writing j any public excitement on tbe defendant's . . - 1!-- a M I J .. ,r . I f i guilt to others, nor circumstance appeared ! ne was nul weu enouga acquaimea wnn :case mat he tell it to oe his cutv as coun io raise a suspicion that anv other person .n' handwriting to detect sel to gise this caution, and meant not to i - ..' -. 1 i imposition. i . j- ,r i . i had been concerned tn tne possession than ti. hfrl i lS ; ; oe Personal or disrespectful in the least.- .he defendant, nor did it appear that any ,hi, Thi. rl! Therefore, he thought the Senate ought , , . . - , it nut io, mat iiiu manual wi mo I i' 1 t i other person had a motive to impose it tin- .i . c , to be wary and distrustful of inemselves, . . 1 , ., , ' 11 uv ceiving the certificate, was so strange and . . . ,p . on htm. but all the evidence manifested. AM,1 .... nnnU. tn ,1QWO PI,;P1 1 hen party spirit was so rife every where that he alone forged the order. But even in that case, the Court in applying the Committee's rule of evidence, said, ""The force of the presumption, depends upon the abili'y of the accused to shoiv WITH " FACILITY, the real truth ; and its in this State, and throughout the country. sncnirMMti T-Ind ilia frtiin m i Mpp ovj m I ntt . r i n i r i and discard all personal sectarian or patty with tine care all the foregoing coinciden- . . J c.es, (six in number) which could only consist with innocence had they compar ed them with Mr. Ennett's confiding sim- prejudice, for that prejudice Would' snme- limes.cnurse through honest minds "as in sensibly as the blood did through the veins silently and warmly; or as insensibly as rwlirittr r f olmrniitni ii 1 1 i 1 V. o rrtniiiatpnpv t ' 1 H. I I V W I I a ill 1(, " MflLllLIl,-WL10lk-4,V'tl'WW . . . , . . . - - -refusal to do so, if there be other cH k his three sever, statements with lhe atmosphere through the ungs. Here "cumsfances from which it may bejudg-h9ence ofaIl moliveon nt8 part lo perpe "ed that certainly or PROBABLY his j trale sucj, a crime; with his open disclosure -possession was not acquirea oy nis ownxo me Senate's Clerk on Tuesday mor- I, C U'OO T Oil. i.illnil I A ni'.t.r Ii., ll,t Qnnnl. n nuo iij;ijiii t iiut.it it utit.i u tur alt er, on the grounds tluat a discussion of par- " taking, then the whole presumption "fails.,r The case ol the Stale vs. Britt was decided in June, 1831, the latter case in June, 1837. In a very late case decided by the Su preme Court, June, 1842, State vs. Scipio Smith, 2d Vol. Iredell's Rep. page 402. Judge Gaston as organ of the Court, lays down the rule of evidence truly applicable to Mr. Ennett's case. The evidence in that case was, that one Chambers had had his tobacco stolen on Friday night, that he followed the tract of a cart from near his tobacco house, to a house of the defendant, Scipio . milh, on the next morning, Satur day that said house was on Smith's land snd within 80 or 100 yards from his dwel ling house, and that on that day (Satur day) his tobacco was found in Smith's house that Smith claimed the tobacco so found in hrs house, as his own, in the pre sence of Chambers, and stated in what field it was grown, and that he, Smith, had ordered it to be put in that house. It was also proved, that Scipio Smith's two sons lived with him at the time, who were joint ly indicted and tried with their father. The Judge who tried the cause below, ap plied to Scipio Smith, the father's case, the rule of law which the Committee have ning Soon after a fraud was suspected, of all the circumstances which attended the way he got into possession of the certificate, and with his unblemished innocent life, The counsel ly feeling was out of order. immediately took his seat. Senator Wilson then arose to tbe ques tion of order, and stated that he did not perceive how the counsel was out of order, i.i . j ; ii l --. and character, they would indeed have anu mat ti seemeu to mm imposMuie tuai shown that anxious wish they professed, to be could do justice to his client, unless search out in the evidence, the circumstan- such latitude of remark was allowed him. ces of his innocence, instead of first assum-The Speaker called Mr. Wilson to order. tag, as they have done, that his account of j 8,1(1 lie U)ok his seat- Senator Biggs next the matter ivas suspicious, and from that il 7 I .1 suspicion, r mar own minus, urawing me most unfavorable inferences against him, and arguing the case in their report alto gether on one side. The next ground the committee take is, that his whole statement ought to be discre dited, because he did not mention to his room-mate, Jackson, on oundav night, arose to the question of order, stating that he did not perceive that the counsel's re marks were out of order. The Speaker called him to order, unless he meant to ap peal from the decision of the Chair, and if he did, he must reduce his point of Otder to writing. Mr. Biggs did so, and read it aloud to the Speaker, who remarked, that he would write down his point of order when he returned home from preaching at himself. Having written it, and read it 9 o'clock, that be had received his eert.fi- oenaie' il was cnair uc- cate. Had Mr. Ennett taken extraordina- c,des the c0sel for Mr- Ennetl m ry pains to make known the reeeipl of his confine himself to the rules prescribed for certificate, would it not have excited 8UBni. me government ni me senate m me ois cion? As it was be did inform Mr. Jack son, his room-mate, although a stranger to him until that day, and Mr. Sanders, his colleague, of it the next morning, and tfhen the question was asked in a public compa ny at Mr. Holden's office on that same cussion of the question before the House, and that it was not in order to refer to, or discuss Ike state of parties that divides the couty try." The excited manner of the Speaker- his having changed the grounds of his de cision and the remarks of the counsei allowing that lie was improperly interrup ted by the Speaker satisfied the under- morning,-"who was the member that had applied to Mr. Ennett's case. All the de- left home without his certificate," he being fend ants were convicted: they appealed to ! present replied, "he supposed that he was j ,i :.;,. nmAA ,,,,1 ho donp in " - " J - " m ' OlUVtlf UlUk J lionet tw " -w ihe Supreme Court, and the Supreme the person meant, but that he had received Mr. Enneo8 defence unless that freedom Uourt set asuie the venltet against cipio,it on the night hetore. Mere, men, me f , . . w allowed his counsel, which Smith, the father. Judge Gaston, who Committee so anxious to establish has been truly called "a good man and a j Ennett's innocence, assumed the Mr. fact in no other tribunal before have they known it to he denied, and the necessity for which great Judge," delivered the opinion of the ( that not to mention the reception of the certify ! . fc M hag ful, H frtl h.ivc. ,h-n ionisroom-maie was suspicious, auu nneum. - - whole Court ' we examine the cases, in which such presumption has been sanctioned, or con " sider the grounds of reason and expert ence on which the presumption is clear ly warranted, we shall find that it applies - 1 p .1 r. : Lr fnet anni-ared on the trial, that he had not snown ; lor, ine laci is now uciorc uic a . ..... . 1 tl.-t ..itiilol u-linln fintllio of only mentioned it to his room-mate but to j """ai l,4C v his cnllcague and to others, it availed him !both parties, recorded their votes in fivor nothing with his accusers. K lhe first resolution only his pohUcal op- ponents, by a strict parly voie, voiea rus guiu The undersigned farther protest in this, . 1. r .i: . i- . !. ONLY, when this possession is of a kind, 1 a ,e lltB "" " which manifests that the stolen goods have j Senate by the mode ol his trial, had thrown ...n, t it th on-r bv his own act. t uPon Mr. Ennett the burthen of proving Ins V. "til V - J''- - J ' - - all events. and expulsion, and that A I LAS I , this dreadful degradation of a man, of unblem ished character." of his family and con stituency, was only accomplished by the hv tlis IT N .nniTRTRn ! ow innocence, contrary to the maxim of ' f h . , ( nxr nnnrpr.R Wp then mpn. ilaw and usages in such cases, his counsel ; The enormity of the charge at-ainst Mr. n Uudww (.o iotpd hv that xrrf;ol,ght not lo have been reused, as they Ennett. hsendurinff character: its blast- and good Judge. Lord Hale, where a horse I"' lhe riglu and Priviiege replying . effect upon a conoecleJ with him ; was stolen from A, and that same day B lu tuen onJe, liuns as "V'B"1 "dVC uccu mt,l,c the honor of the State ; and above all, the was found upon him B was tried, convic- jm gi l prou.,au ...u.c c-pc-ted,and hung for stealing the horse, on the!61?1 ' f8 lhe ComrailJlee s rePorl f a.red ground, that being found in possession orf" a11 errorf' had been printed, circu the horse, and notable to account for it, , ed, and must have prejudiced Mr. En . 1 , , , , . . v 1 nett s cause. Jind the undersigned also protest he must be presumed to be the thiet. Yet, - fh . that thm Snpalfpr nntru?nnt tn hve in. shortly after this, C was apprehended and termmed Mr. Ennett's counsel as he did.' ffainst the conviction and expulsion of Mr tried for robbery and convisted; and when by repeatedly calling him to order, for we ; Ennett, as a dangerous precedent, which executed, confessed that he had stolen the ,u:nu u was lne connsei'9 duty tosav what in the ever-changing fortunes of party. important fact that no appeal could lie, from the decision of the Senate, demanded the most unprejudiced and dispassionate enqui ry, and free discussion of his cause. Therefore, we most solemnly protest renders every public man's character inse cure because we believe he had not a fair and impartial trial because we believe the whole strength of evidence was in favor horse for which B was hung, and being he cjijj wjen thus caiied to order, with the closely pursued, requested B, a stranger to viexv f gecurin2 an unprejudiced trial to him, to walk his horse for him while he ll8 cient. turned aside on a necessary occasion, and j 'Hip fets hi..r i!,pp. ihp ronnsel cau- escaped. Here B was hung, because be- lioned llie Senate against any unfavorable j of his innocence, and because he was depn ing found in possessions he could not ac-; impressions or prejudice that the report of-J-ved of the free liberty of counsel, and z count how he come to the possession ,up f'nmm;,tPP m;ht have made in their dangerous blow has thus been given to ths The Jury forgetting that the possession of h,lsnm, -. ,hat renort contained x -arious jnest,mo& privilege of freedom of debate a horse might be put upon a man, aud heierr!-g nf jaw an,j r-n.lf and had been for neveitheless be unable to account for it, assome tjmP printed & circulated from which theSenateraay have in Mr. Ennett's case, , ie wa8 fearful his client's case may have forgotten, that a man may be put in pos- Deen. prejudged, disclaiming at the same session of a' letter containing a forged cer-; time any intention to impute improper mo tificate or counterfeit notes, aud the posses- j t;vea to the Committee or to the Senate. sor be unable to prove who gave him that , letter much more easy and common it is to palm a letter upon a man, than to palm a horse upon him, aad yet both have and fhe counsel was here called to order by the Speaker for charging the Senate with having prejudged the case. He prompt to reiterated his disclaimer of intending a Whitmel Stalling, TV. A. Jeffreys, Geo. W. Thompson, Thos. N. Cameron, Robert H. Hester, Thos. I. Pasteur, Geo. D. Boyd, Jno. H. Drake, Jr. John Reich, John Exum, Geo. C. Baton, Louis D. Wilson, Larkin Stowe, Asa Biggs, O wen Holmes, Robert Melvin, C. Ethtridse, John Walker, James TomJinson, E. G, Speight, E'. C. Gavin, J. K. Hill, L. J. Gwunn, IV, Edward may happen. Another C8ie is mentioned 'ny thing personal and was permitted to Raleigh, Jan'y 4, 1845,