prejudice, and you will be governed only by a regard for equal and impartial juftice. We are perfuaded, gentlemen, that you come to this trial with unbiaffed minds, as pure as the white mantle that now enshrouds our fields, unfullied by the touch of man. I afk pardon for confuming time, which might be more ufefully filled up by the gentleman who is to conduct the profecution of this article of impeachment. For myfelf, and for the managers of this impeachment, I thank you for the kind & patient attention you have been pleafed to pay to my obfervations. Attend,gentlemen, to this important caufe. Nay,I am fure you will attend to it, under the folemn impreffions of your facred oaths, and under the moft impreffive confiderations of the vast importance of your decifion. With this view, I rest confident that the refult of your deliberations, will meet the approbation of your conftituents. Mr. RODNEY.-Mr. Speaker, and gentlemen of this honorable Court, you have heard the statement that has been made by one of the managers. In order to lay before you the principles of the article of impeachment against Edward Shippen, Jafper Yeates, and Thomas Smith, Efquires, I fhall exhibit in the first place, the record of the Supreme Court, or at least fo far as I think it will bear on the prefent cafe, relative to the action between Pettit and Bayard, and Thomas Paffmore: Pleas before the Honorable Edward Shippen, Esquire, Doctor of Laws, Chief Justice, and bis associate Justices, of the Supreme Court of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, of the term of September, in the year of our Lord, MDCCCII. We, the underwriters on the body, tackle, &c. of brig Minerva, Jonathan Lambert, mafter, infured by Thomas Paff. more, in the office of Shoemaker and Berrett, by a policy dated September 30th, 1801, hereby agree to abide by the award to be given by Mathew Pearce and Hugh Henry, in an action wherein the faid Thomas Paffmore is plaintiff, and Andrew Pettit and Andrew Bayard are defendants, and authorize and empower Jared Ingerfoll or any other attorney of the Supreme Court, to confefs judgment against us for any fum in proportion to our feveral fubfcriptions, that may be awarded against the faid Pettit and Bayard; and I, Thomas Paffimore, do alfo agree, that the award of the faid referees, fhall be valid against me, and authorize Jared Ingerfoll, or any other attorney, to confefs judgment against me, in any action or actions that I may bring against any or all the underwriters who fhall fign this agreement. In witness whereof, the faid parties have here unto fet their hands, this twelfth day of July, 1802. Thomas Passmore, THOMAS PASSMORE, PETTIT & BAYARD, FOR PHILIPS CRAMOND & CO. NICKLIN & GRIFFITH. Andew Pettit & Andrew Bayard, trading under the firm of Pettit and Bayard. Supreme Court of Pennsyl vania.-Cafe, with writ returnable, Sept. term. 1802. Sur. policy of infurance. It is mutually agreed between plaintiff and defendants im this action, that all matters in variance between them, fhall be referred to Hugh Henry and Mathew Pearce, who, if they cannot agree, are to make choice of a third person as an umpire, who are to hear and determine upon the merits of the difpute, and the report of any two of whom after a full and fair inveftigation is to be made into the prothonotary's office-upon which judgment is to be entered. Rule, if either party refafes or neglects to appear on one day's notice the referees may proceed exparte. Let this action be made, and the rule made conformably to the agree ment on the other side. EDWARD BURD, Esq. S. LEVY, Atty. p. plaintiff. I, Edward Burd, prothonotary of the Supreme Court aforefaid, hereby certify, that the above agreement and order of Mr. Sampfon Levy, as to the form of entering the fame on record, were filed in my office, on the thirteenth day of July, eighteen hundred and two. In purfuance whereof, the following entry was made on the record of the faid Court. Thomas Passmore, Andrew Pettit Andrew Bayard, Bayard. In the Supreme Court of term, 1802. Amicable action entered by agreement filed 13th July, 1802, and by the fame agreement, all matters in variance be tween the parties are referred to Hugh Henry and Matthew Pearce, who, if they cannot agree, are to make choice of a third perfon as an umpire, who are to hear and determine upon the merits of the difpute, and the report of any two of them 'after a full and fair inveftigation to be made into the prothonotary's office, and judgment entered thereon. Exparte rule, ¿ on one day's notice.' I further certify, that on the fixth Auguft, eighteen hundred and two, a report in faid action, was filed in my office, in the following terms, viz:— We, the fubfcribers, (William Hallett, being appointed by Meffrs. Henry and Pearce) after a full and fair investigation of the fubject-do award for the plaintiff in the above cafe, four hundred and ninety dollars with intereft.' HUGH HENRY. WILLIAM HASLET. And, that on the fame fixth day of Auguft, eighteen hundred and two, the following entry was made on the record of faid Court 6th Auguft, 1802, judgment on report fec reg.' and that on the eighteenth Auguft, eighteen hundred and two, a paper whereof the following is a true copy, was filed in my office. Thomas Passmore, Andrew Pettit & Andrew Bayard. Supreme Court of Penn fylvania. Amicable action, cafe. By virtue of a warrant of attorney filed in the office of Edward Burd, Efquire, prothonotary, figned by the defendants, I do hereby confel's judgment against them, for the fum of four hundred and ninety dollars, the fum awarded by the referees. 18th August, 1802. SAMPSON LEVY. And that, thereupon, the following entry was made on the records of the faid Court: 18th Auguft, 1802, Mr. S. Levy, by virtue of a warrant ' of attorney, contained in faid agreement, to enter the action, confefs judgment for the fum awarded by the referees.' H I further certify, that thereupon on the nineteenth day of Aug. Anno Domini, eighteen hundred and two, a writ of Fieri Facias iffued, to the fheriff of Philadelphia county directed, to which no return has been made; and, that on the fourth day of September, eighteen hundred and two, exceptions to faid report, with an affidavit thereto fubfcribed, were filed in my office in the following terms, viz : Thomas Passmore, Andrew Pettit & Andrew Bayard. Exceptions to the report of referees in the above cafe. First. For, that the faid referees had a meeting on the fubject of the reference with the plaintiff, when the defendants were not prefent nor notified; but one of the defendants going into a room to find a friend, discovered the plaintiff engag ed in fhewing his papers to the referees. Secondly. For, that the plaintiff communicated to the referees, his affidavit, of what another perfon told him, refpecting the object of the reference, in the abfence of the defendants, and without the fame having been communicated to them, or either of them, by the plaintiff. Thirdly. For, that the referees have allowed a claim for a total lofs on an infurance upon a fhip, although the plaintiff did not produce the account of the expences incurred for repairs, and the defendants, or one of them, defired the referees not to come to a conclufion in the bufinefs, until fuch accounts were produced by the plaintiff. Fourthly. For, that the referees have decided in favor of the plaintiff, when they ought to have dedided in favor of the defendants. J. INGERSOLL, for defendants. Philadelphia, September 3d, 1802. Andrew Bayard, one of the defendants, being duly fworn, declares and fays, that the facts contained in the above affidavit, are true, to the best of his knowledge and belief. Before me, OHN INSKEEP, Alderman. ANDREW BAYARD. And that at a Supreme Cout, held at Philadelphia, the 6th day of September, 1802, before the honorable Edward Shippen, Doctor of Laws, Chief Juftice, and his affociates, Juftices of the faid Court, on motion of Mr. M'Kean, and by confent of Mr. Levy, the execution aforefaid was fet afide, and on mo tion of Mr. Levy, a rule was obtained and entered for taking depofitions in faid caufe, in twenty-four hours notice, and the hearing of the argument was poftponed till the enfuing term.. That on the 27th of October, 1802, a paper in the faid caufe, whereof the following is a true copy, was filed in my office. In the Supreme Courtamicable action cafe. To Sept. 1302. Aug. 6, 1802, judgment. I do hereby acknowledge and declare, that the above action. is for the ufe of John Travis, of the city of Philadelphia, merchant, THOMAS PASSMORE. Philadelphia, October 26, 1802. (Witness) JAMES GIBSON, And that on the 16th day of November, 1802, the depofition of Edward V. Miller was filed, whereof the following is a true copy. Thomas Passmore, Andrew Pettit & Andrew Bayard. In the Supreme Court of Edward V. Miller, being folemnly fworn, doth depofe and fay, that he hath been clerk to Meffrs. Pettit and Bayard, the defendants, fince the month of July, in the year 1801, and is ftill employed by them in that capacity; that, the deponent has been the only clerk in the counting-house of the faid defendants, fince the month of December laft-that he can fay, upon his oath, that he is careful of, and attentive to the business of his faid employers, generally; that he cannot fay, whether any letter from the plaintiff to faid defendants was delivered to him, at the counting-houfe of the latter, in the courfe of last fummer, but doth pofitively declare, that he uniformly and steadily, places all letters put into his hands for the defendants at their counting-houfe, in one certain place-that is, on a defk in the faid counting-houfe, at which the defendants write, and if any letter from the plaintiff to the faid Pettit and Bayard, was left with him la fummer, at faid counting-houfe, he is confident |