Alexandria daily advertiser. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1803-1808, 1804-05-10
DEBATE
u 1lr. Fand1l5h's motion j5r the appoint
/. S Il MUEL CT Il S Z.
{ Jfr. F1aGleu's Sbeech Gontiuued, J

ne ludlC1arlSS IN al the StateS CT tue IT
MON are rendered more or less independ-
pendent, some are appoin.ed fora short
er and some for longer periodic. in New
Jersey theyare appointed for seven years,
they were SO in Pennsylvania formerly,
since the revision ofthe constitution they
are appointed during good behaviour they
are however, subject not only TO removal
by impeachment, but also BY the voice OF
two thirds Of each House for any cause
which the House do not think a sufficient
cause of impeachment but in the federal
government, there is no method provided
for removing them for the most scanda.
lous indiscretions, or incapacity, as even
when they may unfortunately be under
mental arrangement, except by impeacii-
nent, which is inapplicableto official crimes
and conducted with tedious forms. The
power ofimpeaching being the only shield
provided by the government, for the pro-
lection of the citizens from judicial oppres-
sion, and this House being the only consti-
tutional organ for obtaining information
OF official excuses and bringing forward
articles Of impeachment, ought not to bind
up their own hands from doing their duty,
and this they will do if they reject the re-
solution now on the table
But while the gentlemen consider the
character Of these judges so sacred that
their conduct cannot be enquired into not
withstanding such proofs or want of con-
6dence in them, and that as the gentleman
near ne from S. Carolina, Mr.. Lowndes)
has said he is afraid of impeachment, and
grounds his fears on the incapacity or the
uuhtness Of the members of this House, or
because the members ofthis House may a.
buse the power. Mr.. T. asked were not
the members of this House selected and
qualified for the discharge of this nocessa-
ry duty? Were they not appointed by as
respectable authority as the Judges? Were
they not under solemn oath of Office for
the faithful discharge Of this, as well as
every part of their high trust? And were
they not protected by special privileges
and protection during the charge Of their
trust equally with the judges. and their
stations as respectable as that OF the Judges
They are not only protected from civil
actions, but are not subjected to imp7aeh.
ment fer misbehaviour in Office as the
Judges are. They are in their official ca
pacity subjected only to the censure Of
public opinion. If this is true it is impro-
,er, it is inlpolitic, for the members of this
House to degrade their own character, it
amounts to saying, they are not capable of
discharging the trust they are solemnly
bound to discharge and ought not to have
been invested with. He knew however this
was only introduced as an excuse for un-
willingness. But the same gentleman adds,
as reason for opposing the resolution,
hat he is not acquainted with the history
Of the business. Fiat is probably the case
With him and others, especially such as
had not seat in the last session of Con-
gress, or who resided at great distance
from the sence alluded to intae resolution
admitting shis to be true, the best and
the only regular way to become acquainted
with the history Of tha case,i is to carry the
resolution into efccf-,o have a commit.
Zee appointed with such power as would
enable them to procure suyh Information
as that gentleman and every other mem
Der who is unintormed could depend on.
The gentleman objection IN fac5 is one
of the strongest arguments in favor OF
the resolution. The gentleman from South
Carolina has however offered one other
objection to the resolution which merits
some notice. He has said that If a com
mittee is appointed for the object propo-
sed by the resolution, men OF character
and talents VIII not accept Of appointments
in the Judiciary. The solidity Of this ob-