Alexandria daily advertiser. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1803-1808, 1804-05-01
Continued

Mr.. Gregg sald ne5Slfoei1A
the postponement and IN favor OF the reso
Ltion. TIE case was somewhat new, but
he perceived no improperly in giving i
the same direction with all the other busi
ness originated in thehouse. WHAT'S this
committee to be appointed for! 10 Haves-
tiqate facts, and report them to the House
Was it not most proper that gentlemen
whose characters were implicated should
have. IN the first instance, facts stated prl-
vately before committee, than that parts
Of their character should be Immediately
brought into view before the House lie
recollected one fact not yet alluded to IN
debate. In 1893 after the army, under the
command of General St. Clair, was defeat
ed, great Dissatisfaction arose, and the
character ofthe commander was implicated.
The idea was that the expedition had not
been conducted with proprlety. Inc bu-
siness was brought before Congress. 1t
was understood at that time, whether just
ly or not Mr.. Gregg would not pretend to
saw. that the commanderin chief could not
be tried by court martial. Congress
therefore took up the business and appoint
ted committee of enquiry, who went thro'
lengthy examination of the subject. Mr..
Gregg mentioned this precedent that gen
tlemen might turn their attention to it.
Mr.. r. Griswold. had hoped thatthe
language used by me, when | was up be-
fore, would not have led gentlemen to sup
pose that was acting as the friend or the
enemy of Judge Chase. | am acting in
neither capacity. am acting only as a
member of this house, who ought to be
anxious on an occasion OF such importance
to take that course which is most consist.
ent with proprety, that course which re-
suits from the duty this house owes the ma
ton, and that duty which they owe the
character ola Judge. 1t did appear to me
that it was not correct to call the character
of a public officer into question, unless
some necessity should first appear. No
facts are psesented on this occasion. The
gentleman from Virginia has said that he
is in possession of facts, or OF something,
|. that makes him believe that an enquiry is
proper; but he does not choose to comnu.
nicate these facts. The gentleman from
PENNSYLVANIA has given us his information
The question is whether 1t is proper on
these light suggestions to institute solemn
enquiry into the character of this Judge.
It appears to me that we ought not to throw
any imputation ON the character of any of.
6cer without evidence that such an enquiry
is necessary. The case mentioned by the
gentleman fromP Pennsylvania Mr.. Gregg,
does no. apply. Dissatisfaction existed i
the country and in this house on the events
of campaign; an enquiry was instituted,
but what was its object? The committee
were appointed to enquire into the general
causes of the failure ofthe expedition they
were not instructedt to enquire into the cha
racter of a particular officer.
The gentleman from Virginia has refer.
red to another case, when he says. we were
ready enough to institute az enquiry, ant
has left it to be inferred that the enquiry
was made without shy previous proof o.
its necessity. But certainly on chat occa
sion enquiry was not made without proof
suppose the enquiry alluded to was thai
which related to the conduct of the com.
missioners of the sinking fund. Il was In
stituted on report made by them, and
which we thought was not satisfactory
The resolution offered was adopted, and
enquiry was made, the result of which is
well known to every gentleman. 1t fol-
lows, therefore, that there are no prece-
dents adduced, which apply to the present
case.
1t is my wish that the proceedings ofth;s
House may on this occasion be perfectly
correct, and that we may not beprecipitat-
L. i II,