The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1805-03-30

oI inc OcdTief puni'hnC!its, without admitting
him to the privilege of trial, or the rnalleR
chance OF eicape, aud clofed the door of MIRA
fion upon the inhabitants of Euroce? Have
all thefe memorable faas efcaped the attention
OF the federaliits, or are we now to be deluded
INTO the belief that the republicans alone have
meditated IN attack upon the vital principles Of
the contribution
The Contribution in danger ~ And is II
cometo this then, that no changes can he pro.
Poied, no amendments can be introduced, with
out affecting The very exiitence of that inftru.
ment Are we 70 certain hat the contribution
rs 10 perfect in ALL its provilons, that no change
or circumstances, no experience however ex-
teniive, and no political fcience however pro-
found, may not detett fome of its defects, dill.
tribute the powers of the government upon
later principles, and more fully fecure the ref
portability of its officers? Is it indeed 70 Der.
rect as TO be erected into the ark of our politi-
cal covenant, and the man who once touches il.
iiiall no longer furvive in the eGimation of his
couutrymen The cry formerly was, that &" tn.
Church was in danger 30 and had theie holdings
been believed, had they arreited the progrefs of
free enquiry, then eccleiiahical establishments
would never have relaxed in their rigonr, and
the advantages of federation would never have
been felt. The mott ufeful discoveries in
phIlosDphy, Gays the able Gerald) the mott i'm
port7nt changes in the moral hiftory of man.
have been Innovations: The revolution was an
Innovation ;the reformation was an innovation ::
chnlianitY itfelf was an Innovation" And
VINO is there bold enough TO a1ert, that even
the conititu'ion of this country does not re-
quire an amendment.
Yet our contribution is proclaimed TO be in
danger where then, we ak, are the fnurces of
the alarm? You will find them, fav the fede-
lifts, in the late propositions of Mefis. Ram
dolph and Nicholfon. Mr.. Randolph Wiilles to
increafe the refPoniblity o. our judges, by filb-
JectIng them to removal on 4 Joint vote of
both hOufes of congrefs and Mr.. Nichofon
wiiheS the members of the federal fenate to be
removed at thepleafure ofthe fate legislatures /?
Admit that theie amendments are moh impro-
vIdent in themfelves arethere fufficentgrounds
for the alarm, that the federal party have at
tempted to excite
Isitfirto conclude, becaufe MelIrs Randolph
and Nicholfon are oppofed to the prefent tenure
OF the Senate and judiciary department., that
T there is not an article, f-Gton, or paragraph of
/ the contribution, which is comfortable 10 their
wiiheS? Becaufe they do not admire thefc two
features Of the contribution, that there is not a
Jingle feature of any Importance, which they do
not admire That they with to involve the
whole in one undiitiugulhing ruin? Let theft
llhberal differences he ever 20 iuf, Till would it
be fair 10 extend them to the whole or to the
theie tzvO amendments have been propofed by
tzvo a6le republicans, is it in reafcn to found the
tochn of alarm; and to proclaim in a voice of
terror and denunciation, that the contribution
ittef is in danger? Ifthis reafoning be correct,
and theie differences be founded i'm truth then
is the whole fyfem of logic from the age of
Arftotle down to the preftnt day; the whole
! theory yllogifm, which declares that the lefs
can never comprehend the greater, aud that
we muf pats from the major to the minor {;
| Then is this pompous edifce of learning naught
but crumbling heep Of fand.
But are ihe{e amendments really 70 IMPROVE
dent in themlelves, that not folilary argu-
ment can DC adduced in their vndicaton, and
thar the men who propofed them, could have
! been actuated by none other than the clearen
| and mott uniuRihable intention of fubvertinq
the contribution? For moment let us bring
them before the tribunal, not of our preiudices,
but of our understanding ; and fee what the ex-
perience of other ftates, what the theory ofour
own government, what recent incidents, could
| FAY in their juftifcation.-Mr. Randolph pro-
poies, that "the judges Of the fupreme and all
! other courts the United States fhall be reno
| we'd ny the PRECEDENT, on the joint addrefs of
10th houirs Of congrefs requefing the fame.''
| viii il be no uncomfortable eulogium to this
amendment to fay, that it has long become one
the tettIed principles of the Brtilh couititu.
tion, that mott fupendous monument
of human wifdom? "In order to maintain
both the dignity and independence of the indg-
es in the hyperion courts, Gays the able com
nentator on the laws of England) it is enacted
itatute 10 Wee, that their commhions nall
he made mot as formerly, dn-ante bene blacifo,
but) 7Hamdia 6ene ge0srint, and their ralaries af-
'ertained & eftabliihed; but that ifnarbelazvfal
70 remoVr them on addrejJ ofbofb boHr5 ofbar-
lament" Yet of al the departments of the Bri-
'iih government fiuce the paling of this ilatute,
its judiciary has been pre-eminently diftinguih-
ed for its talents, its independence, and the
unrivalled accuracy of its deciions. Whit
The Britilh King has been denounced as the def
pot of his donlinions, Whit the Houfe of Peers
has been denominated an hofpital of incurables,
whilt The genius and attainnents Of the Houft
of Commons have not faved them from the ac-
cufations of venaty and corruption, the know
ledge & the integrity of the Engilh bench have
entitled it alone to the unmixed admiration of
the world. Can then an organization which
has been found 70 Pituitary in England, prove
altogether pernicious in the United States? Or
can there be any bscnLarify in the nru6}ure OF a
republican government, which by defeating a
rigorous analogy, fhoold prevent us from hav-
Il ing recoure to the judicial hiGJry of England
Let us iearch alto into our own tate contituti-
ons, and we ihall diicover that there are no Iefs
than eight of thele itates, which have fubie6ted
their judiciary to a removal from Office, with