The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1807-02-13
(CONCLUDRD.)

(CoNcLuDED.)
MIR. BIDWELL faid, although he was not
fatished of the neceiiity of pafing this bill, he
was not prepared TO rtjed it, in its preient Gage
AS it had received the function of the Senate
he was ditPofcd to treat If as a iubie9 worthy
OF dhcutiion and elaboration, by referring il in
the ufual courfe, to committee of the whole
Houfe.
Before the paifing of any bill of this nature,
the Houfe ought to have satisfactory proof that
rebellion in fact exifed (for there was no pre-
tence of an invafior) and that the public fafety
required a fufpenfion of the privilege of Habeas
Corpus. BY the terms of the contribution,
both OF thefe pre-requGtes mutt concur, to au.
thorfe the meafure. The firft enquiry would
naturally turn upon the exitence of rebellion.
On that point he had no doubt. To conftitute
rebellion, in the fenie of the conaitution, he
did not think it neceflary that battle fhould
have hfen fought, or even Jingle gun fired
If troops were entitled, attended, organized
and armed for the purpefe of effeeting trea.
tonable object, it amounted to actual rebellion
Such was the exiting ftate of things. The pub.
lie notoriety of the fact was, perhaps, fufcient
evidence, for the legillature to act upon, if me-
ceilary but they had alto the official ftatement
OF the Prefdent to that efs6t. He had, there.
fore, no doubt fthe exitence OF rebellion,
and that, too, of more wanton and maignan,
character, than any iniurreetion which had here.
tofore been RATED againft our government; for
| it had not been occafoned by any grievances.
real or imaginary, but muff have originated in
motives of perfona ambition or fome more up-
worthy paflien.
An exiting rebellion, however, even of this
aggravated defcription, was not alone fufficient
to juitify fufpenion of the writ of Habeas
Corpus. To bring it within constitutional uf-
tihcatlon, it mutt be required by the public
fatety. That was matter of opinion, rather
than of fact. He was convinced that the pro.
pofed fufpenfion was not requiite for the pur.
pofe of fupPrefIing the confpiracy for, by the
vigilance and energy Of our executive govern
ment, feconded and fupported by the exertions
of particular ftates and territories and the ar
my, this deep-lad confpiracy was already in a
good meaiure iupprefied, and he trulted the
means now in operation would complete the
fuPpreflion. a fufpention of the Hsbeas Cor.
pus could not be neceilary, except for the de-
lection and conviction of the coRfpirators. A
thorough invcftieation ought undoubtedly TO be
made. IT any perions, concerned in the con-
ipiracy, were arreted in ftuations which pre-
Guided an Immediate production of tuch evil
dence, as would warrant thlir confinement.
jultice would require that they fhould be de.
tanned until the proper evidence could be pro.
cured but In the mean time they might be
discharged by virtue of Habeas Corpus: for.
though he agreed with the gentleman from Ma
ryland (Mr. NelfoD) in fhe importance and II.
tiIity OF this writ, he could not fubfcribe to
the doctrine which he underltood that gentle.
man TO maintain, that it would entitle perfon
to difcharge only for caufes of irreguarity in
the afreh. Want of legal evidence to thew,
by oath or affirmation, probable caufe for de.
tention, would be ground of dfcharge. In or
dina cafo nd.
a guilty perfon, for iuch want of evidence. was
efteemed fmaller evil, than denial of the com
mon privilege. If it were 70, in refpeet to this
oonfpiracy, there was, in his opinion, no good
reaton for paiiing this bill. That was A point,
which appeared 10 him worthy of fome delibe.
ration.
1t had been mentioned, in the debate, that
IN the whole hiitory of our government, not
withtanding two iniurrections, the Habeas Cor
Pus had, in no nftance, been fufpended. II
was true. But an inRanCe had been cited from
one of the itates. During lie infurre6ion in
mafiachutetts, there was fuch fufpenlion, in
puriuance of a constitutional proviGon; and IL
was generally ACKNOWLEDGED to have been ne.
ceflary aud iaIutary meaiure. He bad never
underhood that 1t was sbuled, or that it was
conhdered by the people Of that nate DANCE.
rous example. it was jufthed by the occ sG,n.
But it did not, therefore, follow that Gmilar
iutpenhon would be jufifab!e on this occaGon.
That mutt depend on the prtien' Gate and cir
cumttances Of the nation. Although rebrlli.
on exiited, be was not fatisfied that the pub.
ic fAfety required 70 ftrong aud fevcre n,ea.
lure. But, as it was an important qurfion, ON
which the Houfe had not YET taken time 20 de.
iberate, he was willing that the bill fhould 90.
according to the ufual courfe of proceeding to
committee of the whole and therefore, he
mould not give his vote for rejecting it in the
preient Gagc.
Mr.. ]. RANDOLPH. G1all give NV
vote IN very different manner from the
gentleman who has jutt Fat down. wasex.
tremeiy hApPy to witneis the very promp, aud
decided oppofiton this msafure received in the
Houle, and from the guarter whence that 90.