The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1807-02-10

b
] am acquainted, that the infurretlcn which
took place in Pennsylvania did not GO to the fub
verhon of the government. But let us lool. a.
this con!p!racy. While the nation from one
extreme to the other enjoys degree of profpe-
r,ty and happinefs unparalleled in any other ma
ton, and not Jingle individual within our IL
nuts has any resfon to complain of oppreiion,
an infurreeton is fomented, fubverive of the
government and deRruttive of the rights of the
people. 1t appears to me that this infurrettion
las the mott asgravating of all infurrettions
wh'ch hittory gives US an account of. There
Is not the eait oppre Iion or the leaf preflure of
circumstances to induce any individual to rife
up aganft the government of his country and
it confequently betrays the greateft turpi,ude of
mind IN thofe who either lead or unite i'm it..
For theie reafons think it ought to be traced
TO its fource, and / think it very doubtful whe.
Their this can be effeeted, without in the firlt
Impending the Habeas Corpus. Will GENTLE
men fay that any innocent man will have a fin
ger laid upon him, fhou!d this law pats No
| there is no probability of tit is fcarcely pof-
iib!e. But even ifit be potlible, if the public
good requires the fufpenfon Of this privilege,
| every man attached to the government and to
the liberty he enjoys, will be furely willing to
fubmit TO this Inconvenience for a time, in or
der to fecure the public haPpinefs. The fur.
penhon only applies to particular crimes, the
Liberties of the people will not therefore be
touched. do think a great responsibility will
reft on this branch of the legislature in cafe
they refuie to pats this act. Suppofe the head
of this confpracy fhall be taken in diHriet of
country where evidence exits of the crime
charged to him, and he fhall confequenty be
fet at liberty by the tribunals of iuftice-where
will the retPonfibiity reit but upon this branch
of the Legislature 1t too great for me as an
individual member to bear. fhall therefore
vote for this bill under the impreffion that it
will not have the injurious effects that fome
gentlemen feem to apprehend, and that it will
only more efectuay conlign the guilty into
the hands of juftice.
Mr.. r. NELSON. As the motion to reject
the bill meets my mott hearty appreciation, and
as conlider it involving great national quef.
ton, cannot reconcile it to my duty to give
hent vote on it. fhall however, i'm order to
avoid an unnecef1ary confumption of the time
OF the Houte, offer my remarks in as concife
compass as pofiible. / fhall firft confider the
nature of the writ Of Habeas Corpus after
wards examine its effects, not only on the indi-
vidual, but on the community at large, taking
into view the mode of proceeding under it, to
fhow, as conceive, that no danger can enfue,
on the refuial to pats this BILL
What is writ of Habeas Corpus It a
writ directing certain perfon in cuftody to be
brought before a tribunal of juftice, to enquire
into the legality of his confinement. IF the
judge is of opinion that the confinement is lille
gal, the perfon will of courfe be difcharged;
If on the contrary, from the evidence, he fhall
be of opinion that there is fuficent grounds
to iufped that he sguity of fome offence, he
will not be discharged. Now to me it appears
that this is proper and necefiary power to be
vefted in our judges, and that fufpenfion of
the writ of Habeas Corpus is in all cafes impro-
per. If a man is taken up, and is denied an
examination before a judge or court, he may,
although innocent in this cafe, continue to fuf-
fer confinement. This in my opinion is DANCE
rous to the liberty of the citizen. He may be
taken up on vague fufpicon and may not have
his cafe examined for months, even for years
Would not this bear hard upon the rights of the
citizen
Let us turn over leaf, and fee how the go
vernment tands. IF the perfon accufed is legal
ly committed, or if it iiiali be proved that he
has committed any offence, the Judge will fay
that he ihall not be releafed. If he has COM
mltted an offence there can be no grounds for
this tuipcnhon, becaufe without fuch fufpen-
iion he will not be discharged becaufe it does
not follow that inaimuch as a man has right
to demand that he be brought before Judge
by writ of Habeas Corpus, he ihall therefore
be discharged. He is only bound to examine
him, and if he finds there is ttrong reafon to
mand him to confinement.
This is writ of right, which ought to exit
under all governments on earth. What right
The right of being examined by the tribunals of
his country, TO determine whether there is any
ground for the deprivation of his liberty. Is
this right which ought to be fufpended mere
" to crafty the approximations of gentlemen
think not. The trainers of the contribution
have faid 60 The privilege of the writ of Habeas
Corpus fhall not be fufpended, except when in
cafes of invafon rebellion the public fafety
lhall require it. Well, but Jays the gentleman
from Maff. can any one deny that this is rebeli
on 1t may perhaps be, but think it does not
deierve the name of rebellion it is Iittle pet
ty, triHing, contemplate thing, led on by a
desperate man, at the head of few desperate
folowers--a thing which might have been dam
gerous, If the virtue of the people had not ar
refed and defroyed it. But admit that it is a
rebellion. Will every rebellion utify fuf-
peniion of the writ of Habeas Corpus? The
contribution fays " The privilege of the writ of
Habeas Corpus fhalI not be fuipended, except
when in cafes of invahon or rebellion the pub
lie fafety ihall require it," Does then the pub
lie fafety require this fufpenhon? Does the
contribution juftify it /? And under prefent cir
cumhances combining man in prifon without
eauie--There is no danger, the enemy is not at
our door--there is no invafon-and yet we are
called upon to fufpend the writ of Habeas Cor
pus This precedent, let me tell gentlemen,
may he ruinous, may be mott dsmBable pre-
cedert u precedent which hereafter may be
mo- ~ 81 IL.