Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1808-05-31
rupt agency, dyed with innocent

stood, that mean rot 70 justify the
conduct of the Judge at Richmond |
am OILY stating the facts; and shall
we pass law that must, according TO
the admission of lis advocates, depend
upon tue humanity OF j. Dig s, to pre-
vent injustice, and to shield the inno-
cent from unjust punishment +? Shall
we divest ourselves of all humanity,
and exclusively trust to the humanity
Of the judges? Sir, hope not.
The honora' lie gentleman from De-
laware (Mr. B.ya d. in his argument
in favor of passing this bill, has told
us, that man might love his wife,
or his father, or his brother, or his
friend but be would love himself
more and therefore, as the law de-
clared it to be crime, he would re-
fuse all acts of hospitality and Kindness
to those that were charged with any of
those acts that are made criminal BY
this bill. " He has told us farther,
that neither the Innocent or the gull
ty should be prohibited, because the
guilty should be tried and punished,
and the innocent should seek their
trial, that their innocenay might be
fully established. All this is, no doubt,
mighty pretty in theory, but how Is
the fact? Let the proceedings at
Richmond, which has given birth to
the bill before you, answer the questi-
on for will venture to hazard the
opinion, that if Aaron Burr had been
an innocent man, taken from the walks
of useful life, with one half of the e.
violence against him that was against
Burr, that before this time he would
have been rotten in his grave.
But, Sir, how is this doctrine to o.
perate in private life, among the citi-
zens of the United States? Let the
insidious traitorous informer once
raise the hue and cry againsta man,
and, by this bill, you cut him off from
all the charities of life! From the
moment that malice, with her enven-
omed tongue, can excite the whisper
of suspicion against an individual, no
matter how fair his character mayhave
stood before, he is now to be cut off
from the protection and support of
society---to be denied the common
rights and charities of humanity---to
be legally communicated, and by
this law doomed to destruction.
Can this be right? Can any law
which is just in its principles, and cor
rect in its details, require such sacri-
6ce That we should thus legislate
against all the amiable & tender chart
ties of human life, tearing them up by
theroots, * in their stead planting sell
hshness and all the, antisocial passions,
which God knows, and every days ex-
perienee proves, that they grow battoo
fat without being either planted or
fostered by the legislature.
But arguments still more extraordi-
nary, when all circumstances are I'M
partially considered, have been resor-
ted to by the gentlemen who are in fa-
YOUR of passing this bill: the ashes of
the United Irishmen have been raked
from out of the fire Of persecution, to
induce us to pass this bill the evils &
suferings Of Ireland have been menti-
oned, as warnings & evidences of the
VI III ooOhp III OihCl W
induce the passage of this bill: the great
body of the people of ireland have
been arraigned at our bar as traitors,to
persuade us to vote for this bill. see
neither the justice, the truth, or the
application Of those observations to
the purposes intended.
In order TO be understand the ma
ture and character of any engagement,
whether it was criminal or not, at the
time it was agreed to, it is necessary
that we should understand the situati-
on of the country, and the circumstan-
ces of the people, at the time the en-
gagement or agreement took place.
When we turn our view to Ireland,
and trace It's history from the reign of
Henry the With, down t. the present
time, does it not more resemble the
history Of human shambles, than that
of civilizedpeop and when we en-
quire the causes which have produced
this horrid scene of misery and suf-
fering, of blood and slaughter, we find
that religious intolerance stands in
front of the catalogue that from the
time Henry the With quarrelled