Alexandria daily advertiser. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1803-1808, 1808-02-03
of oppression to him not TO grant this Pro-

Idea with regard TO the power OF the senate IN
j .this case. Suppose question OF expulsion
To arise dependant on record evidence, and q
/ summons should goto the clerk at Klchmord
! - send certain records. How are we to pay
the clerk the expence Of getting attested CO.
Y,;ee IF these records Gut of what fund is It
I e. be drawn? Is sit not clear thatSWe must de-
! mend on,the concurrence OF the other mouse -
ls,fefraying it. Soin the present case We ougn,
to take it for granted that the other mouse Miii
) Go what is reasonable and just.
Mr.. Reed observed that Peter aylor was
( ayYnaterial witness in the present case, andhe
7 could see no reason for drawing distinction
I between him and Glover and Mi'lfar!aile. All
their characters were implicated 1t one,
/ therefore, was summoned, he thoughthey
! should all be summoned, and he should vote
against the resolution unlessPeter laylorwas
{ Likewise introduced into it.
| Il. Mr.. Pofe said, if the gentleman from Ma
{ rsland wished the name of Peter Taylor IN
! troauced, he hoped he would make II. otion
to that effect. He had no objection TO sum-
mon him likewise.
Mr.. Giles remarked that the suggestion OF
the gentleman from Maryland furnished a
strong argument against the original resolu-
tion. If the senate adopted the principle on
tanned in that resolution, there would be no
end Of thesexercise of the power OF summon
ing witnesses. Suppose, said Mr. Gales, ale
ter we have adopted, this resolution. Mr..
Smith comes forward and says he has many
material Witnesses, and that he considers 1t
extremely hard that they should come on at
his expence. If the senate regarded the obE-
gation of consistency, would they not be
OBLIGED to summon these witnesses on the
part of MI. Smith With the gentleman from
Kentucky, toresee, said Mr.. y. many IN
cohYeniencies attending the present mode OF
procedure. But the que stioD is<Whet;,er we
are in capacity to remedy them. believe
we have already proyidedior the protection OF
witnesses, in the resolution adopted, as lara
we can. am satisfied that all we can do In
this case is to take voluntary testimony. The
committee thought, that under the peculiar
circumstances. of the case, if a witness were
TO be discrecited, it would be proper to give
him previous notice.
Mr. Giles said he was not ready at weseat
to decide on the power OF the senate to sum
mon a witness. But he would remark thatin 4
similar case, it had been thought hecessaryby
the other house TO have an express lawpasSed.
He alluded to the provision for summoniag
witnesses in the case of a contested cleo
ton
For these and various ether considerations
Mr. G.. thought the course designated by the
committee the best that could be pursued In
this case.
Mr., Pete said thas,the inconvenience at
tending the course suggested by him, could
not be so great as gentlemen imagined. In
ordinary criminal cases the expences Of the
accused were not paid by the public. So in
this case, if Mr. Smith brought forward his
witnesses, the senate would not be bound to
dcfray their expenses.
The claim of Mr.. Smith as well as that of
every person accused before this body, to have
his expenses reimbursed, must depend on
our justice and sound discretion. If we have
power to enquire into any fact not coming
within our own view, we. certainly ought to
pursue that course ofinyesdgation that is~best
calculated to produce correctTcsut-, Mr.. |
P. added that he had as one of the committee
consented to oppose a resolution for the ex-
.pulsion of Mr.. Smith, but was DESTROYS of
having the witnesses named in the resolution !
examined at the bar OF this house before a
final decision. He therefore hoped tbs reso-
luton would be adopted, although from tic
general opposition which had been discovered !
to this mode of procedure, he had but little !
reason, to expect It.
Mr.. Franklin said a few words against |
.he resolution which ne heard too lads, .
timely TO report.
Mr.. andersen. said hat much paios had
been taken 20 assimila,e thespowers OF the /
senate in the present case TO rhose exercls.
ed in the csse .ef az iUPsachment In
cases of Impeachment, j; woui5, however,
be recolle c,ed that it2 hsd invsriablv been !