Portland gazette and Maine advertiser., 1812-01-06

an amendment offered by Mr.. Mel
ion, TO a propoled rule Of thc houie
reported By the committee, which
empowers any FIVE members TO call
for the previous qusfion whenever
they think proper, by which all fur
Their debate on the main quefi0a would
be prohibited-the amendment pro-
vides that when he previous ques-
ton is demanded, any member who
has not fpoken ihall have right TO
fpeak once on the main question.
[lt is generally difficult TO under
itand the rules and orders by which
the proceedings Of the houie are re-
gulateG, and it is fill more difficult
to explain their operation fatisfacto-
rily. Queitions of order have al
mof uniformly heretofore produced
unintereiting and defuliory debate,
not unattended with confufion.1
Mr.. Quincy fupported the amend
ment on the ground that every men,
Der had constitutional right to de-
liver bis opinions, of which right
TO majority had constitutional pow
or TO deprive him.
Mr.. Quincy, among many good
things that he faid, obferved that ne
was fully fenGble that this privilege
of fpeaking in the houfe was fome-
times greatly abufed by fpeech upon
fpeech, and wind upon wind, buihels
of chaf to a grain Of fenfe-that the
mott propriety that ever he knew for
a call of the previous quefion, was
the other day when it was threatened
by the gentleman from Georgia,
[ rroup7 who was afraid there was
not quite fighting matter enough in
the houfc, and that what there was
inifead of being prefeved for action,
would, if not prevented, all Gaze cut
at The moutb. 1t was he faid, in the
power OF the majority, through the
chair, to prevent unnecenary debate /,
70 long as we have, as we nozu have,
a fpeaker Of great intelligence, great
and great impartial
lty, who can check all improper wan
derings from the fublecf before the
houie.
Mr.. Mellon took the fame ground,
declaring that the freedom of debate
might be abridged. Not to allow
every member TO fpeak once, was in.
compatible with the contribution and
the hrft principles of civil liberty,
and that the majority had as much
conititutional right to turn the mi
nority out of doors or to forbid their
voting, as to deprive them of the right
Of fPeaking at lealt once.
MIR. Gold fupported the amend
ment.
MIR. Alton, Mr.. Smile and Mr..
Ballet oppoied it on the ground that
the Responsibility reifcd with the ma
Iority, and without The right of clo-
ling debate, the minority might pre-
vent, at leait for long time, the paf-
(age of the mott neceGAry law.
On motion of MIR. Williams, in
ltead of giving the power of calling
the previous quefion to five men,
oers, it was enlarged to one fifth of
The members prefent.
Iuejday, De-. "a
Mr.. Stow offered the following
reloIution
Refolved, That fhould war enfue
between the Jnited States and Great
Britain, it is expedient to provide by
aw a bounty to American impref-
led feamen and their a6ociate5, for
every Britiih fhip of war, which they
Ihall capture and bring into any A
port. This alto was order
ed to lie on the table till the hrit
Monday in Feoraary next; as the
Houfe was not prepared to act on it,
not having YET fully come to a Con-
cIuGon to 30 TO war. Suppohng the
Britifh government .hould retort,
what would become of our public ar
med vtftls, on board of fome of
which more than half are Britiih
fubjectS ? Let the Britiih offer them
and their aD5ciafeS bounty, and per-
haps all our public veiiels would be
carried into England within year.
Did you ever before know Legila-
fure RI ofTyr houpties for niracv and