The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1812-12-05

was tuae WHICH Wouu ensure the passage OF
this bill which would excite q temper that
would indispose the House to listen to the
still small voice of conscien and of reason
1, sir, shall vote for the recommtu,ene Of
this bill, and for reasons which / am almost
ashamed to urge, which / hope to be OK
cuscd for adduciug. They have nothing to
do with the question of mpressbent, a ma
ritine war, of the invasion Of Canada, of
Indian warfare but, sir, they are princi-
pies which from length of time Ium sorry
TO say have grown so obsolete, like some OF
the older statutes of those Countries of more
ancient date than ourselves, that though /
am not ashamed of them am almost a
shamed to mention them--they are those
possessed by the Republican party in the
year 1898, which I had the honor of az
temffins Cat least) to supportin those days
the principles, as reduced to record, of
the present Chief Magistrate of our country
| IN those days. In truth it has been insinu-
| ated, if not asserted, with much more of
lcandour than OF logical address, that the
principles Ct the bill are those OF the former
1 friends OF the gentleman from Massachu-
sets On my left, from which, 7 suppose, that
gentleman has in some way or other deser-
ted. his goes TO prove, as far as the au-
thority OF the gentleman from Vermont and
| OF my worthy friend from South Carolina has
| influence, that long course of opposition has
instilled into the gentleman something of
the principles which did not belong to his
friends while in power that he is deser-
ter from his party, and consequently that
have remained a faithful centinel at my
post. did not expect to hear it said, sir,
that this bill was not to be opposed because
similar bill had been passed in what used
20 be called the reign of terror. In other
words l did not expect to hear it stated
that the principles of the administration of
the predecessor of Jefferson, which l sup
posed ne would now be as ready to recant
as any man in the nation, justified the bill
that 1t ought TO be passed because it was
fashioned in conformity to such doctrines
| 1t is nov, sir, think, some thirteen or four
teen years ago since similar question was
| gitated on the floor of this House, and it
was my lot to be compelled to sustain the
same side of the question which sustain to
day-for ! will not use the qualified term,
ATTEMPT to sustain--against one of the proud
est names in this country-aganst the man
who now presides, will not saw with what
splendor OF abilities, at the head of the Ju-
Idicial Department of our government. The
l1ouse will readily agree that plain must
nave been that question which could have
been supported with such unequal odds
that strong must have been that side of the
argument which could be sustained but for
| a moment against such an advocate. 1t was
one OF those occasions on which the gentle
man who then presided IN the House declar-
ed :" he never witnessed more unpromi.
sing debate J. it was so--for it was one of
those which tended to put that gentleman &
his friends into the situation which so many
OF them will not say ali---for there are
some illustrious examples to the contrary
into the situation which SO many of them
nave since occupied. 1t was an assertion of
the great fundamental principles of our GO
yernment against arbitrary high toned court
ly notions. The party then in power had
been nearly as long in Office as the party
now IN power, and looked at the question
pending before them with a very different
eye whilst they welded the sceptre, than
that with which they look at the question
now when the sceptre is applied to their
backs. am sorry to say that j fear that
| the converse of the proposition is in a great
degree true, and that those principles which
l then supported, and which were the ground
OF the revolution of political sentiment in
1901 which thereafter ensued, have fallen as
IT were in allegiance; that in fact we have
forgotten our oracle.
| / have said OH former occasion-and IS
/ were Philip would employ a man to, saw
1t every day, that the people of this country.
II ever they lose their liberties, will do it by
SaCrihcing some great principle of free go
lvernment to temporary passion. There are
certain great principles, which if they be not
heid lnviolate at all seasons, our liberty is
gone. If we give them up, it is perfectly
immaterial what is the character of our So
yereign; whether he be King or President
Elective or Hereditary-it is perfectly inn.
material what be his character-we shall
be slaves-it is not an elective government
which will preserve us.
But am afraid have fallen somewhat
INTO error by wandering from the course
proposed. On the occasion to which have
| alluded, maintained that the provision of
Dill then pending, similar to that now OBJ =
Ject to, was arbitrary, Unconstitutional and
unjust, because it was i'm the nature of an
&C post faoto law. 1t is of the nature of an
&c post Jacto law-itis more--it tends t.,
eXait tile military authority over the civil
1t is TINS or it is nothing. If the section pro-
nounce an ambiguous voice, to be construed
according to expedieacy, then is there so
lhuch greater reason to recommit the bill
20 reduce VI to some shape which shall FEN
| der 1t ineligible to the meanest CAPACITY.
IL goes to alter the nature of a remedy--to
impair the obligation Of Contract A
man has contracted a debt, and his Gre
ditors arrest him. He enlsts. He en-
| lists through the CRATES of prison or
within the limits of prison bounds. Tne con
tract between this man and the creditor is
varied by the law, because the remedy Of
the creditor is Changed. Let us not have a
descaEt on the cruelty Of imprisonment for
debt, and Of the expediency OF Introducing
other provisions ON that subject. That is nov