Alexandria daily gazette, commercial & political. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1808-1812, 1812-01-08

niStry to prevent the Commons from opening
their lips an subjects relating to the royal Ia
mily andgthe great men of the realm. but,
sir, we have gone further than the ministry,
and their nlaipfifies, despotic and tyrannlcal
as tIeyfhave been, have even dared to go IN
parliament. For even there members are now,
and always have been, permitted to debate on
the previous question but which members
on this floor are not now permitted to do
Mr. Speaker, the nature Of our government
forbids that the majority should have the
power to prohibit all debate on questions
which may come before this house. We have
not, asyet, trust, any high personages in
this country about whom it would be indcli-
cate or improper for the members on this floor
to speak and let me ask what subject OF ma
tional importance Can be proposed for adop-
ton, on which a member should be deprived
of the privilege of speaking at least once be-
fore he gives his vote. May, sir, let me ask
gentlemen, whether this house has right to
comhel me or any other member, to vote on
any question, without giving me an opportu-
nifty of explaining my reason tor that vote
/ deny, sir, that they have this right; as a
member of this body, claim the privilege Of
delivering nv sentiments, or what may con-
slider the sentiments of my constituents on any
subject, before give my vote upon it.
claim it not sir, for myself personally, but
claim it in the capacity Of representative of
free people, sent here, not like member ct
the French Council Of Five Hundred, forthe
purpose of v3ting merely, but for the purpose
of celebrating on subjects OF high concern to
their peace, their prosperlty,s their happiness
For what, sir, are we assembled here undera
Constitution the purest in the world Is itnot
for the purpose of promoting the general
welfare Of the nation, which we represent
And now is this to be done, except by free
communication of our sentiments to each O.
Their, on the various plans which may be pro-
posed for that object? The peace, the honor
and interest Of this country is confided TO our
care, and while we are here celebrating on
the best means of preserving the one or Sc
curing and promoting the other, the constitu-
ton has-xery wisely, thrown around us shield
of complete indemnify" for ai.v speech or
debate hi this house, we are &c not to be
questioned in any other place" viii then
the majority claim the right Of depriving a
member of this privilege of speech, a privi-
iege not only thus secured to him by the Con-
stitution itself, but for the due exercise of
which, he is not to be questioned elsewhere
But, sir, those, who oppose the amendment,
say, that the construction is founded in uecss-
sitv, that individual members have abused the
privilege Of speech, that they have hereto
fore, and probably will again, make long
speeches merely for the purpose Of delay, and
of embarrassing the proceedings Of the hodse;
and that therefore, The majority, must have it
in their power to stop debate, whenever they
think proper, and that this power will always
be exercised with sound discretion.
| deny, sir, that any such necessity exists;
it is plea easily made, but generally difficult
and in this case impossible to be supported.
why has it so happened, that this necessity
has never existed, until the last session OF con-
gress? Was It then for the fir time, that
were parties never before heard of in this
country Were not parties arrayed against
each other in l796 On the subject Of the Bri-
fish Treaty, and in 1898 9, on the question
of war with France? Were not the dis
putes, in this house, in those times, as long s.
as bitter, as they have ever been since !?
these5were times, which have been so often
quoted in this house as hard, and unconstitu-
tional times when the reign Of terror pre-
vailed, when corrupt majorities, as has been
often said on this floor, passed alien and seLi-
ton laws. And, yet, sir, with all the politi-
cal sins, which have been heaped upon those
majoritlcs, the sin of having taken away the
privilege of speech on this floor, never has
been, and as have proved from the journals,
never can be laid to their charge. This house
by the Constitution, has the power to "de-
termne the rules of it's proceedings" & in
making those rules, it has the right Of regu-
lating, but not of entirely Preventing debate.
1t would indeed be a strange anomaly in
politics, as well as in law, that under gene
raj power ofmaking rules of proceeding, we
should make rule, to prevent all proceedings
whatever. Gentlemen may as well assume