Alexandria daily gazette, commercial & political. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1808-1812, 1812-01-07

relation TO the TlSnl OIltHO WHY oo5' d
one of it's individual members, rather than 20
that of a majority and minority. ne flgre
to sneak is an individual right. Limit IT as
You please, consistent syth a single e,cere1se q
.da5 ,5eht. But when this is taken away, or,
which IS precisely the same thing, so tar as 1t
yespsctsS the principle of civil liberty, when 1t
;e i, the power of one or many, at its sove-
re iig will and pleasure, totake 1T away; there
IS no longer any right. We have our tenure
of snecch as the slave has his--at the Will OF
But it is said that the legislature must some
fines {. act" and that individuals, by an a.
buse of this liberty OF speech, prevent the
whole body from g acting" All say is,
limit the exercise of the right as you please,
only do not assume to yourselves the power
OF taking away the whole right, at your plea
sure. i.
& It is, in this doctrine Of " the necessity of
acting," that lies the whole mystery OF that
error, which we are now combating. Strictly
speaking a legislative body never acts"
Its province is to deliberate and decide.
/" Action, is, alone, correctly attributable TO
the executive And it will be found, that all
the cases, In which this necessity OF /" action,
has been urged have been cases, IN which the
Legislative body has departed from It's appFo-
priated duties Of delberation and decision, &.
descended to be an instrument, or engine, OF
the executive. | hesitate not to say, that this
position may be !proved by almost every IN
stance, in which this necessity OF acton mas
been urged. 1T was an executive haste to lis
own purposes, which prevailed upon the le-
gi.lative body to deny, to It's own members,
their privileges.
II has been asserted, that if this amend
ment passes this will be the only deiberatlve
body in the world, which cannot stop debate"
On the other hand l assert, that II this amend
ment does rot pass, this will be the only deli.
berative body in the world, pretending to be
free, in which it is in the power of majority
to force decision, without any dellberatlon.
It is not true that, in the British parliament,
the previous question steps debate and forces
decision on the main question without dell
beration. The previous question there, II de-
cided in the negative, supPresses debate, by
postponing the main question And IAul
1907, the practice and rules this house per-
mitted debate OF the main question, alter an
affirmative decision of previous question
Who ever undertakes to examine the subject
will find it as have stated.
1t is not true, that this power ever was, or
ever can be necessary, IN Legislative booty
In every case, in which the previous question,
according to recent Construction, has been
pressed upon the house, it will DE found, that
there was no natural, or state necessity fof an
immediate decision That is to say, III every
instance it will be found, that 1t was OF no sort
OF public importance, whether the main cues
tion were taken On this day, Oh the next, or
on third day. Always the question might
have been taken, in reasonable time; and
every indiyietlal 4nember, who chose to speak,
might have had the privilege, IT ne pleased,
of speaking, at least once. AS tar as l OBJ
served, all these pretences OF necessity have
been easily receivable into party cunning
The subject was one difficult to maintain. 1t
had popular bearings, which it suited not the
pleasure of the majority to have investigated.
They pressed the minority to instant decision,
by refusing adiournment. And as it happens
in all such cases, reaction is equal to action.
he minority were put upon their mettle, and
they put to trial the metal Of the majority.
It is undoubtedly true, that this power may
be. sometimes convenient And this is the
whole strength of the argument OF those who
oppose this proposition. The weak and aged
members Of tie majority have been, kept all
night from their slunBers, BY a hale e SUR. !
ay minority which sldn{btrs they might, by
the way, at any moment, have enjoyed, if
that very majority had yielded the point OF
adjournment. And is this reason OF convent
ence sufficient in the estimation of this house,
to Justify it, in depriying this people, IN the
person of their representatives, OF the essen
tial right Of speaking upon this floor lsthls
justification for such an atrocious and exor-
bilant grasp at power? Our patriotism, now
a-days, can submit to no sacrifices. We are
not content with sleeping, if we please, every
day, in our seats, unless we can sleep, also,
every night of the session, in our feather
beds. And these feather-bed patriots, as