Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1818-01-24


ties. " ithin the ten square miles there was
no difficulty tor The pettiest offender within
the District could be punished only by autho
my OF an act OF Congress, either Special, EN-
btaciog the case, or adopting the laws OF Vir-
gibia or MarSlaL OF the subject. Ii is possi-
bic that doubt might be created as TO con-
tempis, or other offences against The pfivile-
ges OF the House, committed be- ond this ex-
elusive jurisdiction and we must then resort
TO The authority 10 make all laws which shall
he necessary aud proper fer carrying inio ex-
ecution the powers of Congress. But in no
event could much practical inConv enieHce re.
suit as II could very rarely happen that any
contempt, shewu beyond the District, could
seriously obstruct the transaction OF the pub
lie business.
IL has been urged that tle state legislatures
ana courts OF justice punish cohtcmrtS, and il
Is demanded II Congress sliailDot exercise this
power. No Legislature VI court can exercise
II without Law. In all the states they are autho
| iized either 10y statutes specially, or by the
common law, recoshizcdb By the statutes or the
state constitutions. Congress Can by law pre-
scFiDe punishment, aud the mode uf award
inS. Ohtil thisss done, one House cannot make
the offence, aud then punish it. He thouwbt
the warrant should be set aside. Still lac could
cast censure on no one, as no member of the
House had voted for the warrant more
promptly than lie did, If the prisoner had then
been present, il is probable he would no have
postponed the punishment, even to read the
MIR. koRsYTH, of Georgia, said he W ouId not
| follow the gentlemen through the long course
OF 'heir arguments. He relied upon their own
admissions as abundantly sufficient to Justify
| the proceedings which had been and which
were proposed to be adopted.
IL Is admitted that we have power to sup
press disorder III the gallery, TO remove the Of
iender from the hall. Is not this removal OF a
citizen of the United States. of freeman, from
your gallery, IN which, while il continues
open, he has as much right TO sit there as we
nave 10 SIT here, punishment fora crime or
contempt which he has committed! Is il not,
If not justified by law, an assault, aud false
Imprisonment, for which the officer acting
under your orders. is answ cradle by suit aud by
Indictment Whence arises the power Will
gentlemen point TO the clause in the constitu-
ton which confers it Here then is case in
which, from the necessity of the case 10 gen
tieman viii venture to deny The existence of
the authority 10 punish and the proprieIy of
It's eXercise' But does il stop here Are we
permitted 10 remove the nuisance only beyond
the walls of this room. Extends il no farther
Cannot our deliberations be interrupted at the
door, and on the staircasel The same reason
ing will apply to all portions of the house and
TO the street. Does ii stop here viii You
permit the beating OF drums and The firing of
cannon under your windows, in the street, in
front of this hall Can not remove such
nusances, and prevent their recurrence, by
the punishment of those who caused them, for
their contemptto this body. Certainly no one
can deny it, We have, therefore, by admission,
the power cithin and rithOWt these walls....
Where is the limit Mr.. F. said 1t was limited
only by the jurisdiction of the United States,
because to the extent of the jurisdiction was
the necessity of the legitimate exercise of the
power
MIR. +. did not conceive those clauses of the
constitution, quoted by the gentleman from
New York, applicable TO the present case.....
The person in custody is charged with a con-
tempt, punished sunmariIy in all cases-not
for an offence indictabe and punishable BIZ
the ordinary course of Judicial proceedings.
Every gentleman, whether of the profession OF
the law or not, will know the distinction, and
framed without any view 10 the exercise of
this power 10 punish eontempts, and without
any intention 10 prevent its exercise.
But we are told, that this miserable man is
called here 10 answer 10 some unknown law.
lie was somewhat at loss to understand the
force OF the remark lift was meant 10 convey
the idea, that there is no law of Congress def
ming the bribery ola member of Congress as q
crime, aud aHxing inappropriate punishment,
il was true. But if il meant, what il can only
mean, IT used with an application TO this case
that we proposed to make action, in itself
innocent, criminal and punishable, Mr.. F. said
he must express his establishment al the decla- |
ration. Ignorant indeed must be that man.
who does not know that this action was not |
criminal in the highest degree. Every man |
carries in his own bosom faithful monitor,
instructing him how enormous is such an |
offence. He has committed an offence against |
a law known TO him and to all mankind for !
which Mr.. +. trusted he would be punished |
as far as the power of the house would permit. |
Mr.. F. said, the gentleman from New York |
acknowledged the force of precedents in Judi
cial proceedings there they are highly useful |
land marks, not to be departed from without |
danger but in legislative proceedings they |
are dangerous things. Mr. r. could not per |
ceive the propriety of this distinction. A pre-
cedent in one place is Omnipotent in another |
a succession ofprecedents are Ia he disregard |
ed. The judgments pronounced i'm similar |
cases by the House of Representatives, were
assaulted, on the ground that they were estab.
lished under the influence of passion. The
gentleman, Mr.. L. apprehended, had not ex-
amned the history of the cases to which he |
referred he would find that they were estab.
lished on due deliberation. If he would com
pare the conduct of this House, and that of the
House of Representatives in '96. i'm the case OF
Randall and Whitney, he would find that sufii-
cieDi cooling time had been furnished the House
OF Representatives. before the commission Of
the fact. This House, yesterday, under the |
influence of violent indignation, adopted mani
meusly the proposition To arrest tile offender.
To-day we are cool enough 10 examine with
critical accuracy and scrntlnzing care, into
the extent OF orr constitutional authority 10
protect ourselves from the approaches of cor
TuptoH, or the assaults of violence while in
the performance of our public duties. In the
case of Randall, the offender was brought day
after day before the House; he had counsel
who defended his cause, and urged all the
suggestions in his favor which his case would
Justify. He was, by a majority of four To one,
deliberately condemned and deliberately pun.
ished, by confinement of three weeks for the
he had committed.
The gentleman from New York had read to
the House the arguments which were made 1
use of, on an occasion, subsequent to that to
which Mr.. T. had referred, against the power
OF the House; and the observations Of MIR. JEFF
fersOn thereon. Mr.. +. called the attention of
the House 70 the arguments which the gentle
man bad not read, from the same authority.
In dc batting the legality of an order issued by |
the other branch of the legisIaturc--an order
OF an extraordinary character, Mr. y. said and |
one which lie would not have consented to is
e. III. ...aa. ~.