The Massachusetts spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1821-1823, 1822-01-02

vidual, nd had never been practically ex-
tended any other.
But, 1.-THE rule is enlarged, where will you
stop bu now admit Judges, and why not
Chancelbrs and Judges of the Supreme
Courts irthe respective States? They were
surely MT less in dignity than those whom
this Restitution proposes to admit. Nor is
this ALL Members of this and the other
House oten bring with them to the seat OF
government, their wives and their daughters,
and you send these to the galleries, and at
the samesime propose TO admit ON the floor Of
the Hous all those who at any time had OBJ
tanned cat in either branch of the legisla-
tive body of any State. He believed the
measure would impose an invidious duty on
the presiding ofTicer-would be incorrect, un-
equal, ard inconvenient in its operation, and
therefore ioped it would not prevail.
Mr.. Rih moved to amend the Resolution
by strikin: out the words IS or have been,n so
as to CONNIE the privilege to the benefit OF
members br the time being.
Mr.. Tuaxer made few remarks in reply to
Mr.. TaylG-and particularly answered the
question, Where shall we stop?--by saying
it should b at the very moment that an incon-
venience slould arise from an extension of the
privilege.
MIR. Randolph remarked, that, in respect to
the rights OF individual States, and to the at
tention o be paid to State Legislatures, he
would ppfcss to yield to no man in that House,
or in anyethHr. II had been evinced by eve
ry act ofais life. But he did not feel that that
respect cslled for an adoption, either of the
Resolution or of the amendment for if the ex-
tension is once made, it viii be difficult, not to
say impossible, afterwards to alter it. When
those, for Whose benefit the rule is enlarge J.,
shall avail themelves of it, where is the law
OF courtesy that shall subsequently, exclude
them 1t had ben correctly remarked, that
1t would cast an Avidious responsibility ON the
Chair-so lnvidlols, that it would become, Ito
use the expressio4O non-user; for the Chair
would never be Opposed to assume the unwel-
come prcrogatlye. And when, said Mr.. r.. we
are called upon to admit the ex-membeps of
the STATE Legislatures upon the floor of this
House, shall we colsign TO the cold aud cheer
less galleries the talhst, and best, and dearest
part OF creation? Courteous, indeed, is the
rule that shall eXclde these from the:fre-side,
and at the same tine. cherish and indulge our
own sex in a participation of all the comforts
which this House ian afford. (The Speaker
here remarked, ttit the question was simply
on the motion of amendment.) Agreed, said
Mr.. r. and oppose the Resolution whether
amended OF not Legislation is not a matter
of courtesy, and, without the remotest disre-
spect to the Chail he would observe, that
there was already disorder enough in the
House, without laying in new stock of mate
rails toincrease it. additional numbers would
necessarily have tina, efFect--and the States OF
Virginia and Maryland could furnish enough,
within the rule propoed, to ill the hail..
The question was tlen taken on the amend
ment, and lost.
Mr.. Nelson, of Maryland, opposed the Reso-
lution- He hoped that it would not be adopt
ed, for other reasons than those that had been
offered. He contended that the rule, as now
proposed, was calculated to create distinctions
IN the Government unknown to the Constitu-
ton. By that instrument equal rights and
privileges were extended to all and the citi-
zen who may have filed an office is supposed,
after his trust. is discharged, to return to the
body of his fellow-citizens disrobed ofhis offic-
ial character. He is then entitled to no great
er privilege OF distinction than those around
him. For thisreason, independent of all con-
slderations OF convenience, he was opposed to
the Resolution
The question was then taken, and the Reso-
luton was negrtived.