The Alexandria herald. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1811-1826, 1823-09-17

\ CTlmlnal JUrlSulCtlOn WOuiu DC eSCiuueu
land in the resolution of expulsion the
| senate declared the person inculpated
gUilfy o5fG high nisdemeanor, although
no prcsentment or indictment had been
found against him, and no prosecution at
/ law was ever commenced upon the case.
| This event occurred in July, 1897 A.
| bout | ) months before that time, on ap>
| p.ioaion from the legislature of Ketucky,
| requesting an investigation by the senate,
| ni charge against one of the members
from that state of perjury, which had
been made in certain newspaper publica-
tons, but Tor which no prosecution had
| been commenced, The senate did adopt
| by majority OF 10 votes 10 8, the report
OF committee, purporting that the Sc
nate had no jurisdiction to try the charge,
| and that the memorial Of the Kentucky
legislature should be dismissed. There
| were indeed very sufficient reasons Of
different kind assigned IN the same re-
port, Tor not pursuing the investigation in
that particular case any further, and your
committee believe, that in the reasoning
oil that report, some principles were as
! sumed and some differences drawn, which
were altogether unnecessary for The de.
termination ut that case, which were a.
dopted without full consideration of all
their consequences, and the inaccuracy
OF which was clearly proved by the
departure f,om them in the instance
which was so soon afterwards to take
place. twas the first time that the ques-
ton Of expulsion had ever been agitated in
congress since the adoption fthe consti-
tuition. And the subject being thus en-
tirely new, was considered perhaps too
much with reference to the particular
circumstances Of the moment, and not
enough upon the numerous contingent.
cies TO which the general question might
apply. Your committee state this OPT
mon with some confidence, because Of
the 10 senators who in March. 1896, vo.
ted for report, dismissing The memorial
OF the Kentucky iegisla;ure,el eleven on the
subsequent occasion 10 July, 1897, voted
also for that report which concluded with
resolution for the expulsion of MIR.
Blount The other five were no longer
present in the sena,e-yet If The princi-
| pies advanced in the first report, had
been assumed as the ground of proceed
| ing at the latter period, the senate would
have been as impotent of jurisdiction
uponthe offence of Mr.. Blount,. as they
had supposed themselves upon the ale.
| CATION against Mr.. Marshall.
Those parts Of the fifth and sixth arli.
Giles amendatory of the constitutions, up.
! on which the report in the case oil Mr..
Marshall appears to rely TOR taking away
the jurisdiction ofthe senate, your com.
NJ
as referring 10 prosecutions at law. To
suppose that they were intended as re-
strictions upon powers expressly granted
by the constitution to the legislature or
either OF It's branches, would in man.
ncr annihilate the power ofimpeachment,
as well as ira; oil expulsion. Ii would
lead to the absurd conclusion that the
authority given for the purpose of remov-
ing lDiqulty from the seats Of power,
should be denied its exercise, in precise
ly those cases which most loudly call for
us energies. II would present the singu-
| lar spectacle Of a legislature vested with
powers Of expelling its members OF i'm
Peachlng removing & disqualifying pubs
lie officers, for trivial transgressions be.
meath the cognizance of the law, yet for
hidden 10 exert them against capital or in-
famous crimes.
those two articles were in substance
borrwed from similar regulations con.
tanned in that lusly celebrated statute,
which for SO many ages has been distia.
gulshed by the name OF The great charter
oil England. Yet in that country where
they are recognized as the most solid
foundation of the liberties of the nation,
they have never been considered as inter-
ierlng With the power of eXpelling men,
Der, exercised at alilimes by the house
OF commons; power which there how
ever rests only upon parliamentary usage,
! and has never been bestowed as in the
constitution of the u. States by any Of
the supreme legislation. From number
OF precedeDts which have boen consulted
IT is found that the exercise Of this sutho-
| rity there has always been discretionary,
and lis process always far otherwise COM
peDdlous, than in the prosecutions before
! nc judicial courts So far indeed have
they been from supposing a conviction at
aw necessary to precede a vote Of ex-
| puisioD, that in one instance resolution
20 demand prosecution appears imme-
diately alter the adoption Of the resolu-
ton to expel in numerous cases the
| member submits 10 examination, addu-
tes evidence IN his favor, and has evil