Edwardsville spectator. [volume] (Edwardsville, Ill.) 1819-1826, 1823-04-12

tanl 10 tXCutpdtc US all. IL INC bipbtc
could be traced to any member OF this
house, he would expel him. He hoped
that further remark would be WITHHELD,
and that the house would pursue the in
quily, lei The consequence be what it
mis hi. atjustifia, rurat caetum.
Mr.. COOK. The gentleman says
that he would not regard the testimony
OF witness who would decline an
swering any question propounded to him,
no matter how impcrtlnent, or how re-
pulsiye to his rights. | disclain the
right of this house 10 know from me the
author of this publication. | disclaim
the right Of any committee to ask me
question upon any matter communicated
IN confidence TO me. know my rights.
Was it 10 be oniectured, that because
he knew his rights, and was determined
TO exercise them, he had an occult mo-
tive for concealing the truth ? The
house would appreciate the argument Of
the gentem ali at its proper value. And
the gentleman from Maryland had shewn
| a zeal, at least equal 10 his youth, to,
break down the constitution, and to vio-
ate the rights OF the citizen, for the pur-
pose Of gratifying feelings. whether pab-
&c or private, 1t was not his purpose TO
INQUIRE. The house would take The gen
leman's statements, incorrect as they
lad been, for wi,a, ,h~y worth. But
ne member from Maryland is willing to
,xpel any member of Ibis house who
lares to exercise the right OF discusslns,
~ constitutional way, the conduct OF
public men. Mr.. Wright explained.
The explanation still amounted 10 this,
that the gentleman is willing to expel
! aiember OF this house because he has
Jared 10 exercise The constitutional rights,
IN constitutional manner, Of discus
sing public matter in public manner.
If The gentleman had done me the JUS
tee TO deal as cand:diy with evidence Of
| the witness as was due to me, and is as
much disposed to do me right as to draw
irrational and strained deductions from
my own evidence, he would sac, that the
deduction from the testimony of Mr..
Dickins is so irresistible, that an honor
able gentleman, who was as we'll verseSl
as he is with Investigations before juries.
won,a cIe,rly s.e ,bst ;,stice vopIj
lead him 10 draw differences wholly al.
F4rent from ,bose which he has drawn
from il He would find differences froe
il 10 sbew Satisfactorily to his mind mail
tde marks eys,.e wade az thstyeasurv. The
honorabIe member from Kentucky. too.
| had found fault with his r. fnsa, ~ an
syer o,es,;on nronoonded n hin, he
lore tie commi,,ee. and had said that .
snn,ress;ou of ,rutb ;s eq,,;y,,,.n, -
lfalsehood THE rr;nr;nIe vas sn,ndI
one. Rnt he asked Inc gentlemen from,
Kentucky whether. ir . onest ion were,
mt ,oah,m wb,cb ;nvolved h;s coas,;I,
tional rights. !, asno, his nrivilege as
member Of this house. as a member
OF the American community. to ref,sr
to answer a ones,iop ic direct violation
ofrhose rights? He asked. where was
The ri,.ht of the honorable member ~ |
found suspicion on The refusal ron
suited my own sense ofriyht and nronrie. I
~. and The Question was ole WIN /
both in right and in honor, | was bound
| TO object to. But the, honorable mem. |
her has found out there is a eouspiracv
in his business. Ii IS easy 10 ,ndnlys
in dec laration. or assertion. VIXEN M.
th,n,, else is left 10 the Marty ~ fund b;sI
aream emf mon bu, assertion. Iyhere
is the evidence of consniraev nm his