Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1824-01-17

bill doubt even the policy of their favorite law.
The petitioner, in the choice of the means
III obtaining reparation, which all agree he
was bound To seek, has dune no injury to a so
| litary human being. No duel has been fought /;
challenge indeed was given, and there the
matter stopped. The Legislature is not call.
ed upon Ia interpOse in behalf of = veteran
dueliist ;of Il man who has sought distinction
by getting into disputes and whose only claim
to consideration is the innrxibillty with which
he has acted. But il is called upon tn extend
indulgence To d young man, Who respects the
laws and institutions of his country who
would regard AN exile from his native state as
the gre Attest calamity whose offence the com
passionate has forgiven, and the rigid cannot
condemn.
Ii is not my intention to discuss The question,
which while we are considering this bill must
nirude itself upon the reflections Of us all,
whether the duelling act, as il respects mem
hers of the General Assembly, and official APP
p"intments under the Constitution, is consi-
tutional. 1t is d question, however, which,
those opposed TO the bill, cannot think lightly
at. Sir, you are sworn to support the con-
stitution of the state aud the obligation of
this oath, applies most aptly, when you are
considering the operation of an existing law.
The constitution prescribes the qualifications
l
have been il this first and most important fra-
iure in every government had been left vague
and unsettled. Whence is the power de-
rived TO superadd qualifications to those fixed
and ascertan-d by the constitutions? The quail
ificatiOns of a delegate, as fixed by the consti-
tuition, are two: that he shall reside i'm the
county which he represents, and be d freehold
err. liz you nave the right to add other quail
fications In these, why may you not substitute
them also? Stronger terms than those to he
found in the constitution could not be- EN-
ployed To express the intention of the conven-
ton, that the qualifications of delegate should
| remain as then established. Can any man ina
CINE that il was supposed for a moment, by
the convention which ratified our constitution,
that citizen Of Virginia, possessing the two
fold qualifications which | have mentioned,
| sent here by the united voice of his county
to represent their interest, would not he al
lowed TO take his seat ? And WHY? Not be-
| canse he had become Infamous by the per,.-
| tratiOn of crime, hut because he had proposed
tn do what reflects dishUnor on no man, and
| what is sometimes made necessary by every
consideration which can affect AN honorable
mind. Sir, ! pronounce, that at the period of
the settlement of our government such thing
was not thought of.
The second section of the duelling act is "a
like opposed toihe benign principles by " hich
| every civilized government processes TO be-
governed, and To our constitutions The send
ing challenge to fight duel, is bnt evidence
at an intention 10 commit AN offence consI-
dered by itself, and apart from an actual COM
bat, 1t ~ violation of public or private in
ferest. III Us not connected with "A duel by
such inevitable consequence, as that il be-
comes necessary to punish The one, TO sup
press the other. ], Sir think too highly of
the political privileges ofmy countrymen, and
have too much federation for human infrmi-
ties, 10 give my appreciation to law, which
has never hern cousummatpd, with the con-
| fiscaiion of the better half of civil liberty.
do nal propose, however, TO place the fate of this
hill on the constitutional OjecIon. Satisfied As |
am, NV the argument this subject TO which have
very briefly advered, am aware tina, many entertain
u different oppion, and am willing to place the,
question on lis merits. II happens unfortunately Tor
MIR Douihat, that his punishment of kind 10
operate on our feelings OF sympathy aud humanity
IL confinement OF torture were the punishment, we
should he able TO estimate correctly the penal
| ties ut the act and To feel became us, for The
suferings OF the Individual who had incurred IT'S pen
aiiies Suppose HIM brought forward 20 suffer The
'gnomnious punishment OF confinement in Jail, or
pory, and there scarcely an indiv duai in Virgin
-, acquainted with the circumstance of his op nee
VINO would not pronounce u, The cruel Oppres-
SON Bui because the destruction of mans polnicsI
rights, does moi so readily, corporal punishment
excite our sympaibies, does follow on that account
that the punishment is less (. Does il moi excite our
sympaiihes Z" behold man. deprived for ever of II c
prospect OF holding office, wiiae, er nav be his qua
liii'slons or his merI' To suppose such an ap.h h,
IN The members of this house, on "a subiec so mil
maieiv connected III every viiuious mind with liner
| ~ Itself, would make them hi for the vassals aud
n'inioDs of monarch. IL may he said that Ibis cas-
cannon he distinguished hop many Others com
| ing under The duelng act. What greater pIOyoca-
10" could there tie than that received 10y Mr
Doniha' Argument on this subjecr is useless. Di,I
not the insult, aggravated as by The place and
manner IN which il given, cali for the most de-
imined resistance iftere he enough in this case
To rh'iile ~ 10 pardon, do NOT beseech YOU do
wrong for fear that hereafter you may he called ON
to do justice.
MIR. LUNDY addressed the House. as follows:
Mr.. Speaker have Isened to the argument of
the gentleman from Brooke with ali the Difference
due To age and experience, and whilst concur with
him IN the opinion which lie has EXPRESSED Ina, rho
suhjec now submitted to deliberations t. one of
great and serious consideration, ! mist also be ner-
united to express my regIet,ihaI cannot concur with
MN ~ The view which he has taken OF IT,. IL COR
tended 10y the gentleman who preceded me i'm the
course Of this debae-hai time aud experience have
July demonstrated The policy aud efficacy of The nnri
uuelling aci--thai the law a good One--and thai
no RELAXATION Of it's rigour should eYer he permitted
The friends of this bill-and The friends of Roberi
DouhaI are noi to lac identified with ihe enemies Of
the anti dueDg act. They are willing fo admit tba
me law has been productive Of the beneficial effects
anticipated by its fIends-hey are wiIng To concede
That u has eradicated an evil founded ~ false honor
ana fortified by prejudice aud by cus'Om--tisi 1t has
succeeded efectnaly in controlling aud >ubduing
public opinion that il has in face removed foul
blot from the moral char of the state" But they
may he permitted AZ the same time inquire IT there
IS NO possible case in which III individual may be al
lowed 10 plead, and not Ia plead VAN, for as ex-
empiiOn from its operation
What, lie: me ask, is the rule which, we observe in
relation 10 Other offenders, The humanity OF the
law does wisely consider tie Causes and cirounsian-
ces which lead their pepetration aud the guilt of
inc offender rs either enhanced diminished 10y the
nature OF these causes. A compassionate indulgence
IS extended TO those irailfies which are nseparably
incidental TO the constitution Of our NATURE aud the