Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1825-02-08

had entered into amy corrupt bargain, he should
be inclined to go with the House in the inihction
OF the fullest extent of punishment.
Mr. M'DUFrIE (of South Carolina) expressed
his regret that he should be under the necessity
OF trespassing on the House on this most un-
pleasant subject. five adopt the course which
is now suggested, we must intlict on the char
acter of the House deeper injury than 1t had
yet sustained. Before we adopt this course, it
Is right that we distinctly ascertain that there
Is some lawful and constitutional act which we
could do, as the result of such measure. This
House is not to be viewed as an asscmblage
of persons, invested with the character of CON
vocators-assembled merely to inquire into the
truth or f,sehood of allegations. Ii must be
shown that we can do something beyond the
mere inquiry. What is II weare to do? lfthere
rs any Legitimate power, IT is TO expel the Spea-
kcr Let us meet the question il must he
met. Has the House the power to expcP
Notwithstanding the ingenious exposition OF the
charge by the gentleman from Ohio, this is
clear. and every gentleman will come to the
same conclusion, that no charge has been made
against the Speaker. The writer speaks i'm
general terms fsscombnation." s'unholy coali-
tion," SC. but when you trace the historical
charges which give colour to these expressions,
some time it had not been believed, but it was
now beloved that such combination had taken
place. But by whose agency has tins been
brought about? BY that of the Speaker? Let
any gentleman put his finger on The paper, and
say there is such a charge.--His friends have
done SO and So. Where? He has friends out
OF the House as well as in it. 1t does not ap-
pear that any members of the House are i'm
plicated. The charge then is merely gene
raj one. But he had much stronger oblec-
ton to the inquiry. He would go higher
ground, and deny that we prosecute this in
vcstgatiou, with a view TO the consummatlou.
without violating the highest privilege of the
people.
We have been told of the Righteousness of
the press. This is not now fit subject of in
curry II was not new inquiry. There was
a time of great public cXci;ement-when the
people were all rising up-wheu the legitimate
power of the House, in this respect, underwent
solemn investigation. The question was,
whether the House had a right to adopt the
common law OF England, with some modifica-
tions as 10 the punishment for libel. He re-
ierreG to the scdition law. What was the pro-
position? Was il to pass law enabling the
government To punish by its own act? Was
that III Was /; to enable person to be Judge
iii his own cause? No. The proposition was
or any public officers, were ,ibeilcl ,iev should
call on a jury to decide, and if t,la charges
were ,:aIse, the libellcr should be punished
What SAID the nation 1t rose indignant; the
law was repealed, and no man rises to do honor
to IFS memory. And, what are we now dong:
We are to show our contempt of the people,
and to declare the law, and ntiict the punish
:ucut, by the same act. w are call Ell on to
nlict punishment, not by virtue OF a law, but
on our own will, and under the influence of an
excitement from which none OF us can be en-
tirely exempt.
In this country, the law of libel received an
important Modification. The law which pre-
vailed in the !recst country IN the world, ex-
Cept our own, was deemed Incompatible with
our free institutions. The English law OF libel
was not our law of libel. WHAT is the law,
and what is the notifications? BY the common
law of Eagand, if a man publishes libel, he
is liable TO punishment, notwithstanding the al
legations may be true. The truth must not be
told. But what say our state tribunals ?--'That
charges against public Offices cannot be subjects
for the law libel. The public are themselves
SO deeply interested in the purity OIL their own
officers, and the latter are so ready to execute
vengeance on those whom they dislike, that il
was thought right that the power should be
taken out of their hands. 1t was considered
safer for the government to throw itself on the
Justice OF tire community, than to adopt such q
mo lie of defence. Ifthereis any reason in this,
what are we about to do? w are about to do.
in the most exceptionabe manner, what il has
been decided that we ought not to do at all.
The subject relates to the election of President.
How is this to be done? What are the reasons
which urge us to itsconpleton? The work must
be completed here. Where are we? Are we
in the midst of our constituents No; we are
far from them. We act under strong teinpta.
tons, which may well draw men aside from their
duty. Not only is this act to be done under
strong temptations, but we are asked TO do il
under circumstances of secrecy; we are to
choke up the channels Conformation.
When ne referred to the danger of this course,
he looked beyond the present. to times when corrup-
ton may stalk abroad. Is it not more important
that the press should be free, and that individual
character should be left sustain itself before the
nation than that the press with all its RIGHTEOUSNESS
should be stopped? Suppose this was place of the
greatest corruption, and the circumstances of the
times were similar to those which existed twenty
years ago. 1t was sometimes salutary to refer to
/ past times. How were the people acted on before
the election of 1900? b; rumours; by reports; by
reports OF combinations. Ify you are forbidden to
disclose rumours, the object of intrigue may be
accomplished, and conspiracy may triumph over
the public interest If you prevent alarm and ull
the world to sleep, consplrators will carry their
designs with security, because they will work in
! darkness. We are taking dangerous step. A
word as 20 tile analogous powers exercised in
other countries in Furnishing for contempt The
object OF cur present proceeding IS inquire into
contempt offered to the House; and if the member
from Pennsylvania is liable to any punshment Il,
must Dc on this ground. Without further argument,
it will be admitted that mere publication in "a
newspaper cannot be considered contempt of this
House That which cannot be Il libel, cannot be
the basis Of a motion 20 expcl. According to the
3 n,ufary, rr:rtico of Erul1uI. rauuot