Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1830-01-02

cruel All | ask is not TO make a Gdpoured class OF
traitors murderers house burners thieves and
and give them the benefit Of all the forms OF the Cons
tuition, while you take thom away from another class
OF whom your hears, if not desperately wicked, are
at least "deceiiful above all things, when you cay you
think they are so very Infamous. want 10 know "a
VIVA, man OF wealth and OF talents, and with no blot on
his escutction Dat tt;s any ainorg you would refuse
the hand OF daughter sister? j. in vein ,alk
Public opinion IS the other way. vow will vote f'r
man who has fought duel f,r Pee OF the Cni,ed
States, and then you come hack here and grsve!y
clare that no such man shall be a member oi that az
gust and ustrious assembly, the House OF Burg
Sir, IL u r'hoong the mark In tho words of an
eloquent British civilian it is attempting rigdly ,c
up right iato wrong: yes, sir-every slch pro
vision is nothing else but an attempt rgidy TO uJ
right into wrong. Summum jus sunma injuria.-lti.
sanctmoDious sort OF republicanism not to my taste
not al all. Give Inc the good ancient repubcanism-
and let it not be said that in proportion receded
from our Colonial state, departed from the prn
c'ples of freemn Give none Of this putting men "a
the question, ordinary and exraordiuary-hs putting a
man on his oath TO declare what he Ias done and wha
he has not done. Sir, would not believe such man
would not believe him upon his oath.
Mr.. NAYLoR rose in reply Could he believe that
this measure had its origin in f,n,cisn, or cant, he
should he the first to rep.l IT, But so far from this il
no had been brought up in The faith OF the heahen
II ology, he should si think that such MEASURE wa,
dictated by sound policy. If it was sound policy 10
preserve the best blood Of the larh-to cher-h the
ripest hopes OF the republic-o prevent scenes which
whenever they occurred, shrouded The face of society
in mournng- this was sound policy, and orc of the
Lost sacred duties OF assure which wa
esaycd as means Of accomplishing it, was not the Off
spring OF cam, fdnacism and religion. hypocricy. The
gentleman from Charlotte had asked WHY singIs out
this particular offence, and make il the object of so
we're punishment His answer was that ie.rra,e
diseases called Tor desperat. remedies o her rene
dies hhd he,n tried IN vain Nothing but this would
reach he case. The law against murder had been
virtually rerc led. /. in vain u talk about grand
jnries, petit juries where the case in which
man was convicted for murder committed in duel! The
law was nugaory. Was il c'nt, under such circum-
stances, TO apply TO some ether remedy to save the
lives OF valuable citizens law was to he Judge by
ts good or bad consequences. The gentleman was a
grea; advocate for the doc rine OF expedency and
much opposed 10 mems standing abstract rights
Test this mCa ure by his principles. Had more
good or more evil flowed from the enactment of the
statute and was more good more evil likely 10 FOL
low the securing II by constitutional provision Thai
good had been produced by the law he had heard none
deny. And where would b. the evil of the C,n.titu-
tonal provision hot blooIed young man would not
he able TO challenge hi. adversary (ot.n his bosom
irend) 10 the field.
Mr.. n. said he proud of the chvalrous feel
lngs OF Virginia az any Of her hut he did wish
to zee them displayed in such fell.
But was there no ether ''sng'ed our? III al not
the Convention deprived Ciergvmen Of a seat in the
legislature? Was not that Gaze quite "a peculiar as
thi>: They wou Il exclude Clergymen, because they
followed calling for which all men telt or rrsfessed
10 rei some respect, and yet all cant and anat
cisn 10 exclude from The same seat the due'st who
h"d sh,d, or sought TO he'd, the blood of his fellow
man, lie thought that when the good and had conse
qlences ct any measure were weighed, and the good
was found to preponderate ii Ought be rendered
man mt The people he confident desired the dig
qlaihcation To con nue: and the amendment OF MIR
SrANARD accomplished all the object he had had in
view he was content 10 waive his amendment and
should vote for that OF the gentleman from Srotsylva-
mia. "A
Mr.. LEIGH said that he understood the question AZ
presen, 10 he as to the preference the suti,n
with, ard without, the amendment. He preferred the
resolution tch The amendment. and he should ac
accorGingy If atterwari the House chose to strike
ont the whole, except the anne ty II would be coue
tent for them 10 10 So
The question was now PM on Mr.. SrANARD's amend
ment and decided in The afi tive without count
SO The amendment adopted
Mr. LEIGH now moved 10 strike ont the re ou,ion
az amended, retaining only that portion OF it which re-
lated 70 ainnesiy
The reason for this moiion he said he had already
as lined, and the gentleman from Charlotte much hsf
ter than himself and therefore he should not tionbI
me House with "ny remark in support Of il.
Mr.. N-iYLoR demanded that the question be taken
by Yeas and Nays, and il so ordered.
Mr.. CAMPBELL Of Booke said that he should not
enter into the d"cussion, hut had risen merely assign
IN" reasons Why he should vo'e against striking out
He had no with 10 visit with punishment this class Of
evildoers han others land most OF The arguments
against The resolution had been grounded on such an
ljea) bu ne supported tie measure as means OF pre-
ven;ion. III considered il az the best preventive nj
one Of the most baibarous crimes OF the age.
Mr.. VENABLE desired tie question 10 he divided so
a. first To be taken on so much of IN resolution had
no relation 10 The test OATH separately, and then the
clause which pre- scrbed such oath.
The question so divided accordingly: and being
put first, On The former rortion oil the resolution,
MIR CABELL moved an inde finite postpone ment of
the who'll sul iect.
Mr.. LEIGH enqnired il The gentleman wished the
amnesty To be included in hs motion?
Mr. CABELL said he was fully persuaded the object
fthe gentleman from Chesterfield was unauainahIe
aud that the aiteup TO attain it would ONLY he A
w'ste Oftme. But as II suggested to him by
friend that The motion he had made was exposed 10
the same obi cipn, aud likely only to waste the
time OF the House, he would consent 10 withdraw il,
And he withdrew il accordingly.
The Yel' and Nays were then called on tie frs;
part Of Mr. LEIGHs motion, viz. strike out all that
part of the resolution which preceded the oath, and
they stood "a follows:
YEAS-Me'srs Jones Leigh and Taylor of Chester.
heid, Ghrs, Dromgoole, Goode, Mar.hal Clopton,
Johnson, Mccoy, B'irne, Miller, VI ,son Of g, Cai.
borne. Randolph. Leigh of H.. Logan, Holiday, Ma.
son OF F.. Campbell Of W. Roanp, Taylor Of Caroline
Morris, Coyd Mathew, Duncan, Summers Morgan
BIrbour of c. Green. TAzewell Loyal Prenis Grgs-
bv, Campbell Of b., Branch, Townps, Cabol Martin
Gordon, Thompson, Mas'ie, Bates Bayly and Perrin
Is.
NAYS-Messrs. Barbour, (Presdent) Brodnax,
Alexander, Tyler, Nicholas, Anderson CofInan Har-
rlson, williamson. Baldwin, Moore, Smith, Baxter,
IreZvan', U,quhart, Venabl-. Madison, Stsnard
Mercer. FtZhreh, Henderson,, O horne Cooke
Gtiggs Navlor, Donaldson, Bowl, Pe"dl"ton. George
Mcmillan, Bvars, Chapman, o iesbv, Ladley, See
Do3drdge, Campbell Of g., Wilson, Scott. CLAW
tor Saunders, stuart Peasants, Neale, Rose, Coaler,
Joynes and Upshur--4S
So the House refused 10 strike out.
The question was then put striking ont the last
clause, referring to the oath.
Mr.. STUART said that this had been resorfcd 10 as
the only means Of getting at the fact: an invid
Gus iask land iUyidou' that none would attempt it,
In 80 f r. IL L..