Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1833-01-17
Esichmond, Thursday, Van. ~.
THE FIREBRAND.

Mr.. Adams's resolution was voted out some Time
since in the House of Representatives, and with the
greatest proprety. 1t would have been throwing
the torch of discord into the House-Ths effect was
seen, and the resolution rejected by large vote
mr.. calhoun Is now repeating the experiment i'm
the senate He too IS for casting the fire brand in
10 Congress lie is playing the part of the eccen-
trio Ex-President by calling for copies of the pro
clamation, Ordinance, &c. Let us suppose the nm
pers Sent let us suppose John c. Calhoun to have
ms opportunity of making another long, beautiful
erPoSe OF his doctrines of Notifications his
little party in the Senate raied-and the friends of
the Tariff there, with Messrs. Clay and Webster y,
their head, tanning the flames of discou and under
cover OF tins excitement doing all in their power TO-
put off the Tariff Bill defeat the redress of South
ern grievances, and taking up the time of the Sc
nate in angry debate, instead of acting upon the Bill
What shall we then think of Mr. Calhoun as n ma,
triot or u statesman?
THE SEDITION ACT-Justicet
The case OF Thomas Cooper twice before
Congress, and on both occasions we thought il orr
duty to advocate his petition. A similar case is
now before the House of Representatives i'm the
shape at bill to refund the fine imposed upon
.uattheto Lyon under the Sedition Net w. sbnnJ
nave hoped, that the Dill would have passed with
out any opposition. No case appears TO us palmer
Here is money wrung from the pockets of the
citizen, under color of law which is now admitted
by the great majority of the People 10 he n gross
violation OF the Constitution. They have so pro-
nounced il by their sufrages i'm 1901 There is no
! party IN this country who stands up for that law
or, VINO would dare to place again on the statute
DOCK Yet, money obtained under the force of n
iaw passed III the worst party times, and which
our counirymen would now pronounce TO he {" nm
constitutional, null and void" has gone into the
Pubhc Trcasury-and justice is demanded by those
from whom IL was unjustly eXtored. We should
think that there could be hesitation i'm the case
that the wrong ought to be repaired the money given
back to the right claimant,--and what is even of
more consequence, that this reparation should be
made to a violated Constitution
/ NO body can restore ii but CONGRESS- No ,no,o,.
shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in conss
quence OF appropriations made by law. The Cours
cannot order restitution. The President cannot re
mt the fne as Mr.. Jefferson did i'm the case of Cal
lehder-bccalise the money has been paid into the
treasury. Congress alone repair the wrong
But II Is said, hat restitution of the money ould
be AN understandable interference OF the Legislative
with Judicial poCerS. How $50 |? The Judiciary car
ries the law into effect and evies fine. Ii IS then
Junctus obcio But cannot the Executive pardon the
person whom the Court has condemned Cannot
he remit the fine, which the Court has imposed p
is this any interference with its legitimate authority?
The President cannot, however, in this case renit
because the money has been paid. What debars
Congress then from doing that Justice which the
President cannot do? DO not our revenue officers
frequently apply to them for redress against the de-
clslon of the Courts? III be given in the case of
Collector, surely il ought to he refused in a case
where the greatest wrong has been done TO a Gill
| zen, both by fine and imprisanment under the CO.
lour OF most niquitous aud unconstitutional law
The Legislature OF Virginia frequently relieves
against the decisions of Courts, both civil and mill
tary. And is this regarded as any interference with
/ the legitimate powers of the Court
| so far from there being any objection TO the pas
sage OF this law, we should trust that Il general law
may be passed, giving relief against all judgments
| under the odous Sedltion act.