Edgefield advertiser. [volume] (Edgefield, S.C.) 1836-current, 1836-04-21

senate aasfslzasSh
Out ALTERATION, IN all The s%uhseGien l,SnSs
anu lnodihcahonssof the rules, we have fhe
strongestevidence OF, the deliberate se,Iso
reconsideration. 1l.Yst
lieei that 1 might here terminate tl,ee aa;s.
cussion. I have shown conclus;yein ,tta.
the right of petition cannot possibly he eS'
tended beyond presentations. At that noint
1T IS met by tho rights of the Senate /: and
u lo.iows as a necessary consequence, tllat
SO lar from being bound to receive these
Peutions, solar would a rejection be from
violating the right Of petition, were it left
lPericctiy Tree to .rejcct or receive at plea
sure; to deprive lis of which would violate
me rights of this body, secured by the Con-
stitution. - eWN
But on n question Of such marp;tnde g
! feel 1t to be a duty to rcmove everv diff.
Guilty I; and, that not a shadow of doubt
may remain, l shall nexi proceed 10 reply
10 tne objections our opponents have made
10 the grounds have taken. AT the head
OF these, it has been urged, again and
AGAIN. mat petitioners have a right to he
heard, and that not to receive petit;ons q
to refuse a hearing. Iii to be regretted
that, throughout. this discussion. those on
posed to us have dealtin such vague gene
raiities, and ventured assertions with so
ilttie attention TO facts. Why have thew
not informed us, in the present instance,
"hat Is meant by the right to be heard.
and how that right is violated by a rcfus
to receive Had they thought proper to
give us this i~nfOrination, it would ut least
nave greatly facilitated my reply; but as it
IS, am constrained to inquire into tho diff.
ferent senses in which the assertion NAV bo
taken, and then to show that in not one of
them IS the right of petition in the slight
est degree, mfrinsed , q refusal 10 receive.
what then is meant by the assertion
heard Isit r,eant That they have a right
to,appearl III the Senate Chambcrin person
invite henrd-
LIN its defencel, If this, be the meantime
the dnllest apprehension must see that .tlin
question on receiving, has not the sliebtcst
hearing on such right. IF they have tho,
right to be heard personally at our bar, it is
not the 24th rule Of our proceedings, hut
the 10Th, Which, violates that right, That
rule expressly provides that a motion to
admit any person whatever within the doors
OF the Senate to present a petition. shall
ne out oil order'sand of course excludes tho
petitioners from being heard in person.
But 1t may be meant that petitioners havo
a right to have their petitions presented IN
the Senate, and read in their hearing. II
this he the meaning, the right has been III
Joyed in the present instance to the fullest
extent. The petition was presented by the
Senator from Pennsylvania iMr. Buchananl
IN the usual mode, by giving a statement OF
its contents, and on my call was read by the
Secretary at his table.
But one more sense can he attached 10
the assertion. 1T may be meant that the
petitioners have a right to lave their peti-
tons discussed by the Senate. If this DO
intended, l will vcnturevto say that there
never was an assertion more directly in tho
teeth Of facts than that which hasbecn so
! frequently made in the course of this dis
cission-that to refuse to receive the pcti-
} fion IS to refuse a hearing to the petitioners.
Has not this question been before us for
months ! Has not the petition becm discus
sed day after day. fully and freely, in all
its bearings? And how, with these facts
before us, with the debates still ringing in
our cars, any Senator can rise in his place
| aud gravely pronounce that to refus to
receive this petition is to refuse n hearing
to the pctltiOners-tO refuse discussion. il,
the broadest sense, IS pasfSmy comprehcl-
I Sl0n.. Our opponents. rs if i'll their eager
ness to- circnmscrihe the rights of the Sen
ate, and to enlarge those of the abolitionist
uor such must be the effect of their course,
have closed their sonacs against facts pass.
ing before their eyes (; and have entirely
overlooked the nature Of the question now
before the Senate, and which shey have been
so long discussing.
The question on receiving the petition,
, mo- only admits the discussion, but admits
, it in the most ample manner more so, in
5 fact. than any other except the final ques.
9 ton on the rejection Of the prayer of the nc.
, ttion,o o some antamount question. Whal
ever may go to show that the petition is O,
is not deserving the action of this BODY
. may be freely urged for or against it, a.
has been done OF the present occasion.-
In this respect there is a striking dinerenc.
a between it and many Of the subscquen
: questions which may be raised after rcccp
@ ton, aud particularly the one made bv~ti,
Senator from Tennessee, (Mr. Grundv,
who now is so strenuous an advocate i,
Il favor Of the right of the petitioners to l.,
y heard. bespoke with grcat con.
= placcncy of his course, as it respects anotl,
Il err of these petitions. And what was tina
course? He who is now so eager for dis
CUSTOM, to give a hearing. moved to Law TN
u pctitionSon the table-a motion which cut
o of alEtiiscussion.