Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1839-02-16
. rb,, ,enuired MIR H. to reduce his point to WIT

The Chair required Mi H. to reduce his point 10 WITT
Mr Howard insisted that, by the rule he was not re-
oured tu do SO unless the call TO order was lot Petso
| aly in debate. ,: Sc ,h. ,r,s
The Chair adhered TO his construction of me RUE
| Air Howard took IN appeal from that decision
Mr. Doudin made an earnest appear ~ ''e e"' ~, W.
Tee 10 dispose OF the question, aho not sac,hIe on 'e
interests CT The District, To discussion n' uiIs Au
| MIR Glascock with due difference 10 the Chall sdiu
| the Chair would have best consulted It's own dienIV
and the dignity of tho House by nresling the gene
from Ohio in pouring out his gross cau'eS uu 'ou'
asoersons upon The citizens Of this Dlstfict.
The decision Of The Chair was sustained by messrs;
| Adams and Mckennan. and opposed by Messrs. Del
and Thomas The greatest confusion prepaiea curing
this time, number Of members rising ana aooressng
the Chair al the moment but IL was hnhy ats'eu
nv the Chair going behind the point Immediately before
H. cor,,,ee and STATING that he had hesitation in
deciding Mr. Giddings be GU! OF order lor IreleVancy
Of debate. :. ~,
Mr., Howard ,hercupon Withdrew his appeal on the
preliminary point. =
| Mir SIade then took appeal from The decision OF
the Chair pronouncing the gentleman from Ohso Out o,
rd.r. but after some confusion the committee divided
BY rccrs and the decision atirmed-ayes u.s. noes
81 81 ''''''' ~ "
Mr. Adams said, that as this decision imposed new
principle he wished TO know IN WIat WuHhef u "ou'u
be reported 10 the House.
The Chair replied that no report at all would be maze
Of it. .,r
Mr. Reed then moved that Mr.. GiddInrs have leave
70 u,oceed in order but it refused without divi
sion. -.
The question was then taken, by teers on striking
GU, the enac,ing clause and resuted-ayes TO- h1es'o
So the enacng clause o! The bill was stricken OUT
and ordered 10 he reported ~.
The bill TO prohibit The giving or accepting, within
the District Of Columbia, of challenge TO bghl duei'
and for the punishment thcrot ;,
AIR Bondin said, as this BILL though not reported by
him or from The committee oil which he had the honof ~
,.,,I,, Iha
special order for District business, with his perfect as
sent (a courtesy demanded from him by The Kindness Oh
the gentleman from Massachusetts (hlr Adams) yeid
inn the oor for District business last year, II might De
inferred that lie favor OF It's passage and II he gave
silent vote againt it he might be mlslnlerpreted he
wished therefore, 10 explain he should neither vote Tor
nor resist it, because by the common law in force here
as well elsewhere, man who kills another IN dnei
shall suffer an ignonnous death, and that was Ia"
enough for him. and much for It ought IN all cases
TO he inflicted where according to the principles oil lie
common law, the party is guilty OF murder.
Mr. Adams after a lew remarks expressed himself IN
favor of the bill in the form which passed The Senate
Mr. Campbell of S. G, moved 10 insert the word
"knowingy in the provision respecting The carrying
challenge; which was agreed to.
Mr. Jenier offered the following as an amendment TO
the BILL
Der of the House OF representatives so lar iogs NM
self as to nse offensive language in debate, which shall
b. decided 10 be personal TO any member by vote OF
the House the offending member shall immrdia,el y
make apology 10 the member SO offended and 10 Inc
Hnuse. .
Mr.. was understood to be opposed TO the bill, but il
il should be passed that there should be- feature
That would restrict gentlemen to drcnTOus language IN
debate. That there should be some responsibility at
ached to those who might be disposed TO take advantage
nf The law and nvrrslep the bound Of courtesy and
urctv tn which parliamentary debates should he defined
Mr. Toucey hoped the amendment would not prevail.
nd that the gentleman would the proprety of with
aWng the same was one "i most extraordinary
character He considered the rules oil the House amply
sutcj,u, To proiec, the members from personal abuse
if they were not, tina, The House had The power under
the Constitution Ia make the rules su >lenuy binding
TO effect that object.
Mr. Adams considered the proposed amendment one
Of an extraordinary and unconstitutional character IN
asmuch as il goes to abrldge The freedom OF speech IN
the House by law. |, would be referring to the JndcIa
~ the power by law TO decide upon and Judge OF the
rirhs aud privileges of this House tie believed that
i, had the power, urdrr the Constitution end lis or"
rules tn regulate the matter far proper or necessary
MIR II!inrhast understood TO oppose the amend
mPn; because it would be incorporating IN genera
law two principles |, would he restricting the PTVie
rcs Of the members Of the House Of Representatives.,
whilst it would not operate upon The Senate lie con-
cc;ved the rules amply sufficient II not IT was sub
Zee, properly within the province OF either House 10 re-
! rulae by such rules.
snadu De iseto 6PeratG SRo rse esenafs m
ohio, was TO discontinue disorderv conduc, ba,
which, he thought, might arise under the law if
7 be not proper restriction upon the members
hlr rlinghast would he happy 10 the principles
adopted III The rules for the government OF the House
but opposed to Incorporating The same in general
Law He Suggested 10 the gentleman whether II was no
nul OF place this bill; and hoped the matter would be
e the House. to be regulated by lis rules If not, il
would he better In include both Houses.
Mr. Pceniss Of Mississippi stated that the effect o
this amendment would be 10 make backguards OF men
who might otherwise Gc Moreover, forced ex
plantations degrading while voluntary ones were
honorable.
/ Mr. Boudin begged his friend again to remember tina
/ debate would block out the Dis,rc; business
| The amendment was then rejected
Mr. Crahb moved 10 strike out The words in italics in
! the following paragraph:
"Or shall knowingly carry deliver an acceptance oil
such challenge or message, 10 fight duel in or 0ut q
| the said District "
Mr. insisted ihat the retention Of these words would
make the provision Unconstitutional:
The amendment rejected, and the bill ordered to
/ be reported.
| The Committee then rose and reported the various
bills and amendments TO the House. Those without
amendment were ordered 10 third reading, and the
amendments to the others concured in, except the fol-
| lowing
The anti-duelling bill being taken up,
Mr. Crabb moved to recomnlt the bill to the Com
mlttee on the judiciary, with instructions 10 report
whether any provisions in The first be unconstitutional
| After some further discussion,
Mr. Bouldn begged 10 remind gentlemen while they
| business Of The District.
Mr.. Crabb Withdrew his instructions, and
Mr.. Campbell Of South Carolina moved Others in eE.
feet, 10 instruct the committee TO report bill the
subject otduring coniormabe the laws Of Virginia
and Maryland Ia operate in those portions of the Dis
| trlct heretofore within those States
MIR. Haynes remarked that that was the existing law
Mr.. Crabb preferred his own, and renewed them.
Mr.. BnuldIn demanded The previous question, which
was carried; aud The question being the main ques
! lion, viz the ordering the bill to third reading,
Mr. slan!y moved olay it on The table: lost without
! q division.
| Mr. Jackson of New York demanded The yeas and
nays on ordering the bill to thd reading, winch were
| ordered and werr-ycas l07 mays 90
And the bill ordered II. read third lime to da
Mr.. Bronson moved TO reconsider the vote by which
the bill was ordered 10 third reading His Object
10 give gentlemen who desired il opportunity Of 4,
least one days examination.
| After some remarks from Messrs Underwood Prem
tiss o. Miss, Sergeant, Robertson, I'd Boudn, the last
gentleman moved he previous question. VIII was car.