The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1839-05-18

mission OF the MEMBER, as Tue speaker ieit
he was taking high responsibility in refusing
10 swear the member in. The motion was
sustained by vote Of 40 TO 80, by which
act Of Legislative legerdemain, MIR. Stevens
is actually refused admttance, at least until
Loco-iocoism shall feel its vast bowels Of
compassion moving in sympathy for the poor
unrepresen,ed people Of Adams.
In any view we can take Of this case, If
we have stated it correctly, we are constrain-
ed to regard the proceeding as unjus,ifable
and outrageous. Is representative duly
chosen, to be refused his seat on account Of
unproven allegations against his moral and
political character, and condemned without
hearing by an accidental majority If he is
to be expelled from the repres entative body,
shall he not be first admitted and tried For
he is by force Of the election, a member Of
the body, although he cannot vote until he
is sworn, and to deny him the administration
Of the oath, is virtually an expulsion, which
cannot lawfully be done in that way, nor by
such vote. II he had been even indicted
for felony or treason. he ought to remain Of
the house until conviction.
This is according 10 oil parliamentary prac-
tice The case is first to be laid before the
House, that il may judge Of the fact and the
grounds Of the accusation, and how far the
manner Of the trial may concern their priyi-
lege* There have been cases wherein mem
beers have been expelled, for conduct previous
to the swearing in. But if the people con-
tinually send them back how shall the House
undertake 10 dictate what sort of a member
they shall elect! II the members qualifica-
tons meet the standard required by the Con-
stituiion, how can the House reject him
The Loco. focos in this case have involved
themselves in other improPrieties. They re-
fused Mr.. Stevens hearing. This was con-
trary to all the law and practice Of courts Of
justice, as well us Of parliament. In Con-
gress, in questions Of privilege for violations
Of order and decency, the member is heard
in cases Of contested elections, both sides are
heard. The common law gives every man
The right Of confronting and answering his ac-
cuser. In the next place Mr.. McElwee vio-
lated very important parliamentary rule in
traducing Mr.. Stevens Characteristic priyi-
lege from personal traduction and assault is
not only essential for the peace OF Legisla-
ture, but also for its dignity and independence.
The Speaker was also out of order in allowing
Mr.. Nc Elwee to proceed in his strain OF
coarse personality.
.Non-user, perhaps, should be deemed for
fixture Of the seat Whether il is so consider
ed is questionable. Il is matter for The
people to settle. We have never heard the
question raised here. Members are frequent
ly in the habit Of absenting themselves. We
have known absence for whole session, but
it was not regarded as forfeiture Of the right
to seat. il is grea, evil both to the public,
and to the absentees constituents, and saoud
be prevented as far as possible. But even if
It were settled that non-user works forfeiture,
the proceedings in the case at Harrisburg still
could not be justified. As the Speaker did
not notify forfeiture, Mr.. Stevens remains Of
the House until that is shown.