Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1842-02-01

the Bankrupt bill.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
This morning. after the reading OF The journal, the
question pending was Oil the point OF order made by
Mr. Adams thai the House cannot entertain the reso-
luton offered by Mr. Marshall, as substitute tor that
of Mr. Gilmer.
Mr. Bolts asked Mr. Adams to withdraw his point
of order, that he might have an opportunity 10 address
the House.
Mr. ARNOLD said if the point Of order were with
drawn, he should claim the floor
Mr. ADAMS said he should refuse to withdraw the
point of ORDER that the House chose TO en-
terrain the resolution, all the responsibility OF suisse
quent proceedings, would rest on the House ana not
on him. The discussion this subject could not be
more painful to the House than 1t was TO him. lie
hoped the House would dispense with all further pro-
ceedings in order that the important measures before
il might be attended to- But if the House should not
think proper so TO do he must insist on his protest
that the House had power to receive the resolu-
tons.
Il would be evident, if the resolutions were enter
tanned that there would be debate OF at least three
,yeaks After LENGTHY debate on points Of order, the
vote was taken on the question: "Wi the House en-
terrain and consider the resolutions OF MIR. Mar
sha3" Before the vote announced, many mem
hers changed their votes the ground that they had
previously understood that the question was on the u
risdiction Of the House. instead Of being question OF
expediency: s,.. ao,o,.oa
the record on the journal as system OF lmPosture,
ing but was promptly called to order by the Char.-
After some further debate Mr. Rayner gave notice that
on TO- morrow he will move to amend the Journal on
particular construction of which The vote was taken-
The result of the vote was, yeas u.s. nays Io 80 the
House decided that the resolution OF Mr.. Marshall
should be considered.
MIR. UNDERWOOD then took the floor, and IN
lucid speech commended that the House hac no power
to punish in such cases. lie argued that u ci',,e
had been committed for which member was amcnab'e
bv the Constitution TO the civil tribunals, The House
could not try him. Suppose saio lac, Tue '"ieei "
civil tribunal should and demand member so
charged and the House should say, NO. we nave nun
IN limbo and YOU must wait till we have done with
Nm /" How uouid that look: Would they pretend
that the accused 10 be punished BY the House and
the civil tribunals both? Mr. Underwood then showed
that if Mr. Adams was really guilty OF hSh treasoh' as
mp,ed by the resolution, then the punishment proposed
was not at all adequate II the crime should be proved
would mere reprimand be sufficient punishment IL
members, after finding one OF their number guilty o.
high treason, should, after mere reprimanu, pe
content to sit with him on the floor, what would De-
come of the moral purity Of the House: After no.
tcipp various constitutional objections 10 The Jurs'
diction of the House, Mr. Underwood came 10 me spe-
cifc case now charged. He argued. that the House,
n presuminp TO know the motives Of Mr. a dams, was
srrogating to itself the power of Almighty God. lie
then reviewed the course of Mr.. Adams in relation
10 the right of petition, and said the record would
show that the member had even on one occasion
presented a petition for his own expulsion There
FORE in presenting the present petition, the gentleman
had but carried the principles heretofore arowed
respectng the right of petition He, Mr. Underwood,
did not agree with him in his views, tor he con-
tended that bound ought TO be set to this right tie
asserted that the House had right to entertain Pc
tition the PRAYER of which it had no power 10 grant
He held that had right TO petition or pray Tor
another whose affairs he knew nothing about For IN
stance what folly il would be for an individual on tins
earth TO undertake pray for man in the moon How
could that person on this earth know what were the
wants of the in the moon How could u be known
what would be acceptable 10 him Why, an attempt
of this kind would be looked upon by the Deity pre-
snmptuous So il was with the Northern people. What
RIGHT had they petition about the institutions OF the
South by which they not affected: If It could be
shown that the existence of slavery in the District OF
Columbia affected, any way, the people OF the North,
then he would admit that they have right 10 petition,
but not otherwise.
Mr.. UNDERWOOD, after some further remarks,
said he would endeavor TO correct mistake South
eru members had threatened dissolution OF the Union
as remedy 10 the unjus,habe interference OF the
North in this slave question. This dissolution, instead
of remedyinr the evil would be the very means OF de-
s,royng the institution Of slavery. He showed That
after q separation between the onS!arehcldng and
slaveholdng States should have taken place. the slave
would be declared free the moment he sci his foot upon
the soil of the free States. Mr.. U. then argued the i'm.
possibility of Ohio and Kentucky being separated
by this question. Their former relations and associa-
tons forbade the idea.
MIR GIDDINGS, of Ohio, for his State, said that
the people would not fail 10 stand by Kentucky in the
bour of need He Abo!onlst, but he denied
that the Abo,on.s attempted desired 10 interfere
with the institutions of Kentucky. All they wanted
was that they should not be taxed to pay for the per-
peuation of that institution OF slavery urtbef ex-
PLANTATION was about TO be made BY Mr. e., but he was
prevented by objections.
MIR. UNDERWOOD then concluded BY stating
that when Mr. Adams presented the petition, al
that very moment he moved its reference TO Com
mittee with instructions 10 condemn II, and report
that the prayer ought not 10 be granted Now,
esid Mr. Underwood, suppose | had presented n
similar petition and asked action upon It, SO that
the House might ii it had not the power 10
punish such persons: If lie did this in the sincerity
Of his heart, there any one who would charge HIM
with treason, Was there any one who would AFRO
gate to themselves the Omnscience OF the Crea-
tor, and say he not sincere? How was 1t with
the gentleman from Massachusetts: lie had pre-
scented the petition III accordance with his views
on the right of petition, but with q motion that a
report should be made that the prayer should moi be
granted. Now how could the House undertake to de-
eide upon the motion OF the gentleman, and IL the
place Of the Almighty Judge the motive, and pronounce
it reasonable. Suppose the House should punish the
gentleman for tbis' Would il not give him the power
10 90 home to New England and say he had been n
martyr TO the right Of petition: Would not The New
Englanders say that, their Representative had been
thus used they would dissolve the band which bound
them to the Union?
He warned his Southern friends not to put this in
the power of the gentleman, by pursuing this matter
any further.
Mr. Bolts followed partially in defence Of Mr..
Adams, and showing that there were many members
in the House who delighted in irritating the gentle
man. He asked how the gentleman could be blamed
for presenting petition for the dissolution of the
Union, when member from South Carolina, in a let
ter to the Charleston Mercury, had stated that it was
his inention years ago, to have offered resolu
ton appointing committee of one from each State
consider the expediency of dissolving the Union He
meant Mr.. Rhe;t
MIR. RHETT rose and explained the circumstances
under which the resolution in question had been drawn
up. ltwa at time when during slavery discussion,
the Southern members withdrew from the hall. Mr..
r. then read the resolution, which The reporter under
stood based upon contingency, viz the refusal of
the States to amend the Constitution in certain way.
After this topic had been disposed of, MIR Bolts
again asked how the House could wreak lis vengeance
on MIR. Adams for presenting the petition, when, at the