The daily Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1841-1845, 1843-11-08
THE RIGHT OF PETITION.


Mr. EplroR Your last article on this sub
j ject so distinctly and correctly put the ease,
that il would seem superhuous TO add more, did
not the exhibition OF any important question
in a variety of lights and the presenting II ire
quenlly before the public, become duy from
which men Of sound political and moral views
cannot recede.
| The right Of petition, as conlended Tor by MI.
Adams, is not practical right; and not The
right which under the monarchy OF England
was so much insisted on. What the People
wanted in that case was an opportunity, unmo-
Tested, to give oppression TO their views and
feelings, so as TO produce an effect in particular
cases on the action OF Government. Monar-
chies, fearing the freedom Of expressing opin-
ion in very many instances, were not IN those
days, and are not much more now, disposed TO
permit assemblages of the People, as they may
choose, for the purpose OF petition. Ot course,
if they could not assemble 10 petition, numer-
ousy signed petitions could not easily be obtain
ed and above all, those discussions could not
be had watch would lay open the corruplions OF
the court and its satellites, and the sources Of
public grievances. Monarchies have ever
shown peculiar sensi,iveness on this subject.
Hence they have often made laws 10 prevent
the assemblages Of the People, that they might
discuss and petition, and such laws now exist
in most monarchies. More than certain num-
Der of persons is forbidden to assemble for any
purpose of political discussion. Bayonels have
in former ages, as well as some years ago, been
EN- ployed TO disperse assemblies proiessedly Po-
litical, convened for discussion, and TO r, dress
real or imaginary grievances. Bat in this coun-
uv, no one thinks of the bayonet as means TO
stop discussion or TO prevent petition. NO OBJ
slrucuon is given, other Than that OF discussion
no physical opposition is made to the assem-
blages Of the People for petition. Free as the
breeze that watts it, "a chartered Iberline," the
right Of discussion is fully INDUCED ; and the
right Of petition is no less tree in our country.
But The mulilarious and serious business OF
the nation is not therefore TO be arrested; the
e : actmenl Of Who'll some laws, within The con-
stilulional jurisdiction Of the General Govern
ment, is not therefore TO be prevented, because
certain men in our country choose TO haIass
Congress with petitions to act Lcyond the pale
of its authority Our lawgivers are sup
posed to be sage counsellors, grown TO
years of competency 10 judge of the mat
ters for which they assemble in Legislative
capacity, and are sent 10 the Federal Legs
ature by election Of the People themselves,
which is the endorsement Of the People that
they deem them qualified TO judge OF what
is cupstitu ion"l -'oN' "~'
n,,Ing, wong and dangerous IN any given
case. They have, therefore, bot TO understand
the nature Of any proposition, and they may,
III they choose, entertain 1t and discuss II, re-
jecl it at once, without any hitting, ment of the
right Of petition. In doing either, they are res
ponsib 10 the People and liable to be dismissed
by them at short periods, if they disregard what
they consider a proper expression Of their
wishes. Far Otherwise in monarchies: The
Lords are not at all responsible, consttu,ionaIIy,
TO the People nor is the King and the resPon-
sibillty Of the Commons, or House OF Repre-
senatives, is far more restricted than with US
! The number of electors is very limited in all
the monarchies that have representative bodies,
and che time for which they hold office is much
longer than in this great Republic. Hence the
right of petition is more important in a monar-
chy by far than in our own country, because Of
the mighier and more direct control which the
People have, in our country, over both branches
of the Legislative body, and over the President
himself
But no one denies. and as | have shown, no
one obstructs the right OF petition in our ma
lion. All that is asked it, that il be confined to
topics within the legitimate jurisdiction Of our
National Legislature T; that ii be not directed TO
subjects which, so far as the National Legisa-
lure is concerned, are fixed and settled and the
serious and important business in which the
great and leading interests of the country are
Immediately involved, be not postponed to the
consideration Of petitions, the nature Of which
is at once understood as soon as announced, and
which are regarded beyond the limits of Fede-
raj Legislature.
QUINTUs Mucius