The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1847-03-09

The necessary conclusion therefore. from the declaration
that there may be public lbeF against the sscharacey
of the Senate is that such public libel may be the subject
of public prosecution You see, take for granted tina
the Senate In using technical terms intend to adopt thei
technical meaningin other words that they wha
they say.
Now, ask if such doctrine is not dangerous in the
exheme II was one OF the objects OF the sedltion law
to confer upon both houses of Congress such ndivdu
atty OF character, would authorize prosecution for
public libel against it. Ii enacted that f any person
shall utter or publish any false, scandalous and mali
cious writing against either House of Congress OF the
United States such person being thereof convicted before
any Of the United States having jurisdiction thereof
shall be punished by fine" &c. Without that law, il
was known that there could be no such thing as public
libel against the character of the Senate House OF Rep
resentatyes any more than there could be public libel
against the character of the Baltimore Harrisburg
conventions. That law excited the Indignation of the
people, and was afterwards repealed; nevertheless,
the doctrine involved in the late resolution of the Senate
virtually asserts that persons still liable to punish
for utterng public bes against the character of the
Senate Ii this doctrine should be universally recog-
nsed would have been better, if the sedion law had
been repealed for ii at least gave public notice of
the danger which might be incurred.
In England, this doctrine of the distinctive and ndivd-
ua character OF the two Houses OF Parliament and of the
right to punish those who utter public lbes against it,
has been several times maintained But it no more fol-
lows that abuse of either House of Congress would be
public libel against the character because similar abuse
would in England be libel against the houses of Par
lament than that to compass imagine the death of the
President would be treason the United States because
to compass or imagine the death OF the sovereign would
be treason in Great Britain Even in England, how
when asserting the right to inct punishment for
such bes, they have been very cautious to blend
the somewhat inconsistent functions of accuser and
Judge In the celebrated trial of Stockdale, for sup
posed libel upon the House OF Commons, the Attorney
General then Sir Archibald Macdonald, aludng to the
address made by the House, requesting that nfoma-
ton might be fled said that they Thought it to be the
ttest TO bring before jury of the country offender
against themselves avoiding thereby what sometimes
indeed is unavoidable; but which they wish to
nuniI Srhan he dana ia,
acting both judges and accusers That jury found the
defendant not guilty thus showing that impartial tri-
bunal will sometimes differ in opinion from the accusing
body.
that many of the senator's in debate defended the
right to pass the resolution in question upon the ground
that they were only withdrawing privilege which they
this position, they should have been contened with SIM
ply Withdrawing the privilege. They should have said
nothing about altering public libel against the character
OF the Senate; by saying which, they announce doc
trlne which is, | think, unenable and dangerous.
Buteve if all this had been omitted could their
luton have been defended upon their grounds
Can they by voluntarily rendering courteses priv-
eges to particular classes OF men, acquire right to sit in
judgment upon particular individuals of that class under
the preext OF Withdrawing the privileges previously ten
dered' Why, if this So how easy would it be to
exercise strong, and sometimes controlling influence
over the public press in the whole country by granting
all editors OF newspapers in the Union, instead of the
mission to the floor OF the Senate chamber After ex-
tending this courtesy to all editors class they
would only have to single out by name, an editor in
Maine, Louisiana, or Missouri, who had expressed
some opinion offensive to themselves, and by a
solemn resolution recorded upon their Journal stigma
tie, or attempt to stigmaize him as public libeller
from whom the privilege they had granted him,
should be Withdrawn. Why may they not grant this
privilege to all editors at But little practical in
convenience would result as perhaps not dozen would
be at the Capitol at any time. Already they have,
believe granted the privilege to all members of the
different legislative bodies in the Union, to Judges and
perhaps to other classes Now, if some member of the
Virrip in HO1s of Dala in
that body offensive to the Senate, will it be argued that
they would be justified in passing resolution withdraw
ing from this member by, By or BY plain description
mon with others OF his class "a privilege which he had
not asked them TO confer, and which perhaps he had
o be sShs1s o. nsv ea S out
presentment insulting to the Senate, and the judge should
permit it to be recorded on the minutes Of the court will
Judge the uerer of public libel against the character
they had conferred upon him Nor would there be any
why these resolutions Of expulsion exclusion
should depend upon 'libelous' attacks upon their body
Murder, theft adultery fraud, breaches of promise,
payment of debts all these might constitute valid obec
any of the thousands OF prirHegea persons against
whom an accusation might be preferred by any member
Of that body
The Senate in extending their coureses to Others do
so spontaneously and from some presumed proprety in
the thing They do not thereby to themselves the
right to examine and pronounce upon the public or pm
vale conduct OF tnose 10 WnOm tneir cives nau Deen
offered They would have quite good right to re-
solve that some who never had been entitled to any
privilege OF their floor, should hare it, as to with
draw it for the assigned from to whom they
had previously rendered it. Of course, they may eype from
the floor from the gallery dsurber OF their delbe
atons but this right does not depend upon the previous
concession of privileges to such person 1t is the right
possessed by Judge to secure himself against annoy
ance; but when he directs the sheriff to expel the wrong
doer he does not if be entered the record by
the clerk, though the noisy intruder may be to
whom he had, the moment before, rendered seat beside
him on the hustings.