Weekly national intelligencer., 1848-04-22

sgh Of the lust distinction stated by the Chair between
question Of privilege and privileged question The Chair
decided that this was privileged question mat Is that
question which had right he heard at once IN pre-
ference every other As soon before the House
then the question Of privilege, viz the question whether
the privileges Of member had been violated The decision
Of the Speaker that this privileged question: and as such
had right be heard decided nothing as TO the
question Of the violation Of privilege Il did not settle what
and what not the rights Of that body That
matter for the House itself TO decide The House could
permit such question that to be settled by the Chair
Mr. " said he should deliberate long, long, before he
would vote committee vague common rumor; he
should deliberate longer before on the ground OF such
rumo he would declare that the privileges OF the House had
been violated Nor would he consent to e the Chair decide
that question He thought the decision OF the Chair had been
right This privileged question II was brought for
ward SUCH When up for discussion Before the
House, then, and not till them the great and often di
cu and very delicate question whether any act had been
done which affected liberty of members Of that House and
the liberty Of the people.
Mr. HARALS0N wished to submit few remarks in COM
pason Of the declarations of the preamble of the resolutions
proposed by the gentleman from Massachusetts, Mr. PALFREY
and the constitution of the United States and he should do
this with view to demonstrate that this neither ques
on Of privilege apiveged question For the better
complshmen OF his object be would read both portion OF
the constitution and the preamble Of the resolution. Mr.. H.
then read from section six Of article one:
tThey H. e. members Of both Houses shall in all cases,
except felony and breach Of the peace be privileged
during their attendance the Of
spectve Houses and in going returning from the
any speech debate in either House they shall
questioned in any other place.
They shall be free from arrest, by the laws Of the
land under legal process for debt &C. Now, had
been shown by the preamble of the resolution that any such
had been made attempted What the
forth in the preamble
Whereas report has represented to members of
this House that lawless mob has assembled within the Dis
ct Of Columbia each Of the two nights last past and has
committed acts OF violence setting at defiance the laws and
constituted authorities United menacng
BY common report! Why, common report might have
assumed thousand different shapes the facts and put
thousand varying phases upon such facts had occurred
II said that members Of the House had been concerned
what had caused the disturbances in the city, Mr. H.
did youch for the truth Of such reports but such the
report He did mention this fact but he mentioned
expose the folly Of nstung solemn investigation by
mitees of that House every floating that filled the
air. The House asked floating report, say
there had been breach OF the privileges of the House, Mr.
H. trusted the time had when the House going
to be guilty Of any such folly
IT, indeed the privileges Of the House, as stated by the
constitutions had been assaed and violated if member would
rise his place and say he had been violently prevented from
attending sitting Of the HYHse, had been arrested for
debt had been called to for words spoken in de-
BATE then would become the solemn duty of the House
investigate the NATTER and whether the allegation
and, if was the House would be bound yindicae
its character and the rights Of its members Till then,
he hoped it never would act mere rumor.
The preamble says "a awless NIB has assembled within
the District of Columbia each of the nights last past
and has committed Of violence, ting defiance the
laws and constituted authorities of the United States and
menacng individuals Of this body" This last clause all
that related members Of the House. Now, supposng
rumored, be would ask gentlemen look at the
clause of the constitution which he had read and which
tanned all that related the privileges Of members Of Congress-
and whether held 10 be breach of privilege
1t presumed and Mr. IL believed truly, that members OF
Congress orderly in their department and submissive to
the laws if OF them improperly menaced there
laws in this District which would ahundantiy protect hm if
any undue had been addressed member be could
appeal TO the law and get ample redress. But If redress
refused him. then would be time for him invoke the pro-
lection Of the House. If he had been interrupted in his
tendance and prevented from dischagng his official duty, let
that fact be made appear and might be very proper for
the House TO act in the case but not vague
The resolution further il said that only members
Of Congress hut other citizens had been menaccd
said II any investigation 10 be bad all might
be proper inquire who had nterIered with the
rights Of the people Of the District of Coumba and whether
members Of the House had not had hand in depvng them
Of their constitutional rights
Mr. PALFEEY here incrposed to say that If the gentle
from Georgia would introduce such provision by way
Of amendment, Mr. p. would accept il a modification
Mr. HARALS0N. am father to such paper this,
and Icharge myself with the guardianship only OF my
children Phave reason 10 believe that the allegation is
believe that it is but out of the thousand
that prevail without any just foundation have spoken with
view to show the folly Of acting proposed until there
specific charge made by member of the House. III
member of that body out into the Of this city and
him down for it. would the House render itself ridiculous
and incur the public contempt by attempting TO Interfere
Unless the prevented the member from attending the House,
the House would have nothing to do with the matter. II
there was no law the District Of Columbia or no court to
enforce any, then indeed might be proper The House IN
que and for the protection Of its members But there
law in the District and there Judges and uries
Let the threatened member appeal them There
proof that the privilege Of any member had been violated
Mr. BARRINGER said il was important that the precise
question should be understood He had understood the
Speaker decide that there sufficient matter the
Of the paper presented by the gentleman from Massachusetts,
to authorize him TO declare IFS presentation be privileged
question. He fully of the distinction between
question Of privilege and privileged question: taken by the
Speaker and commented upon by the gentleman from Ohio
mr. VIsToS y and while he fully admitted that distinction,
be equally clear in the opinion, with great Difference the
uniform Of the Chair that in this question the OPT
Mon Of the Chair wrong He (Mr b. maintained there
ought appear the face Of the paper sufficient distinct
ter sufficient specific chaTgeshat some specific fact or some
specific person. ought be named authorize Speaker TO
declare its presentation 10 be privileged question He would
declare that they might search the whole Para
mentay records Of England and this country they could
not nd single where the Speaker had decided TO be
privileged question without such specification
The SPEAKER wished to be allowed call the attention
Of the gentleman from North Carolina the fact that the
Manual said that common fame good ground for the House
to proceed TO inquire or even To-"
Mr.. BARRINGER replied undoubtedly, but that did not
reach the Common fame that the safety Of
some member OF the House, designating him by name
nenaced, OF must designate particular fact There
such designation specification here, BY way Of Iusra
ton, suppose the opinion Of the Chair that this phi
- n