The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1851-04-16
From The Boston Atlas, April ~.
nIasssehusstts Legislature.

!
The crowded state OF our columns precludes from
giving any heightened comment upon the investigation
going on before committee OF the senate IN regard 10
the conduct OF certain official persons growing out OF the
1ugyesl case IL is the belief OF many OF our best
informed lawyers that the senate in this case has as
sumed powers not delegated 10 ii by the constitution but
winch belong exclusively 10 the other branch OF the egs-
ature The chamber yesterday during the exam
naton was densesy crowded, and deep interest in the
proceedings manifested
II will be by the house report that the matter
brought 10 the attention OF thai body by Mr. Gurus, OF
this city We ask the attention of readers to the
house report and 10 the report OF the examination before
the senate committee.
House OF REPRESENTATIVES, Friday, April IL.
Mr., CURTIS, of Boston, rose he said, TO question
OF privilege and offered the following order
O'dsrsd. That the committee the judiciary of this
honse inquire and report whether the exclusive privilege
right and duty OF this house 10 be the grand inquest OF this
Commonwealth has been is in danger Of being in
hinged in any way, and what way invaded"
The house would perceive Mr. Curtis remarked that
the order merely of inquiry The usual course
followed the presentation of such documents was 10
do SO without explanation but the subject alluded to in
The one now offered OF peculiar character, and
quired that some explanation should accompany it, No
member OF the house would fail agree with him that it
was well 10 keep wachiu and Jealous eye the priv
eges that the people had conferred on the house, and
the house alone. The privileges so exclusively con-
ferred constituted themselves a sacred trust and il on
any occasion the members of this branch had
believe or suppose an invasion OF any of their special
privileges was not only their constitutional right but
their manifest duty to institute inquiry into the subject of
interference and whether il had justification not
The question implied in the order just read whether
or not occasion presented itself to tolerate the ns
tuition OF such description OF inquiry He held in his
hand copy of an order to which attached the sigma
ure of the clerk of the other branch of the Legislature
and although he was aware OF the unparllamenlary
nature OF making any auson to the proceedings OF the
senate, yet he felt satisfied that it TO be tolerated
to legisate matters which affected the privileges of
this house The following is copy of the order of the
senate alluded to:
Ordered, That Messrs. Robinson, Wood of Plymouth,
Kuhn, keyes, and Grswold be committee inquire
whether the freedom OF any Of the inhabitants of This Com
monweah is endangered through the remisness of any
officers thereof Il any officer has refused neglected
any process for the arrest of any person charged
criminal with power send for persons and papers
Ordered, That the same committee inquire if any law
or the security OF personal liberty has recently been vio
lated by officers Of the city of Boston, or by officers OF the
officers of said city, with power to send for persons and
papers"
This order substantially of inquiry into the
of misdemeanors the part of the officers of the
Commonwealth, official neg lect, although might be
arg ued that it a case in which the senate committee
were ordered to inquire into such msdemeanors, no,
that the parties committing them should be punished, but
that legislative process should follow the inquiry, and not
the punishment OF the parties implicated the mlsde
meanor This argument was not tenable when II was
considered that the house OF representatives cons
uted the grand inquest in such subjects involved i'm
peachment OF public officers The house was according
TO the constitution of the Commonwealth, court with
full authority TO inquire and mpeach and all impeach
made should be heard and tried by the senate
which should determine all impeachments made by the
house against any officer officers OF the Commonwealth
for misconduct and mal-admnisration in their Offices
The house, 1t would be seen, had the sole right 10 i'm
peach and ii The consequence OF The inquiry OF the
ate committee was an impeachment OF any public officer
or the elicltaon OF grounds on which an Impeachment
might be founded by this house. that branch had exceeded
the privilege granted them by the constitution judi
clal court might well institute inquiry into the
merits of case, and try 1t without laying lis details be-
fore the grand jury the senate proceed TO take the ni
liatiye IN case on which an impeachment might be
based, and which they had right TO determine as de-
ermnatos between the people and the individual under
impeachment To inquire whether any invasion had
been made the privileges OF the house. and whether
necessary 10 take action accordingly, the object
OF the presentation OF the order
Mr.. Books, OF Boston, thought the privilege OF i'm
peacbment, which belonged exclusively 10 the house,
was confined exc usively TO judicial officer alone and
that the senate had the right TO institute inquiry into the
conduct OF parties that the house had special cogni
zance He thought that the order OF the senate did
not embrace such inquiry included judicial ohcersat
least il might be inferred from circumstances known to
every IN the house that such not the case. Any
collision between the two branches was to be avoided
and MIR. Brooks hoped that the Interpretation of the
order would show itself TO the minds OF members it
had done to his and that such collision might thereby be
avered.
Mr. CURTIS was of opinion tha, the terms Of the SEN
ate order did not imply any distinction whatever between
judicial other officers, and suggested that every
who held office Of public trust under the Common
wealth impeachabe by this house, whether udiciay
employed or not
Mr.. Brooks replied that the executive the proper
party to take up and decide the OF parties not
udciay employed and this without the consent or in.
reference OF the house
Mr. CURTIS said the executive had the right to remove
from office but the power OF impeachment not de-
stroyed by dismissal from Office The house had still
right 10 mpeach, whether the party had been dismissed
from office or not
Mr. CUSHING, Of Newbury, supported the views of
MIR. Curtis the power OF impeachment the house
privileged in possessing
Mr.. WooD, OF Fchburg, understood the order to i'm
ply inquiry into the proceedings OF coordinate
branch and whether not the rights OF the house
nffnged by the order OF inquiry passed by the other
house He thought the rights OF the house were
n,ertered WITH although was very improper that the
senate should step aside and inquire into this subject,
which might yet have to before that body in the
shape OF impeachment The house, even had the
senate the disposition 10 interfere with its privileges, had
no recourse against IT, disturbance might be raised,
and much bad feeling might result but power OF cor
recon existed, except that welded by the people The
gentleman from Boston Mr. Brooks) right. II was
lnjudicous 10 quarrel where power to recuy could
operate. Let the house allow as they could not prevenL
the senate to into the inquiry embraced IN It's order,
and let its dignity ITS poprey, and ITS honesty go to the
people for correction.
Mr. BRASsIsG, OF Monterey, said that the order of the
could not by any means, be tortured into the in
could be question of the invasion Of the privileges OF
this house by the other branch.
Mr. EARLE, OF Worcester, said he did not agree with
any but the last speaker and moved that when the
question the adoption OF the order be taken it be by
yeas and nays.
the ORDER advanced by the speaker against its adop
tion and showed that these had influence in his
mind in removing the conviction that the procedure OF
the senate nterpostlon with the privileges oil the