New Orleans daily crescent. [volume] ([New Orleans, La.]) 1851-1866, 1852-09-25

" u IN nE16 11Is
change, and the French people Of Louisian
may have partaken Of the changes OF time AM
circumstance; but he did not believe that an,
} one had right to ask them to forget the Ian
guage Of their fathers, and those dearest asso
Citations which their language guarded in tbe;,
memories He believed that nothing Of the kline
would be required. He had faith that the
Americans looked back to the time when France
united with America in the fight for liberty
but he had faith also in the same love of liberty
that still dwelt in both France and America,
# America should ever be in trouble she will
find on the other side Of the Atlantic nation
that will always go for her. He trusted, there
lore, that no Ill feeling would be excited by the
Convention abolishing this very proper article
IN the Constitution.
Mr. NICHOLS hoped that the motion would
not prevail He represented a constituency
whose language was the French language and
When that constituency sends q delegate here.
she expects him to advocate and sustain her
right to have the laws framed and promulgated.
| ana the intercourse between her and her sister
constituencies maintained in all State assem-
plies' without insult to the language which she
adores and which she treasures as n sacred IN
heritance. What necessity is there for abolish
/ ing. this clause in our Constitution 1t will
only awaken and quicken feelings Of distrust
already existing to a too great extent in differ
ent portions of our State. Why should feeEnqs
be thus embittered, and enmities thus eneerl.
dereds We all fight under the same banner.
We all look up to the stars and stripes Although
We have no objection that the language of our
common country SHALL be the American lam
guage yet we claim the privilege of speaking
our own ianguage-of addressing our State
tribunals in our own language, and Of reading
the laws that govern us in cur own LANGUAGE
He trusted that the Convention would NOT enter.
tain the motion.
MIR. PEARcE said that, as this subject had
come into discussion, he would remark that
those OF our citizens who adhered to the
French language had gone too far. When Tor,
isiana came into the Union we thought thu,
they spoke the French language alone, and as
o courtesy. we agreed that the French language
should be in part adopted. for a reasona bic
time. But after they came in. sir we found
them publishing books in the English language
and under the impression that the English
Language would soon be learnt by all of them.
the anomalous condition of the language Of our
state has been allowed to continue There is
no necessity for this, farther. Every person in
the State, who has not learned the English
language, ought now to learn it, wherever the
communities can boast of the lights of etIuca-
tion. The English language ought to be added
to their education. at least, as one of the ac-
complishments of educated persons
Mr.. ST. PAUL called the gentleman to order.
When he speaks OF Louisianians, at least those 81
them who claim to be native born citizens. he
must speak wi th more respect. We are equals in
this State, and when all are equals, there car
be norsuch difference as the gentleman alIudes
to. American blood flows in all our veins. lie
would take it from no mamie would alluyF Ia
man to tell him: ''We gave them a country
etc. You gave us nothing The maintenance
of the French language is a right which we
then guaranteed ourselves, and which we still
will yindicate and claim, etc.
Mr.. PEARcE did not intend to insult the zen.
tleman, but he meant to state his position HI
would state it now. The time has now come
when only one language should be adopted in
our State. Make it French, or English, or Span
ish, or German, or Italian if you will but make
1T one language. He understood that there were
parts of the State where the English language
is not taught at all. French alone is spoken
This ought to be inquired into.
Mr. GuIoN moved to lay Mr. Pearce's motiol
! on the table, which motion prevailed by 10
/ yeas, nays.
Mr.. RIcHARpsoN, of St. Mary, moved to strik
cut that part of the article which saws ss Mem
, bers may address either House in the French o
English language because it assumes the righ
to deprive members of privilege which the Con
stitutlon cannot deprive them Of ST.
The amendment was lost, and the articl
adopted.
MODE or PROSECUTIONS. 4H r
Article l07. Prosecutions shall be by ipdiet.
ment or information. The accused shall have n
speedy public trial by an impartial iury of the
vlclnage; he shall not be compelled to give evil
dence against himself; he shall have the right
Of being heard by himself or council he shall
have the right, unless he shall have fled from
justice, of meeting the witnesses face to face.
and shall have compulsory process for obtaining
witnesses in his favor
Mr. CoLLENs moved to strike out the words,
&c indictment or" His object was to strike out
the necessity for Grand Juries The time had
now come when Grand Juries were an incum-
brance, a nuisance. The Grand Jury system
was derived from England 1t was necessary
there. 1tis not so among us. He would ask any
member of the bar what benefit he saw in Grand
Juries. They never make strict examinations.
ana thus their acts are never effectual. None
but the witnesses on the part of the State are
brought before them, and no such information is
laid as to form the basis of a prosecution Before
Grand Juries, the accused had not the same
privileges as before committing magistrate.
Before committing magistrate, the accused
could always meet his witnesses face to face
but that was not the case before Grand Jury
Before committing magistrate, the District
Attorney can always investigate the case to see
if it is a fit one for prosecution The Grand
Jury system is an Improbable and useless sys-
TEN. The time of the jury lists is taken UP fol
nothing. We have no aristocracy or other SINH
lar power here to guard ourselves against. We
are fully protected in our rights by our means
of lodging information before committing
magistrate, and we can we'll afford to dispense
with the Grand Jury system The Grand Jury
system is tax on the time of the citizens, and
protection to no man. He, therefore, moved
that the words &c indictment or be stricken out
of the article.
Mr.. Hunt differed entirely from the gentle
man in relation to the institution and value of
the Grand Jury system That was system of
great public utility. In times of public excite
ment it was the safeguard OF the citizen. 1t was
wall of fire against aggression-it was n sure
bulwark against oppression, and he had yet to
learn that the citizens Of NewOrleans had any
desire to break it down; he had yet to learn
that they wished to part with this stronghold of
their safety, Nor could he agree with the gen
tleman that our Grand Jury system was entirely
Of English origin; but if it were, it would be a
recommendation to him. lie respected the
English law he admired the true freedom and
solid rights that were guaranteed by many of
the institutions of England He had seen some
thing like an attempt lately to establish the
principles of genuine freedom in France, but
when free institutions had been established in
England. they We're based on solid and durable
principles. That the Grand Jury system hac
| had its origin in England therefore wos J., 10