Washington sentinel., 1856-06-07

speech.
We further ask Mr.. Lord, If Mr.. Sumner in
his speech did not premeditately, with malice
aforethought, violate and transcend this right
of free debate, no less than one hundred and
ninety times. But throwing aside nice criti-
cism as TO the exact propriety Of the rules of
Congress-the words of the Constitution itself,
clearly imply that, stringent provision should
be made to secure decorum in debate, BECAUSE
there would be no legal remedy outside the
Halls of Congress.
VIII Mr.. Lord, or any other man, pretend to
say that Mr.. Summers speech was not viola
ton of decorum, was not in the sense of the
Constitution disorderly". justly subjecting
him to punishment" by the Senate.
With the facts before the public, will any
one be found bold enough to deny that it was
with full knowledge, on his part, that his speech
was one tissue of "disorderly" conduct, clear
and unmistakeable violations of the rules of
the Senate-intended so to be, avowed by him
in boastful letter to the high priest of dis
union, who prides himself in splitting upon the
Constitution and of trampling Christianity un-
der foot.
This speech was an avowed pandering to
that party which disowns allegiance alike to the
| Constitution and to Christianity.
Mr.. Sumner exultingly boasts, in advance,
that it is continued stream of personalities,
in the very teeth of the rules of the Senate and
c.l.. i. II n -
says it is such speech of personality as was
never heard within the Senate walls-or to use
his quotation" language-for he cannot open
his mouth without a quotation flying QUIT
was Philippe" Everybody knows that
the,' Philippics" were personal altogether.
| The speech, by its dedication to Theodore
Parker, was intended for consumption by that
awless class of men, who make amends for
good acts by ferocity Of profession for abstract,
sapless virtue, whose fruits but bitter ashes.
Mr.. Sumner being thus Intentionally guilty,
by his own avoSal, of manifold and aggravated
offences against that decorum of debate pro-
vided for by the Constitution and the rules OF
Congress, was palpably subject to the most ex-
emplary punishment by the Senate.
The Senate, in this case, as in others, failed
to vindicate its own dignity and private char
acter from indecent outrage.
The Senate failing to protect itself and indi
viduals, and the Constitution excluding all
legal redress, there was left the alternative, to
endure the EXTREMIST coutumely that the study
| &c NJ
to resent it illegally, and suffer the penalty OF
violated law.
We submit to Mr.. Lord and others whether
we have not fully and fairly stated the case
When the law remains dead letter, and
those whose duty it is to execute it, habtually
| fail to do so, and when it is clear that great
wrongs must be quietly endured without re-
Dress people resort to illegal redress for illegal
outrage; and it is usual to take these facts in
mitigation, so far even as wholly to exempt
from punishment the violation Of law in pun
ishing illegal outrage.
This was precisely the case with Mr.. Sum
ner. He unquestonaby deserved (richly)
punishment at the hands of the Senate; but
he got it from Mr.. Brooks, and that is the only
difference. He was entitled to punishment"
but it was Mr.. Brooks's hand instead of that
of the Senate which inflicted it.
Now Mr.. Lord and others may disapprove,
and disapprove to the extent of their judgment,
of Mr.. Brooks's undertaking TO measure out
the punishment and of inficting it himself,
but we are wholly at loss to perceive in what
respect Mr.. Sumner is entitled to generous
sympathy, and his course approved, and offered
for example.
For What did Mr.. Brooks chastise Mr..
Sumner?
Mr.. Sumner was distinctly informed by Mr..
Brooks, that it was for personal affronts to
Judge Butler his aged and his absent relative.
or this, however, Mr.. Sumner would have
been fully aware because he has exhausted
bis learning and ingenuity in heaping insult
upon ridicue, upon this distinguished Senator,
distinguished no less by his courtesy in debate
than by his ability.
This, and this alone, occasioned the attack |;
and to support and justify Mr.. Sumner, and to
aid, abet and encourage similar outrages on
the decorum Of the Senate and the reputation
of the country, Mr.. Lord and others seek to
rouse whole community. To give weight to
the matter, Mr.. Lord makes most felicitous
comparison to the fall of innocent Caesar be-
meath the blow of impious Brutus. With what
ghastly grin of satisfaction Mr.. Sumner must
read this most appropriate parallel.
To what end do Mr.. Lords discourse, and
all these meetings throughout the North, tend2
As Mr. Sumner was thrashed for the most un.
paralelled personal insults and they endorse
his course, and hold these meetings to vind-
cate this conduct, it means, and can mean
only, that, in their judgment, on the floor Of
Congress a member may with propriety aban-
don all rules laid down for guidance in free
dom of debate, and indulge in the most out
rageous personalities, for the purposed, delibe-
rate violation Of the freedom Of debate" and
the intended and wanton purpose Of exciting