The Lancaster ledger. [volume] (Lancaster, S.C.) 1852-1905, 1856-08-13

S'"'' S>"c cN'epl upon oath no person
To answer TOR crime except Oh indict-
mcnt; IN all criminal prosecutions accused
entitled to trial 10y jury. These are
some OF the bulwarks of our liberties,
Are they not at war with this power of
summary punishment in the House Has
not Mr.. Brooks The right to ask for the
warrant under oath, the indictment, the
trial tr lnryi DO you not refuse them
hy this proceeding Do You not, there
Tor, tramp'e upon the Constitution? Yet
there ~ more important safeguard Of
liberty still remaining. Congress shall
pass no CT post Jacto law. Which means
that no man shall be punished except by
torco Of law enacted before the commits
SION Of the alleged offence. How do YOU
r"conciI" your action with this great pro
vision of bencvo!ercc and rigbtl Can
you show any previous lawl Nome
Then Jour action is unconstitutional.
conclude, therefore, that this assumed
power in the House to punish summarilv,
without previous law, is condemned by
tie Constitution.
But these asSerters Of imperial privilee c
IN the House, driven d;Scomfitied from the
Constitution, yet refuse to yield They
assume another position, and claim the
power to punish for contempt, as a pow or
arising from necessity above the Cors,i
tuition. But deny this as n question Of
law, and a question Of fact. There is no
such thing as necessity above the Cons,i.
tnton. ii the Constitution does not grant
The power, II Is conclusive that it does not
exist. such a supposed necessity may be
very good reason for an amendment OF
tue Constitution, but no more. But de
II, that such necessity in point of lac,
exists. TIE grant Of exclusive legislation
over The ten miles square, gives Congress
the amrest possible power to protect it.
sclt by Inw against attacks upon itself {,
i's members. BY that grant of power
YOU have rig ht TO pass laws, with heavy
pehalncs, securing Your existence from all
illegal attempts. lfyou do net choose to
cAerrIse this power it is your own fault,
and furnishes no excuse for the assump-
ton ot special summary and tyrannicaI
jurisdiction. by passing laws under this
power, the offender will be handed over
10 the courts, and not be debarred OF his
constitutional privileges, Which is in con.
foHniiy TO the spirit Of our institutions.
Fooled in their plea Of necessity, the al
vocaies OF prerogative take refuge in The
parliamentary law. Parliamentary law
is the tsllsmanic word which is to supply
all Ieiiciences. What has the pariamen
tary law 10 do with the power of this
House! Why there is no possible point
OF comparison between thus house OF Rep.
rescm,atives and tho English House Of
Commons. This House has limited pow.
ers. 1t possesses no power that are not
expressly conferred upon it by the Con
suuiion, Or necessarily implied. The
House oi Commons is All imperial House
OF ""iimitcd power. They have said 10
the liouse Of Peers, Go Quit" and they
have gone gfmmering through the msis
ol thugs that were. They have said To
tue KING Descend from your throne ~
aud To the cxecuiioHer, ION with his
he"d!' and the head 81 the King has
rolled from the block. No power has ev
81 been able TO subdue them, except Oil
yer Cromwell. lie put them down, man
U! iron as he WAS.
The House Of Commons is an imperial
ilcme-ahove kings, above peers, above
constitutions. There is no analogy he.
tween the powers and privileges Of that
House and this House OF Representatives.
There IS no ground of analogy whatever,
between them. Why, sir, from whence is
this preroga,ive oftlle House of Commons
derived We are told 10y uailam that
the House OF Commons exercises its pre-
rogatIyc OF Furnishing for breaches OF its
privileges, from prescription Of the COM
mon lawi Prescription is that which cx-
lists from time whereof the memory Of
man runneth not the contrary. Some.
times il is said TO be founded upon stat
ntes worn out by use. think that is
what Coke says about il.
Well, sball we found our privileges up
on this right Of prescription Why this
House was bora but Yesterday. It's life
is hut day in the lifetime Of nation.
Why there are noble families in England,
which date back TO tho Norman conaues,
centuries before this House, or our Con.
slilution emerged from the bosom of time.
We are not old enough TO claim by RE
scription. We must claim by express
statute, Of which there is no pretence.-
Therefore the ground on which the House
Of Commons claim preroga.ise fails us.
There has been no greater error, in my
opinion iD the view which American law.
yers have taken OF the Constitution Of
their country, than in this Difference 10
the parliamentary law Of England. They
have followed blindly. the file Of English
.prccctients, without ;oos,aH 20 ;!ss reason
of them. They have been satisfied in
going TO the books TO End that such are
iLe powers uuder the parliamentary law
Of England. They do not look 10 the
origin Of the parliamentary law Of Eng
land. say there bas been no greater
error, than in going to parliamentary law
Tor the derivation Of our powers. We
might rs well seek our prerogatives in the
customs of the Turkish Divan.
Id, no, speak Of that parliamentary