The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1856-07-17

cordngy avoid the pressure of these considerations
II has been urged that the right of the respective Houses
10 exclude roEi their presence and their absolute control
within their own walls convey with them the right
punish coniempts committed in their presence"
The court then say that this concession of
the power icitltin their icalLs relinqushes the
great grounds of the argument, to wit: the
want OF an express grant, and the unrestricted
and underlined nature of the power here set up.
For why should the House be at liberty to ex
ercise an ungranted and unlimited, and unde-
fined power, within their walls, any more than
without them?"
The court finally say, upon the question
raised of restricting the jurisdiction Of the
House for the punishment of contempts to the
District of Columbia, that there is no reason
for such restriction and the court add:
ave bounds thai be prescribed its range
but those Of the United States And why should il be
restricted 20 other boundaries, Such are the limits of
legsating powers OF thai body: and the Inhabitants OF
louisiana or Maine may as probably charge them with
bribery or corruption or attempt by letter TO induce the
commission of either the OF any other
non OF the Union"
conclude, sir, that there can be no question
that this House has the power to punish and
expel its members for breach of its privileges,
for contempt of its authority, and for such high
crimes and misdemeanors are inconsistent
with their public trust and duties as members,
whether committed in the presence of the House,
and during its actual session, or not. The opin-
ions of jurists, and the decision of our highest
court, which have cited, most clearly estab-
lish this.
Iconsider that, beyond question, the act COM
mitted by the member from South Carolina
Mr.. Brooks is contempt of this House, a
violation Of his duty as a member thereof, and
hInh md III o,r Oh
| of representation.
We have seen, sir, that Senator, for an act
inconsistent with his duty IS Senator, but not
committed against any member Of that body
nor during its session, nor in its presence was
expelled that Duane, not a member, was i'm
prisoned for printing ibel-an offence not
committed in the Senate, nor to the disturbance
of its proceedings, and for which the offender
was liable to indictment and punishment in the
courts and that Randall, not a member, was
imprisoned by this House for a secret attem pt
| to bride one Of its members. In administering
justice here, L will recognise no privileged
class" If Blount could be lawfully expelled,
and Duane and Randall lawfully imprisoned,
insist that, for like offence the member from
South Carolina may, and should, be dealt with
in like manner. History, sir, the great avenger
of wrong, has recorded this crime upon the
people life, and stands ready to record its dread
condemnation against this House, if it refuse to
ipictthe punishment which hatcrme deserves
Consider the subject of this offence, the alleged
provocation, the mothed, the place, the avowed
purpose, the approval, and the fit condemn nation
The brilliant and distinguished Senator from
Massachusetts is thesube ct OF this assault-that
Senator who, Notwithstanding the attempt of the
gentleman from North Carolina Mr.. CLINGMANl
to defame him, holds now, and will hold, a large
place in the affection and admiration of his
countrymen. That Senator, sir, denounced the
audaciousE crime which is being committed in
Kansas. In his place as Senator, he made a
powerful and convincing argument against the
unparalleled conspiracy which is subecting
that young empire of the West to a cruel and
relentless tyranny tyranny which inflicts
death on citizens guilty of no offence against
the laws; which sacks their towns and plumbers
and burns their kabitatioEs; which legalizes,
throughout that vast extent of territory, chattel
slavery, that crime of crimes-that sum of all
yillanies, which makes merchandise of immor-
tally, and, like the curse of Kehama, smites
the earth with barrenness-that crime which
blasts the human intellect, and blights the hui
man heart, and maddens the human brain, and
brushes the human soul-that crime which puts
out the light and bushes the sweet voices of
home-shatters its altar and scatters darkness
and Oscillation over its hearthstone-that crime
which dooms men to live without knowledge, to
toll without reward, to die without hope-that
crime which sends little children to the shambles,
and makes the mother forget her love for her
child in the wild Joy she feels that, through un-
timely death inflicted by her own hand, she has
saved her offspring from this damning curse,
and sent its infant spirit, free from this horrid
faint, back to the God who gave it.
Against this internal and atrocious tyranny,
upheld and being accomplished through stu
pendous conspiracy, the Senator from MasoA-
olIuov,t,, faithful TO MS own convictions faith
ful TO the holy cause Of Liberty, faithful to his
country and his God, entered his protest, and
uttered his manly and powerful denunciation.
What was there in this to offend Was it be-
cause he presented that terrible impeachment
by the great Roman orator of the tyrant Verres
as fit denunciation of those new tyrants in
Kansas, who but re-enact the brutal cruelties of
Verres?
1t is not claimed that the Senator uttered
any word which he did not believe to be true ::
but i. is said that in his exposition Of this wick
edness, he denounced the act, the men, and
the States, that aid and abet it, with an intem-
perate violence of language. He spoke with
zeal, with knowledge, and power. This, sir, is
the head and front of his offending. Is moth
ing to be pardoned to the spirit of Liberty
Is the great right of the People-freedom of
debate in the Senate and House-to be restrict
ed in its exercise to the notions of every man
who chooses TO constitute himself the Judge of
what may and may not rightfully be said? The
fact, sir, that the Senate permitted the words to
be used in its body, without objection, is con-
elusive evidence that it was the right of the
Massachusetts Senator so to speak; nay, more
the Senate is the only and final arbiter of what
ha - oh - Al
sir, is the necessary sequence from the consti
tutional provision that each House may make
rules for its own government, and no member
of either House shall, for any speech or debate
be questioned in any other place. For his
speech, under the Constitution, therefore, no
earthly power had the legal right to question
the Senator but the Senate of the United States
l dismiss this inquiry az TO the provocaton
with this additional word-that no man can
rightfully find provocation for, and justification
or excuse of, an assault upon the peoples rep
resentatives, because of any speech or debate
made BY any member in either House. The
doing of a lawful act, the exercise of lawful
right, or the discharge of lawful duty, can
never furnish apology or excuse for the COM
mission of crime.
Now, consider the place and method and
avowed purpose of this assault. The perpe.
',o'oi vi luis act says MS OBJECT was TO punish
the Senator for words spoken in debate in the
Senate-and thus confesses his crime against
the people. Every personal consideration, sir,
sinks before the magnitude of this offence. A
Senator of the United States, in the Senate
Chamber, in the felt presence of the people, Is
struck down, and well nigh murdered, for words
spoken in debate-and this, too, by q member
of this House, who, like all of u.s. had sworn
that he would support that Constitution which
declares that the person of the Senator and
citizen alike shall be inviolate, and that the
Representatives of the People shall not, for
any speech or debate in either House. be cues.