Semi-weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1853-18??, 1856-05-21
sprrcH OF HON. ASA BIGGs.

SPEECH OF HON. ASA BlGGSs
OF NoRTH-cARoLINA,
Del;uered in the Senate Of tho United State on t@e
SOFA Aprik 1856, on the Naoal R..irsng Board.
% IcoSLuDED]
AGAIN. the Secretary, acting with that caution
vb;ch has ever characterized him in the discharge
Of ! high but delicate public duty, which TINS VAS
called for the opinion of the Attorney GeneIal 'no
legal adviser of the Department; ana the At'olney
General said. in relation to the prov'so OF the nsse
section Of the statute which directed that no Oh.
GERS upon said board shall examine into or report
upon the efficiency officers OF grade above them
as follows:
Ithink, therefore, that the effect OF the proviso
ia 10 REQUIRE the board to be subdvded IN the pro-
ccss Of it's action, and to make three distinct sub.
renorts which together shall constitute the general
report that is to say the entire body will SIT to-
pethcr. deliberate and determine, and by proper
meats authenticate their conclusion as to l'euten'
ants masters and passed midshpmen; after that,
the lieutenans will have to retire, ana the captains
and commanders will act in regard to all omcers OF
the rank of commando, when the commanders
must retire. and the captains will act as to ohcers
of that rank. All the examinations having thus
been made. and the proper judgments reached, IN
the manner contemplated by the law, the sum total
of the opinions will be certified 20 the Secretary IN
such form of authorization he in his regulations
shall see fit to prescribe.
But more than this Z; am authorized to say that
Tho Attorney General was consulted by the Presl-
dent and Secretary on the Interpretation to De gwen
to the law and the proper mode OF executing on
the snbec of the regulations for the governments
the board, to be prescribed by the Secretary s"u
more especially upon the point, "hetnel' accol;'s
to the tenor and true intent OF INC &c '.H 'A"
49,, ,rss ~ he conducted as a court, with arraign.
mont If officers examination of witnesses, ana q
renort of the reasons of their finding in each case
and he advised that such not, IN hsopan'o" sne
reouirement or contemplation Of the statute. But
the Senator from Kentucky [Mr. CRIrrESDENl cen,
sures the course of the Secretary IN strong ters'
read an extract from his speech:
ave now understand the case. According 10
NV view of it. Congress provided for board. IL
prescribed no rules of proceeding; directed no re-
cord to be kept: it directed no summons to party
who was to be affected by their judgment out 1t
did not saw that there should be none OF these
1t is silent in regard to them II makes No resu,a
ton but it saws that the Secretary OF the Navy may
prescribe regulations Suppose the Secretary OF the
Navy haa refused to prescribe regulations on wnom
from the yery necessity of the case, would deVolVc
the power of making regulations Tor the cohouct u
the boards On the board ITSELF
Is not this the plan, common-sense view, tue ,d'a
result Of the transaction? The Secretary OF the
NAVY was to make regulations. What sort OF regu-
latons? Congress trusted to his discretion to make
regulations He said in substance to the board, IL
is not necessary to sit publicly; it is not necessary
to keep record; it is not necessary TO examlhe
Witnesses Were these proper regulations! inat
is the question Although these men were not en-
titled to trial it must be admitted that the pro-
ceedng was in the nature of judicial proceeding
upon which the character, the feelings and the
hopes of the whole official corps of the Navy OF the
United States depended. In the hands OF these
Judges pro tempore-or of these arbiters IT you WILL
depended the place of every man. high or low, IN
the NAVY of the United States Was it not Nigh
ty tribunal, with vast and almost Immeasuraoie
powers? If its members were exposed to pubic
scrutiny or public responsibility in the exercise oil
such vast power could it be anticipated that they
would proceed without record?
In the absence of any regulation by Congress for
their proceedings could it have been supposed that
the Secretary of the Navy would recommend dark
ness? What might the Secretary have proposed it
he pleased? Understanding to our notions OF
Justice according to our notions of every such pro-
ceedng whether strictly judicial and to be exercised
in the forms in which courts justice exercise their
jurisdiction or not-ought to have been prescribed!
1t must have been presumed by Congress that some
form of proceedings analogous to those OF courts
containing some analogous assurances OF justice,
would be prescribed to govern the conduct OF such
a mighty and august tribunal as this was. None
such, however, was made but the contrary SEEM
ed to be prescribed by the Secretary OF the Navy.
Herein, it seems to me, that officer misunder-
stood the proper spirit Of the country, and the
proper spirit of our institutions. Though the
men who were to be passed upon by the board were
entitled to trial. they were entitled to JUSTICE
What is the way to justice? Though before the
board there no jury, and no Indictment, aid no
formal accusation, there was a way to justice And
what was that? 1t was the way which should have
been prescribed by the regulations which Congress
conferred on the Secretary of the Navy the power
to make 1t was left to his discretion, to his sense
of justice to his of conformity with the insti-
tutions of the country, to prescribe regulations
How contrary to the intention of Congress must we
suppose that the regulations actually made were!
Sir, gentlemen should not make personal matter
of having voted for against this law. Here is
the law. 1t does not prescribe rules but does not
forbid rules 1t directs and it contemplates that
rules and regulations shall be prescribed for the gov
eminent of the proceedings of the board. What
regulations so appropriate as those which should in
struct them whether summons should issue to the
party or not pom what evidence they should pro-
ed?-whether they should proceed on their own
statements, one to another whether they should
proceed the repetitions Of the gossps which they
might have heard in the Navy from year to year?-
Was it not appropriate to prescribe in point OF time,
how far back their jurisdiction should extend? Was
it not important to tell them whether they were to
take note of mans wholelifeime-to note and con
every nice offence which he may have committed?
These things were appropriate subjects for the reg
ulations which Congress contemplated; but none
such were made. Does not this vitiate the admin
istration of the law?
Besides, the inquiry of the board was not intend
ed to be left boundless and arbitrary. A despotism
of that sort was not intended to be created in the
heart of free country. You gave them power, and
you expected that power to be exercised with due
regard to the IMMERSED opinion and feeling of the
people, and in conformity with the institutions of
the country. Is not that the fair presumption How
was the jurisdiction exercised? Without the forms,
without any of the ceremonies which signalizc and
solemnize public justice-without one of those
forms IN INV man IN
tigation. Was this right?-I askthe American Senate
if it was right? appeal to them, on no nice ques-
ton as to the power Of removal-up6n no disputed
doctrine of the presidential power. Here is broad
question Of justice presented for decision Congress
lett it to the Secretary Of the Navy to make regula
xioHlaf os fho IL L.