Washington sentinel. [volume] (City of Washington [D.C.]) 1853-1856, 1856-06-19
FREEDOM OF DEBATE.

A story is going the rounds of Northern
papers to the effect, that Southern members
have combined to put down discussion on the
Brooks matter, and some Of them instance the
case of lame member from Indiana" who
is rehearsing to all who will listen, speech
he has prepared upon the subject; and that
Southerner, to whom he read it, told him he
must not deliver that speech, and straightway
editors 90 off in hifalutns about freedom Of
speech, and declare they shall be uttered.
They do not stop to inquire into the character
of the speech, whether it be violation of all
decency and decorum or not, but they object
to opposition to any speech.
How much better would it be for our North
put down their infamous speeches and fire.
brands, they will hold their representatives
accountable for proper behavior in Con-
gress, and true regard to the rules of debate !;
good grace speak of upholding the freedom of
debate. A parallel to their present conduct
would be this Northern man splits in the
face of a Southerner, and gets knocked down
for breach Of the peace, but find no fault
with him who broke the peace in giving the
provocation. Now the offence of Mr.. Sumner
was neither less clear, nor less disorderly, nor
meetings at the North have justified the Of
fence-an offence to which, individually, none
Of them would have submitted.
We subjoin extracts on this subject from
other papers:
SCOOP SESsE.-The Livingston Republican
discusses the Sumner outrage, with full appre-
citation of the fact that there is such thing as
rufhanism of the tongue, as well as rufianism
of the bludgeon, the bowie-knife, and revolver,
and with great good sense remarks:
"When men cease to remember, that as the
representatives of the people of one portion of
the Union, they possess no pre-eminence over
those of any other portion, and when they for
get the rights of others, and run riot in passion
and local prejudice, conceding nothing to
counter prejudices and interests, they fall from
that high and sacred position of representative
that should protect the man. They then vio-
late that representative character that can only
give dignity when not perverted or abused. 1t
matters little whether the attack be upon the
character and motives, or upon the person.
Either will arouse the worst passions of the
human heart; while the former is more COW
ardy and injurious, the latter is the most
beastly and disgusting. They are both without
apology or palliation. The one may be the
corrective Of the other by illustrating its dis.
gusting consequences"
"WoRDs OF SoBERNEss AND TRUTH-In the
Connecticut House Of Representatives, Mr.. c.
X. Ingersoll, Of New Haven, one Of the most
distinguished men of that State, and family
which has ever stood up nobly for the Consti-
tuition and the Rights Of the States, made
speech upon the Sumner affair, in which he
dashed the fanaticism of his section with a bold
and unsparing hand. In the same debate, Mr..
Chapman, Of Hartford, said "A physical as.
sault is against all law; bat there may be other
assaults besides those Of force, which are quite
as hard TO bear. There may be an assault by
the tongue, as well as by the hand the effects
Of a blow may pass with it. Bot wound
made by the tongue may rankle for years-it
may remain open for a life time"