Staunton spectator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1849-1896, 1856-07-30
Remarks of Mr.. Lctcher.

minlstration to give Governor 10 Ital
Remarks Of Mr.. Lctcher.
The House of Representatives having under consi
deration July l2, 1856 the report Of the Committee
on the assault of Mr.. Brooks on Senator SUMNER Mr.
Letcher, Of Virgins, said:
Mr.. Speaker, do not propose to submit many
remarks. at this late hour. The fifteen-minute
rnle, which has been adopted by the House to.
day, wonld prevent me from discussing tho
question at length even if desired to do so.
have risen, therefore, to refer to but one or two
points which have been made in the progress o
this discussion, and which, in my judgement
demand some notice.
And, first as to the remark made by the gen.
tleman from Ohio, Mr.. letter. who has just
taken his seat. That gentleman believes thai
the House possesses the power which it has ex
ercised, in originating this prosecution; and ht
is for using the power OF punishment. in the
present case, to the extent recommended in the
resolution reported by the majority of the com
inittee. He entertains no doubt as to the pro.
priety of the expulsion of one of the parties i'm
plicated and entertans as little doubt Of the pro
prety of censuring the other two. Now, sir
let us look into the power of this House tc
punish, as claimed by the majority, and see to
what extent they propose to carry it.
Suppose you expel my friend from South Car.
olina, and he returns to his constituents-an.
nounces himself candidate for re-election-ii
reelected, as he will be, by an unanimous vote,
and comes back to this House and presents his
certificate of election in due form, what will you
do with him then2 Will you undertake to re-
fuse him admission to his seat2 Will you ori.
ginate another investigation-try him a second
time for the same offense-and. by way Of fur.
ther punishment deny him the right of member
ship2 Such is the extent to which the doctrine
proclaimed by the majority goes but when the
case presents itself, can hardly imagine that
they will attempt to carry it into practice.
Or take another case, which may very readi.
" occur in these excited times. This Congress
expires by law on the 4th OF March next. Sup
pose that, on the last night of the session, a
member of this House, for good and sufficient
reason in his own judgement, goes into the Sem
ate Chamber, or the Rotunda,or on the Ayenue,
and makes an assault upon Senator. The ses-
sion expires on that night, and before you can
originate proceedings, and make your investiga'
tion, and pronounce your judgement, the hour
for adjournment arrives, and our representative
existence is closed. The member who commit
ted the assault returns to his constituents, is re-
elected by them, and comes back to take his seat
in the next Congress- What will you do with
him, under these circumstances! Will the new
Congress, so soon as it is organized, take up the
case, organize a committee, empower them to
send for persons and papers, and proceed to in
vestigate the assault Even if the Senate should
make formal complaint, that the privileges OF
q member of their body had been violated, do
you believe Gin the case supposed) that major.
ity of the House would attempt to act upon it J
The doctrine which has been proclaimed by the
majority, in the long discussion to which we
have listened, would require action on the part
of the House, and such action, in their opinion,
would be justified by the Constitution. Now,
sir, l submit it to the practical common sense OF
every member of this House to say, whether he
believes any such idea ever entered the heads OF
the trainers of the Constitution-that they ever
dreamed of action by the House in such case!
But, say gentlemen if my doctrine be true
members will be constantly liable to assault, and
there will he no remedy IT s not so, sir. II
is the duty of every member in debate to con.
fine himself within the limits of parliamentary
propriety and decorum, and III his intercourse
with his fellow members to conduct himself with
gentlemanly courtesy. Ifhe will observe thi.
rule, he will be in no danger of assault. If, how
ever, in the discharge of his duty, he is called
upon to expose abuses, denounce frauds, hold uI
guilty parties to the eyes of the world, and he
is assaulted the remedy is with the courts Which
have been instituted for the trial of offenses o.
this character, and which ascertain the punish.
ment due to the offense. In my view, this is m
adequate remedy, atfording the same protection
exactly to a member of Congress which is afford.
ed to every private citizen. The courts must be
appealed to to redress the wrongs OF the private
citizen, and is there any reason why Senator
or member of this House should stand upon high
err ground than that occupied BY his constituents
The majority here seem disposed to carry the
doctrine OF privilege far beyond these reasonable
limits, and to make it apply to cases that were
never conceived of BY those who framed the
clause of the Constitution on which they rely.
Now, let me say one word in reply to the
gentleman from Pennsylvania who was speaking
when | entered the Hall, Mr.. Purviance.] That
gentleman says that he has the right to utter
whatever he pleases in this body, and that no
one has the right to call him to account for any.
thing he may utter. He referred to some re
marks made by the Senator from Georgia Mr.
Toombsl in reply to Mr.. Seward, of New York,
to the effect that statement made by the latter
was not true, and that Mr.. Seward did not be-
lieye it to be true when he uttered it. l know
nothing of the occurrence TO which the gentle
man refers; but will venture to say that the
distinguished Senator from Georgia is ready and
willing at all times to answer for any language
he NAV feel called upon to employ in debate
Would the gentleman from Pennsylvania with
his view of it) rest justification for the use OF
offensive language here upon the incident which
he has quoted9 Is he unable to perceive diff
ference between liberty ofspeech and licentious-
ness of speech2 Attendant circumstances may
Justify the use of harsh language by one gentle
man, when the absence of such circumstances
would not Justify its use by another. How 1t
NAV have been in the case cited know not.
Does the gentleman recognize the right of
one member on the floor wantonly to insult an
other. bv the use of offensive languages Would
he have us believe that he repudiated all person.
nj responsibility for insults given BY him, and
that he would submit to insult from others, uIl-
til such time as the law would take the matter
in hand, and provide punishment for the Of
fense2 No. sir! do not believe the gentleman
would act upon any such rule, nor do | believe
that his constituents would sustain him in the
recognition of such rule. have always be.
lieyed. and believe now, that they would JUS
tifv him in resenting any Insult that might he
offered to him, and would justify him in punish
ing the offender believe that the constituent.
cy of every other member on this floor would
recognize this rule and would esteem more high
" the man who would practice upon it. | hold
that every member in this House is bound to
treat Others as gentlemen, and that, if one mem-
ber insults another willfully and deliberately, he
runs the risk of having his head cracked, and
deserves to have it cracked. That is the doc
trine where live, and imagine it is the doc
trine in the northern section of the Union. .
Why, sir, suppose an individual were to tell
tba gentleman from Ohio, the chairman of this
committee, [Mr. Campbell,] on court green,
that he lied, or offer him any other insult, do
Won suppose that he is possessed OF that Chris
tion virtue that would induce him to pass it by
49,. ~ - ,..4;aa or that his constituents