New-York daily tribune., 1856-07-19

BY the recent case of E1-H0n. P. 8. Brooks upon
which Coperess--if it has any respect for itself,
for the public sentiment of the country never on
any occasion moro loudly and emphatically ex-
pressed, for the laws, or for the Constitution
cannot omit to act forthwith and before any ad-
journmeut takes place.
Not content with having already tramped under
foot the Constitution of the Union and the pfivi
leges of Congress- the insolent Brooks, several
times in the course of the debate on bis case, has
bad-in spite of the stringent laws Of the United
States against duelng and in spite of the pro-
vision of the Constitution which forbids Members
being elsewhere called to account fox anything
uttered in debate--tbe audaclty to send some
brother bully to inquire Of Members whom he
wished TO OveraWe, or at whose utterancas he bod
taken ofense, whether they were ready to fight,
and not only this but in the lat speech that he
made in the H0uFe, with the view of rejecting
upon one Of these members, Brooks had the addl-
tional audacty to read letter from one OF those
brother bullius, pretending to give an account of
one Of these interviews. Now apart from the
breach of privilege, which in a House less diluted
by doughfac.s would subject bota BROOKS ano MS
accomplcea in those proceedings to pretty stringent
and summary punishment, it is by law high INSIDE
mean0r TO be- in any way concerned WITHIN the DIS
trict OF Columbia in sending challenge or setting
duel on foot To all intents and purposes, in
common-aense view of the matter, such messages
as we have above referred to are precisely chal-
enges, neither more nor less. Still, though mes-
saees of this SOFT come clearly within the mischie
which it is the design aud intention of The law to
suppress, it is out too certain that tbs Judge who
occupies at present. the seat of Criminal Justice
Justice did we say let Us mind that-wbos duty
it is to administer the criminal laws of the District
would hold that the letter of the law as it now
stands does not cover such messages.
Under these circumstances, we call upon Gon-
eress tn discountenance the attempts now making
to introduce the duel as part of the machinery
of legislation, by new act framed To meet this
very case--an act TO make all indirect invitations
10 duel whether to be fought in or ont of the
District, equally criminal with formal challenge.
Such law would not be exposed to the charge
OF sectionalism, since there Is not, we believe,
single Northern State-and esey it 10 their credit
which has not exerted its legislative authority to
the utmost to discountenance and pat down this
barhsrous and unchristian practice But, IN addition
10 an act CT this sort, there is still more lmpera
lively Needed an act to punish assaults upon Mem
bers OF Congress while employed in the discharge
of their legislative duties. This is subject 10
which we1eierred some time ago, and TO which we
sgain call special attention. The proceedings il
the case of the ruffians who assaulted Mr. Sumner
show how utterly iDetficacious tie existing aws
are. Judge Crawford lets eff the murderOus assail
ant with trfng fine, and there are 30 many
ruhians or towards In Congress that it
it is not possible to get vote of
two thirds to expel him. Even exerted to
the utmost, the power vested directly IN
Congyess to punish breakers Of privilege is en-
tirely inadequate to such cases as have re-
Gently occurred. TDat power is limited TO i'm
prsOnment pending the session, with the addition,
when the offender is a member, of expulsion;
whereas imprisonment In the penitentl9ry for two
Years, at the least onght TO be the punishment of
any attempt to overawe members OF Congress by
the employment of personal violence.
We trust the Hoase viii not adjourn without act
ing on these important subjects. Should the Senate
refuse to concur, it will help to enlghtan the
people as to what sort Of Senate We now have.