Weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1858-1865, 1861-12-18
REMARKS OF w. F. LEAK, ESQ.,,

OF RICHMOND COUNTY,
Upon ''an ordinaneeto define andpunish Sedition,"
DC, introduced By Judge Biggs.
Nix. PRESIDENT: L have listened, sir, with patient
attention to the reasons ASST ned by the honorable
delegate from Martin county, in favor of the ordi-
nance he has had the honor to introduce; and
must be permitted to say, and l say it with re-
spectful Difference to his usual good Judgment that
he has entirely failed to satisfy my mind of the pro-
p'ety of IT'S adoption; but, on the contrary, do
honestly believe that the measure Ito the extent to
which he proposes to carry t) is totally uncalled
for-impolitc, well as violatve Of the fundamen-
tai principles of civil liberty. will go further Sir,
anc say, pass this ordinance requiring that "every
free male person in the State above sixteen years of
age, should be required to take an oath of allegiance
to the State" we'll an oath Ito support main
tain and defend the independent government of the
Confederate States and you thrust in our midst an
rior ay be, its taste will have tendency to arouse
political differences hitherto unfortunately existing
in our midst, and to awaken feeling over which the
curtain Of forgetfulness is now measurably lowered.
say, in addition, sir, pass this ordinance requiring
test OATH and you indirectly reflect upon the 10y
atty of our people you proclaim to the world (in-
coins government incudsd) that there is necessity
of some stronger ligament to bind our people, and
stimulate their patriotism, than love for constitu-
tional liberty.
have said that the ordinance in its present shape
was uncalled for, impol,tic as we'll as violative of
the principles of civil liberty, and If sustain
either OF these propositions, trust it will become
apparent to every delegate present. that the ord
nance in its present shape should not pass without
essential notifications What, then, is civil liberty
DO not understand me as maintaining that civil
government should have no restraints and that q
people who have surrendered the freest private
rights therefore in possession of the greatest
amount of civil liberty. By no means, but on the
contrary, hold that nation or people may be said
to be in the greatest possession of civil berty-not
those who have surrendered the reest private rights
but those who have surrendered all that have been
found to be indspensably necessary for the main-
tenance of the good order, peace and security OF
society.
If our actions were less restrained by civil au.
thority our rights would be less secure. This has
been abundantly proven by reference to the gov.
ernments of France and Great Britain. In the for.
mer, there has been the freest surrender of indi.
vidual rights, and yet in the latter, the people in
the possession of the greatest amount of civil enjoy
ment And why Simply because they have ia
ken more correct as well as more comprehensive
view of the surrender necessary for individual Sc
curity. Civil government then, in its best sense
is the exercise Of such delegated powers as are de
nanled for the public veal, and civil authority
consists, and rightly consists in having no other
straints imposed than such as indispensably nee
| essary to that common veal. You may have civil
government without civil liberty, and you sooulO
have if you were to pass this ordnance-that is
you would still have political organization Of thu
people into body polite with divisions and CLASH
fications Of powers, and your people might ant
! doubtless would survive this entrenchment upor
their rights, but for them then to enjoy civil libert,
in its highest sense l must positively deny.
H., l,lo Co.
duced it frankly admitted that it was indeed ertra
ordinary egislatiolkand justified alone by the ex
traordinary condition. Of the country; but he faile
entirely to show hou that condition would be i'm
proved by the passag& Of this measure That W
arc in state Of war is undoubtedly true; that i