Semi-weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1853-18??, 1863-02-13

Mr. Fowle spoke in favor of the bill and in reply
to Mr. Person.
The discussion was further continued by Nessra.
Person, Fowle, and Mckay, the latteT concluding
by moving to lay on the table. The motion was re-
jected.
Mr.. Grissom said that he did not design at this
late hour OF the session to waste the valuable time
Of the House in considering this question, although
he regarded it of paramount Importance, involving
as 1t did the maintenance of the most sacred rights
of freemen. He presumed there was not member
whose judgment was not convinced and whose mind
was not decided. Although he was prepared to ex-
pect differences of opinion upon minor points OF de-
tail concerning the execution of this law, he was
surprised and mortified to hear gentlemen, accus-
toned to breathe the air, and walk the soil of free
dom advocating the needless suspension and oppos-
ing by inuendo, this great landmark of personal
rights and palladium of civil liberty, for which Eng
hShmen had died and Americans had lived. We
had been met with the dsingenous argument that
this bill had been prepared and pressed upon the
Legislature for the protection of one individual
alone, or for particular class of suspected persons
in dureSS in this State. This measure had Origna-
ted, and was passed after mature elaboration and
free discussion in the Senate with great unanimi-
ty. The measure like the principle, was for the
exclusive benefit OF no individual class of in
dividuals more than another but for freemen every
where. He Mr. g. was no mans advocate in this
matter. He was for trial and punishment accord
ing to the long established custom of civil law. If
the prisoners Salisbury or elsewhere are guilty
of treason or other sufficient crime-cOnrict them
punish them-hamg them. If innocent-acguit
them. All ask is to vindicate the majesty of the
civil law. If one innocent man 6leedS the whole
State 6teeds. The rights Of one are the rights of
aM
We are tauntingly asked by the gentleman from
Harnett, if we can be induced to vote for measure
commanding the Sheriff to execute law which
might bring his posse into conflict with Confeder-
ate officer. For one he would answer that if a
Confederate officer, any one else refused to obey
legal writ issued by the proper tribunal or other
wise attemP: to trampe upon civil liberties he
would meet him in conflict not only with the posse
OF one county, but OF every county from Camden to
Cherokee, and support that conflict with the strong
arm and stout heart of the aoh0Le State till the
offender whether Captain, Colonel, or General
was brought to justice.
Ills only objection to the bill was that the pen
atty was not sufficiently severe Mr.. g. continued:
An attempt to interfere with the great principles
OF hddeds corpus would rot be tolerated for n mo-
nent IN England. Sush an attempt had shaken tie
realm to Its foundation and caused it to tc;ter as if
upon the verge OF a volcano. He askcu if it was
necessary to the maintenance of all our rights to
sacrifice any one of them. For That purpose has
North Carolina in this great struCsle so freely con-
tributed her means and expended her treasure?
For what purpose has she seat eighty thousand of
her citizens to the field? For what purpose was it
that the best blood Ct her citizens has enriched and
their bones have beached every battlefield of this
revolution from Big Bethel to fredericksburg? De-
feat this BILL ignore its principles, disregard its
landmarks, and none answer
Two amendments proposed by Mr. Person were
voted down.
Mr.. Shepherd spoke in opposition to the bill
Mr.. Bumpass moved the indefinite postponement,
which motion was lost
\ motion was then made to adjourn, which was
voted down by the friends of the bill
The yeas and nays having been taken on all the
foregoing motions the bill was finally passed its
serond and third readings, when the House ad-
journed.