Daily State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis, Ind.) 1861-1865, 1864-04-18
The Freedom OF he bate.

The Republican majority in the Federal House
of Representatives lost ground IN tue attempt to
expel a member for difference of political
opinion. That was the offense. The Journal,
Ia apologizing for Mr. CoLFAx, endeavors TO
change the issue 1t says Mr.. LONG advocated
the destruction OF the Government, therefore it
justifes the expulsion resolution of the Speaker.
Elsewhere We give extracts from the speeches of
Mr.. CONWAY OF Kansas, and Governor STANTON,
of Ohio, members of the lat Congress, who in
contingencies which have occurred. advocated
The recognition OF the Southern Csn.eGeracy.
The speeches of those gentlemen were certainly
as Objectionable, in Mr. CsLFAxs view OF the
case. as is that Of Mr. LsSG. yet no proposition
was made by the Republican members of the
House to either expel or censure them. Why
this distinction. unless we place it upon party
grounds? Mr.. Lone is a Democrat. hence he
has right TO differ in opinion from the MAORI
ty: but Messrs CONWAY and STANTON are Re-
pubicans ami for that reason they we're allowed
widest latitude of opinion aud expression by the
same radical majority who seek to tyrannze
over the minority. II the minority in Congress
are denied the right Of discussing measures Of
public policy. In the case of Mr.. Lone We
1--we arrived at the end of Liberty, and the vote
of censure by the majority is equivalent to a de-
NAL of free discussion
The New York Times, radical Republican
paper. condemns most decidedly and ably the
folly. it not the crime of the dominant party in
Congress in is attempt to stihe the freedom of
debate 1t says most forcibly:
We have protested against the attempt to expel
representative Long on the ground of expediency
We now wish to say few words in respect to the
right of the matter The Constitution takes care
TO secure the utmost freedom of debate in Con
gress by making special provision that . tor any
speech or debate in either House. members shall
not be questioned IN any other place
What could have been the object of this un
limited immunity. but the recognized necessity
that every representative should be IN position
to do competest Justice to his sentiments
and those of his constituents That is prlnci-
pie which lies at the very foundation OF every
representative Government. But whv is il not
much violation OF tins princpe.'for men in the
Ctuit0 10 deter representative from speaking
his sentiments. for men outside the CapitolT
lt l. the intimidation that Is the evil aud it don I
matter particle whence the intimidation pro
ceeGs For any power IN Congress or out OF
Congress 10 exercise it. j 20 violate one of the
most sacred principles of the Constitution
Mr. Lon- has denied the right OF coercion
Why should he be expelled for thatl No Con
gre-s ever sat in Washington IN which the same
denial has not been made. The denial has been
met thousand times by argument by ridicule,
aud by uenunciatiOn: but no man before ever
dreamed of meeting Il by resolution OF expul
sion. Mr. Long also affirmed that in hiS belief
il impossible 10 subdue the rebellion Ii he
honestly believes that he has not ONLY the right
but il Is his duty say il Il l. the DUTY o; every
honest legislator. wheu great public concerns are
al stake 70 declare bis honest convictions IL Is
none the les. but all the more his duty To 80
this If these convictions are opposed TO the domi
nant sentiment IL is the weakest side that has
the strongest reed OF argument: for it j. their
only power Mr. Longs only responsibility in
his arguments - 20 his constituents We have no
business 10 assume that in this speech he aid not
utter the sentiments Of his constituents Ii be
did, We are sorry for them. Their views OF the
injustice "nd The lnexpeiiency OF this sre
wide a. the pole> from But that gives i
IN New York ~ right to disfranchise them in
Ohio: and not a Whit better right has our repre-
sentative IN Congress 10 silence. or aid in senc
ing Their representative in Congress
The pretense that Mr. Long uttered trea.ona
be language Is preposleroas Ii i not treasons
ble 10 advocate. or question. or g.insay any con
strnetion Of The Constitution. Ii is moi treasoua
BILE to look the gigantic proportions Of the re
oeilion aud draw the conclusion that il cannot be
pat down. We're IL 20. there are not thirty men
IL that Congress who have not times in the
course OF this struggle been very strongly temp,