Daily Ohio statesman. [volume] (Columbus, Ohio) 1855-1870, 1865-02-14
.c..l1 SPEECH Of ~
HON SAMUEL S. cox,
In the House Of Representatives,
bna .oY9l 10 january 30, 1865, aor .5 .,T
On the Proposition to allow the Heads Of Execu-
.uooq. tive Departments seats on the floor Of =
G,dt bq. the House of Representatives 10 .,.l
concluded from yestcrday,l
90 1no OF OHIO,oa y

ment a few. exceptional cases; nOaleqo paucis
ofeaddr mdculis. From the very beginning
Of the English Government until now, laws
were passed TO regulate elections and pre-
THent theakingly influence upon the Com
mons. In the time of the Lancaster kings
psich statutes are, common. ''lWhat else,''
asks Bolingbroke, Craftsman, No. 44O) Mdo
all these resolutionsy declarations, and ac,s
mean from the timeoof Richard III to these
days, against the influence of the Crown on
the elections or on the members of Parlia-
ment ?" He answers it by saying that a
prince may govern according to bis arbi-
trary will, or that of his more arbitrary
minister, as absolutely and much more Sc
-curely aoith than without the concurrence of
q Parliament. He can do this in two ways:
first, by the. strain of his prerogative, or by
the corruption of the Commons; and the
instrument for both means as shown by
English history has been an obse-
.qulous, audacious, or, corrupt ~IHSnistry
sitting ind Parliament. In the ear
4lieri eras of English Parliament the
stretch OF the prerogative was the means
used to oyerawe Parlaments,, Not alone
by the threat upon members, but by acts OF
Imprisonment and decapitation; not alone
by the threat but by the act of dishonor
and sequestratiOn, were the annals Of Par
lament sullied. In later, times, after the
Revolution of 1885 the ciyil list had in
creased, and with it the means of corrup-
tion; and not alone by indirect bribes In
stocks, lotteries, pensions. places, and hon
0rs, but by wanton lavishness Of dOuceurs,
directly given to members, the, German
princes on the English throne, and their
ministers, controlled the Commons. This
corruption extended then, as it does now,
from the House to- the hustings, from the
lRarliament to the people, until the English
Parliament reeked, and in spite, of all re-
form bills and bribery acts yet reeks, with
the astounding rottenness Of its represent
atives andlelectors. The only reason why
in earlier times,a in the sixteenth century,
this same corruption did not exist, is given
by Hallam, (volume, three, page 49, that
there did not then exist the means of that
splendid corruption which has emulated the
-Crassi and Luculli of Rome. Whereas in
-l5H, member bought his seat for West
bury for "a, an election In York in the
eighteenth century cost f150,000i The cleo
Hons were controlled by the officers of the
Government. 1t became necessary, to save
the Constitution, to reform thesesabuses,
and the English statute-book groans with
laws against placemen sitting in Parlia-
ment, against revenue officers having the
right of suffrage, the disfranchisement of
boroughs, and penalty on members for
bribery.
The Revolution ofl6ss prevented the de-
struction of the. English system by the use
of the sprerogatiye. 1t declared against
making kingsindependent of Parliaments
by prerogative,- but 1t substituted therefor
a system which made Parliaments, depend
ent on kings by corruption Which was
the easiest mode to destroy, 1t is not for us
to ask at a time when the executive influ-
ence not only has been exceeding its con-
stitutional limit in this country, but when
the means Of corruption are as a thousand
to one in this country compared with Eng
land. .Indeed, in she time of Walpole 1t,
was contended that the Parliament should
corrnptly depend on the Crown as the ex-
pedient to supplythe want of power denied
tethe Crown by the Revolution. Even so
good a moralist as Paley justified the use of
patronage to influence Parliament. T1'-I 4 gT|
In. glancipg at this, history l will arrange
a few salient illustrations under these
heads: first, the attempts by executive in
timidationaand power to Overawe the Com
mons; second, by corruption of the people
and of the Gommonsto create adependency
on. their part upon the Crown. ~, =, t,..,,
First most Of the valuable privileges en-
ioyed by the House Of Commons is due, not
to the presence OF the ministry, nor to the
monarch tlical part Of the constitution, but to
people In spite Of all tile threats and penal
ties Of the Crown EAs'earlyas Edward III
1t was customary to imprisop members for
freedems sOfi speech; but this, like other
grievances, was rredressed In time, not be-
cause the ministry--were present to
aid, but because 1.-THE Commons protested,
and accompanied their protests with inti-
nations that if their protests were not
needed, suppllesto theking would bewant-
ing.
The first English council was the Wite-
nagem0te. II lost its place In the Govern
meft by the ambition of the monarch, who
designed to make all his vassals and none
his equals, in the powers of the State. AT
ter the king began to need military SER
vice and taxation he, called his Parliament,
but used land sdispsed them at pleasure.
They Were slayishly submissive. When
the Tudors ascendedfto the throne the con-
test began which has ended In this reign of
QpeenyHN Nictoriasuin the subordinati0n of
nearly all executive powerst0 the ministry,gl
orthe Parliament, which caus upturng the 4
ministry.si Henry VIII occasionally used |
his Parliaments,l lbutused them through the d
ners2palintegferenee of Cardinal Wolsey in
tbe House Of Commons lSmythe, vol i
pn3iSsAib t4is,sQni Edward W by the infu5d
epce ofa a bad minister seeking control, 0fd
Parliament, Issued 3 proclamation to inalln55
followed stterWard bby Mary and Ind f by James
/, AID which i'll this conntfyy! IL Il tie M Exscs
litfyeo Was more nearly Connected With
Congress, WOULD follow every two years,
ana cettainly every, four years, especially
intiHi6 Of civil wari bsdi1sssTT gsns7f oisI oyY
sThena followed Elizabeth' h's sfeivn.s Great
men Hoadorned tohern eouftfc but df0tini aherd
crbuched1a al Submissive sPar1iament.1 Thskl