Register of Debates in Congress, Comprising the Leading Debates and Incidents of the Second Session of the Eighteenth Congress Page: 479

                                
479
GALES & SEATON'S REGISTER
480
H. of R.]
The Speaker's Appeal to the House.
[Feb. 4, 1825.
lief is, that such an investigation will establish, beyond
all cavil, the innocence of the party accused. This I
doubt not, is anticipated by nearly every individual of
this House; and does the gentleman think it of no im-
portance to refute calumny, to sustain the innocent, to
disabuse the public, and to eradicate the poison of suspi-
cion from the very core ? This, sir, is my purpose, and,
I trust, the purpose of those who support the resolution
for inquiry; a purpose which I am sorry to observe there
is so great a reluctance, on the part of its opponents, to
adopt the only reasonable mode of attaining.
Mr. ARCHER then moved to postpone the furthercon-
sideration of the subject until Thursday next, when, if
there was any such thing as corruption in the case, it
may have been consummated, and the House would then
be authorized to make an inquiry, which, in his opinion,
it was not authorized to make at the present time.
On this question, Mr. SANDFOKD, of Tenn. demand-
ed the yeas and nays, which were ordered.
Mr. CADY, of New York, moved that the further con-
sideration of the subject be indefinitely postponed.
The chair decided this motion not to be in order.
The question was then taken on postponing to Thurs-
day, by yeas and nays, and decided in the negative—
yeas 62, nays 145.
The question then recurred on referring the commu-
nication of the Speaker to a committee,
Mr. SANDFORO, of Tennessee, said that, before that
question was taken, he wished to offer a few remarks.
He called upon the House to reflect for a moment—the
question was important—the fact charged approached
nearer to an overt act than any thing which he had yet
seen brought before a legislative body. Suppose the
committee should go into the investigation, and much ev-
idence should be adduced, though not sufficient to con-
vict, (he hoped the honorable Speaker would be acquit-
ted at any rate,) what a dilemma would the House be in!
There was another point; if the report of the committee
should be unfavorable to the gentleman from Pennsylva-
nia, and a suit at law should hereafter be instituted
against him on the same account, that report might
liave great weight to his prejudice.
Mr. TATTNALL demanded that, on the question of
commitment, the yeas and nays should be recorded.—
They were ordered accordingly.
Mr. INGHAM, of l'eimsylvania, then observed, that
lie hoped, although the hour was late, that, the House
would indulge him in a brief expression of his views on
the subject before them. When that subject was first
presented, it struck his mind that the investigation ought
to be ordered, and his first impression was, that he
should vote for the appointment of a committee, and
against all attempts to resist the inquiry. But, during the
course of the debate to-day, he had reflected more ma-
turely, as lie had endeavored also to do during the past
night, and he now felt satisfied that this question involv-
ed much higher considerations than an ordinary ques-
tion of inquiry. What was the question now before the
House ? Was it an issue joined between two members,
the consequence of which must necessarily be the pro-
stration of one of them > That, he apprehended was not
the case. The question had been "represented, on ail
sides, as a question of privilege. The privilege of the
Speaker had been invaded, and the House was called
upon to punish the offender. He thought that, as the
inflicting of such punishment was an exercise of the
highest privilege possessed by the House, it ought
ever to be done with the utmost caution and care, lie
had had the honor to be present, some years ago, when
the nature of this prerogative underwent a full and
solemn discussion, and he well remembered, that it was
then determined, that the power of the House to pun-
ish was a power which had no limits; that it was a con-
structive power, springing out of the necessary organi-
zation of the House, and essential to its self-preserva-
tion. It extended even to death, if that were necessa-
ry, and, in the exercise of such a prerogative, was that
House about to act as on an ordinary case of inquiry ?
It was a question of the very highest importance. On
the occasion to which he had alluded, although there
was no doubt respecting the breach of privilege, yet the
question, with regard to its punishment, was discussed
for a week, and at length decided in the affirmative by
a small majority. Now, supposing the latter question
has been ten thousand times as bad as it had been re-
presented to be, it was no matter : the question was,
Shall a mere newspaper article call into solemn exer-
cise the highest power which belongs to this House ?
Why must this be done ? It is answered, because the
letter has been traced to a member of this House ; but
may you not, on this principle, follow up all the printers
throughout the U. States ? Is there any earthly difference
between a newspaper article written by a member of
this House, and such an article written by. any other
person ? Did a gentleman, by becoming a member of
this House, deprive himself of the ordinary privileges
which he would have had, had he remained out of the
House ? Might he not write to his constituents the same
as other gentlemen wrote to their friends ? Surely he
might. And if this House is obliged to investigate and.
punish a letter which comes from a member, it is bound
to do the same if the letter come from any other mem-
ber of the community. The power to punish for con-
tempt was the most tyrannical in its nature, of any of
the powers incident to Government. It is given by the
constitution to the Judiciary as well as to the Legisla-
ture ; yet, in many of the States, the Legislature has
circumscribed the power of the courts, in punishing, to
their own walls; and, in the discussion to which he be-
fore alluded, and which took place in this House, the
same rule was contended to apply to the Legislature.—
It was ably and very strenuously argued, that even this
House had no authority to punish a contempt beyond
the limits of its own Hall. Shall we, asked Mr. I. con-
stitute ourselves into an inquisitorial tribunal to try and
punish a breach of privilege merely about a letter to a
printer ? Sir, this House is now about to establish a prin-
ciple more obnoxious to freedom than any I have heard
broached in the worst of times.
How is this subject brought before us ? Shortly after
the letter to the printer, in Philadelphia, a card appear-
ed in the newspapers in this city which contained a me-
nace against the author of that letter, whoever he might
be. This made the matter a personal contest; and, if it
was calculated to have any influence on the member,
that influence was to intimidate him. The practical ef-
fect of which would have been—to stifle public and
free discussion of the conduct of a public man, because,
in all such discussions, it is extremely difficult to sepa-
rate truth from falsehood. It is said, the letter has been
avowed. Sir, it has been said, with equal truth, that
the avowal has been " extorted and thus the name
of the author has come into the possession of this House.
An appeal is made from the public and ordinary tribu-
nal to this House. Is it competent for us to sustain the
jurisdiction ? The laws oi' the press do not prevent an
avowal of the name oi'the aulborofa publication. Shall
this House virtually prevent it! Prevent it by punishing
it ? Shall we erect it into an inquisitorial tribunal—into
a summary court to punish for breach of privilege Aye,
sir, for breach of privilege !
What are the respective conditions of the two indivi-
duals concerned ? The one occupies a lofty station—he
is placed high before the view of the country—he pos-
sesses the just confidence of the members of this House
—the esprit tin cu?-p.; concentrates itself upon his person
—he exercises high powers of patronage in this House;
((iod forbid that I should say he exercises them in an
improper manner.) All these tilings create a great dif-
ference between him and the member who has accused