H. or R.]

would not avail the accused.

On the

that this outrage on the gentleman from Ohio was com- adopt and naturalize these doctrines of the English courts, mitted, not for the speech made by him in this House, but and extend their application to such cases as the one now for the publication of that speech; and his refusal to before us, let us compare the difference in the forms of answer the interrogatory of the accused, whether that Government, and of the institutions of the two countries. publication was a correct copy of his speech. The de- The one is a monarchy, of which secrecy in counsel is a fence is not sustained by the evidence, and, if it were, it constituent quality; the other a republic, of which publicity is the life and soul. In England, in a prosecution for I will not waste the time of the House, by a minute an alleged libel, the truth of the charge cannot be given recapitulation of the testimony. The answer of the ac-in evidence; here, truth may be freely published, whecused does not directly deny that the act was committed ther it affects Government, magistracy, or individuals, if for the cause assigned in the charge, in his letter to the such publication be made from good motives, and for member from Ohio; he makes no inquiry or complaint justifiable ends. respecting the publication; his only object was to ascer- "The two Houses of Parliament," I quote Hallam's tain whether that publication was a correct report of the Constitutional History of England, vol. 3, p. 398, "are speech. For aught that appears in the testimony, the supposed to deliberate with closed doors. It is always accused did not know that the member from Ohio had competent for any one member to insist that strangers be any agency in the publication, until the fact was stated by excluded; not on any special ground, but by merely enhim on his examination. But if any doubt rested on this forcing the standing order for that purpose. It has been point, it would be completely removed by the testimony several times resolved that it is a high breach of privilege of the member from Tennessee. The answer of the ac- to publish any speeches or proceedings of the Commons; cused to the well-meant remonstrances of his real friend, though they have since directed their own votes and reproves the temper of his mind--proves conclusively solutions to be printed." It was resolved, nem. con., that it was the speech delivered in this House which rous- February 26, 1729, that "it is an indignity to, and a ed his indignation, and inflamed his thirst for vengeance; breach of the privilege of this House, for any person to and that it was a mere afterthought to ascribe the subse- give, in written or printed newspapers, any account or quent outrage to the publication of that speech. It was minutes of the debates or other proceedings of this here, in this Hall, he had suffered wrong, and here should House, or of any committee thereof; and that, upon disthe wrong be righted. The court of leaven itself should covery of the authors, &c., this House will proceed against not shield the wrong-doer. The ferocious contempt of all the offenders with the utmost severity." In 1738, the resanctions, human and divine, exhibited in that answer, solution was repeated in nearly the same words. however characteristic it might have been, in the mouth 30th of April, 1747, Cave, the editor of the Gentleman's of a robber chieftain, "with hand of blood and brow of Magazine, was brought to the bar for publishing the gloom," in the sixteenth century, and in a country then House's debates; he denied that he retained any person the most lawless and worst governed in Europe, surely in pay to make the speeches, and, after expressing his conwill not be endured in this enlightened age and civilized trition, was discharged, on payment of the fees. country. To my judgment, the evidence establishes fully Look at the contrast exhibited by the American Conand incontrovertibly, that the true and only cause of this gress. So far from this secrecy, this caution to keep the outrage is the one assigned in the charge, and that people in ignorance of our proceedings, every facility is the accused cannot and ought not to evade the conse- afforded, and great expense is incurred, to give publicity quences of this act, by ascribing it to another and simula- to them. Extra copies of important public documents ted motive. are printed, and scattered throughout the whole country, But, were the fact otherwise, I deny that the decisions for public information. Instead of conniving at reporters, of the English courts, in the cases of Lord Abingdon and as in England, admitting them as it were by stealth, and of Creavy, are to be considered as applicable to, or au-secreting them behind the pillars of the galleries, here thoritative in, this country. Nor would the defence now they are admitted of right; you assign them conspicuous set up be sustained even in the British House of Com- stations in the Hall, and, in fact, constitute them officers mons. By the law of that country, as expounded by its of the House. I know that those rules and orders of judges, a member of Parliament is not responsible for Parliament, though unrepealed, are obsolete; that the de any thing said by him in debate, except to the House of bates of both Houses are freely and fully published; and which he is a member; but if he publish his speech in the intelligent writer to whom I have referred attributes the newspapers, though for the purpose of correcting an the improvement, nay, even the preservation, of the Brierroneous report made without his privity or consent, this tish constitution to this circumstance. "Perhaps," is his act of publication renders him liable to a prosecution, if language, "the constitution could not have stood so long, the published speech contains matter reflecting on the or rather would have stood like a useless and untenanted character and conduct of an individual, and he cannot set mansion, if this unlawful means had not kept up a perpeup his privilege as a bar to such prosecution. A party tual intercourse, a reciprocity of influence, between the arraigned before the House of Commons for an assault Parliament and the people.' But a corrupt House of and battery on one of its members, urges this defence: Commons, imbued with the slavish doctrines of a former True, I assaulted and beat your member; but the act was age, anxious to muzzle the press, to shroud their prodone for the publication of the speech, not for the speech ceedings in secrecy, may arouse those sleeping lions, and itself. By the law of the land, a member publishing his will do so, whenever they believe the spirit of the people speech may be prosecuted as a libeller; ergo, a member is broken to submission. publishing his speech may be assaulted and beaten by any Are the representatives of the American people preone who fancies himself injured by such publication, and pared to admit the doctrine that a member cannot pub. your rights are untouched, your privileges inviolate. Ilish his speech, however truly and faithfully, without dideny the logic of this conclusion. It is a non sequitur. vesting himself of his privilege? No reporter, however In fact, the House of Commons has always punished insults skilful, can report with perfect accuracy the language and personal violence to its members, from whatever and sentiments of a speaker. Is it not notorious that, if cause, as a breach of privilege. you deny to a member the right of revising and correct

وو

In all arguments drawn from analogy, we must be care-ing the notes of the reporter, his speech must go out to ful that the cases are alike, that there is no essential dif- his constituents, and to the public, mutilated, distorted, ference in the facts and circumstances; otherwise, our and misrepresented? Are gentlemen aware of the consereasoning will be inconclusive and erroneous, Before we quences of this rigorous exclusion of the right of revision

MAY 10, 1832.]

Case of Samuel Houston.

[H. OF R.

and correction? Why, speeches, as delivered here some-ceeding of those businesses, every member of the House times, resemble bear-cubs, which are licked into shape, hath, and of right ought to have, freedom of speech, to only when they approach the press. propound, treat, reason, and bring to conclusion the The gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. SUTHERLAND] same. And that the Commons in Parliament have like has shown the effects which the adoption of this English liberty and freedom to treat of those matters in such ordoctrine, and its application to cases such as that now der as in their judgments shall seem fittest. And that before us, must produce. I will not weaken his argu-every such member of the said House hath like freedom ments by repetition. One of his illustrations might have from all impeachment, imprisonment, or molestation, (other been extended still further. A distorted and caricatured than by the censure of the House itself,) for, or concernpublication is made of the speech of a member; his con- ing, any bill, speaking, reasoning, or declaring any matstituents call on him for an explanation; in answer, he ter, or matters, touching the Parliament or Parliament sends a letter to one of them, containing a correct report business. This remonstrance was penned by Sir Edward of his speech. According to this new doctrine, this let- Coke, the oracle of the law, who had been dismissed ter, written under such circumstances, would divest him from the office of Chief Justice of the King's Bench, for of his privilege, subject him to a prosecution as a libeller, manifesting a spirit of independence and a conscientious and expose him, unprotected by this House, to the vio- regard of duty. He had declared, while his brethren lence and outrage of any one who conceived himself in-around cowered and yielded to the royal will, that he jured by such letter. Give to these doctrines of the Eng- would determine all cases which were brought before him, fish courts the force and application now contended for, according to the known and established laws of the realm. and you will diminish the utility and efficacy of the press; In that noble remonstrance, freedom of debate is claimed for who can rely upon the accuracy of its reports of the as a right, not acknowledged as a boon; as the birthright debates of Congress? You impair the freedom of debate; and inheritance of the subjects of England, not derived for who will venture to speak when his sentiments are from precedents, or founded on statutes. The King orperpetually liable to be perverted and misrepresented? dered the journal of the House to be brought to him, and and you withhold from the people the best means of judg- with his own hands tore out this remonstrance; but its ing of the language and conduct of their representatives. truths sank deep into the memories and hearts of EngI cannot, therefore, but regret that the gentleman from lishmen. In 1688, when the last King of the Stuart race South Carolina, [Mr. DRAYTON,] whom I was taught to was driven from the throne, the freedom of debate was respect long before I saw him, should have given the embodied by Parliament in the celebrated bill of rights, sanction of his character and influence to a doctrine fraught drawn by that great constitutional lawyer, Lord Somers. with such dangerous consequences. I regret it the more, "That the freedom of speech, and debates or proceedas he has recognised, and stated with so much clearness ings in Parliament, ought not to be impeached or quesand ability, the general power of the House to punish contempts and breaches of privilege.

tioned in any court or place out of Parliament." The rights there enumerated, the two Houses of Parliament "claim, demand, and insist upon as their undoubted rights and liberties, and that no declaration, judgments, doings, or proceedings, to the prejudice of the people in the said premises, ought, in anywise, to be drawn hereafter into consequence or example."

I now purpose to show that this House does possess, and can rightfully exercise, the power of punishment in cases of contempt and breach of privilege. This conservative power is necessary for the due discharge of the functions of a deliberative assembly, and has always been maintained and enforced, both in Great Britain and in this Having thus asserted the rights and privileges of Parcountry. I will not open those pages of English history liament, they were too wise to abandon the power of exwhich portray Parliaments timid and submissive, ignorant pounding and enforcing them to a different department. or careless of their rights, the mere instruments of a ty- A right, dependent for its exercise and enjoyment upon rant. The lessons they teach are full of instruction and the will of another, does not deserve the name. They, warning. But I rather look to those periods when the themselves, vindicated their rights and privileges. I will spirit of liberty was awake, when the Commons of Eng- not refer to the numerous cases which prove that either land claimed their constitutional rights and privileges; or, House of Parliament has constantly exercised the power if the file afforded no precedents, if the statutes, and the of punishing contempts and breaches of privilege. I great charter itself, were mute, asserted those impre- will only quote a single passage from Hallam's Constituscriptible rights which man never can surrender to his tional History of England, a writer distinguished for his fellow-man. James the First, called by his flatterers the talents, his learning, and his love of constitutional freeNorthern Solomon, but to whom posterity has given a dom. While he arraigns with the utmost severity and very different appellation, and who has been described by force of language the occasional abuses of this power by a modern writer as "one of those kings whom God seems Parliament, he admits to the full extent for which I conto send for the express purpose of hastening revolutions," tend its inherent power to protect its members from inthought fit, in a message, to use this language respecting sult and injury.

the rights and privileges claimed by the Commons: "We "The power of each House of Parliament over those could not allow of the style calling it their ancient and un- who do not belong to it, is of a more extensive consideradoubted right and inheritance, but could rather have tion, and has lain open, in some respects, to more doubt wished that they had said their privileges were derived than that over its own members. It has been exercised, from the free grace and permission of our ancestors and in the first place, very frequently, and from a very early us." The Commons, in reply to this kingly assertion, period, in order to protect the members personally, and that they held their rights from the grace and at the will in their properties, from any thing which has been conof a master, entered a remonstrance on their journals, in strued to interfere with the discharge of their functions. which they declared that "the liberties, franchises, privi- Every obstacle in these duties, by assaulting, challenging, leges, and jurisdictions of Parliament are the ancient and insulting, any single representative of the Commons, has, undoubted birthright and inheritance of the subjects of from the middle of the sixteenth century downwards, that England; and that the arduous and urgent affairs con- is, from the beginning of their regular journals, been cerning the King, State, and the defence of the realm, justly deemed a breach of privilege, and an offence against on the making and maintenance of laws, and redress of the whole body. It has been punished, generally, by mischiefs and grievances, which daily happen within this commitment, either to the custody of the House's officer, realm, are proper subjects and matters of counsel and de- the Sergeant-at-Arms, or to the King's prison. This sumbate in Parliament. And that, in the handling and pro-mary proceeding is usually defended by a technical ana

H. OF R.]

logy to what are called attachments for contempt, by the marine corps. The committee to whom this subject which every court of record is enabled to punish by im- was referred, reported that they had "collected all the prisonment, if not by fine, any obstructions to its acts, or evidence they could find to be material in the case, and contumacious resistance of them. But it tended also to heard the parties accused, with their witnesses; and though raise the dignity of Parliament in the eyes of the people, they believe a series of circumstances to have taken place at times when the Government, and even the courts of at the theatre, which appeared to Mr. Randolph, and justice, were not greatly inclined to regard it; and has al- others present, to evince premeditated insult towards him, ways been a necessary safeguard against the insolence of yet, as some of those circumstances have been satisfactopower. The majority are bound to respect, and indeed rily explained, and others are of a nature too equivocal to have respected, the rights of every member, however ob- justify reprehension and punishment, the committee are noxious to them, on all questions of privilege." of opinion that sufficient cause does not appear for the inBut I need not cross the Atlantic in search of prece- terference of the House, on the ground of a breach of dents. They are numerous and decisive in this country. their privileges." A motion to recommit the report was In 1777, Mr. Sergeant, a delegate from New Jersey to lost. An attempt to substitute the following amendment the continental Congress, was challenged by Gunning shared the same fate. "This House highly disapproves of Bedford, an officer of rank in the army of the United the conduct of Captain M. Knight and Lieutenant ReyStates. He laid the correspondence between Bedford and nolds towards John Randolph, a member of this House, himself before Congress. An investigation took place, on the evening of Friday the 10th instant; but, considerand the following resolution was adopted: "Resolved, ing it an indiscretion of youth, are unwilling to exercise That Congress have, and always had, authority to protect their constitutional authority of punishment, under a their members from insult, for any thing by them said or hope that similar instances of misconduct will not occur in done in Congress in the exercise of their duty, which is a future." Neither party appear to have any doubt of the privilege essential to the freedom of debate, and to the power of the House to punish for a breach of privilege. faithful discharge of the great trust reposed in them by The only question was, whether the occasion required its their constituents." Bedford was required to ask pardon exercise. The motion to recommit, as well as the amendof Congress, and of the delegate whom he had challeng-ment, was sustained by the votes of the republican party. ed; and, on compliance with this order, was discharged. What Gallatin, Macon, and Livingston, in that glimmering This case fully establishes the jurisdiction of the House, dawn of interpretation, deemed the "constitutional auand its power to punish breaches of privilege. And it is thority of punishment," we, in this more perfect day, have worthy our especial consideration, from the character of discovered to be a usurpation, and a violation of the rights the men of whom that Congress was composed, and from of an American citizen. One case more I refer to, for the time when this resolution was adopted. I will not say the benefit of the gentleman from New York, [Mr. that there were giants in those days, and that, since that BEARDSLEY.] In 1801, Joseph Wheaton, the Sergeantperiod, the human intellect has been dwarfed; but this I at-Arms, having, in discharge of his duty, and in obediwill say, that in that assembly great abilities were exalted ence to the order of the Speaker, turned out of the galand purified by the most ardent patriotism, and that those lery a man who had made a disturbance there, was arrested men, engaged in a most arduous and doubtful struggle for on a warrant issued by a magistrate, on the oath of the the common liberty of all, would have been the last men person turned out, charging him with an assault and baton earth to usurp power not delegated, or to violate the tery, and false imprisonment. Wheaton addressed a letrights of an American citizen. And I rejoice that a deleter to the Speaker, informing him of his arrest, detention, gate from my native State had the manly firmness, the and final discharge, in consequence of the non-attendance moral courage, to despise the vulgar and unworthy impu-of the prosecuting witness. The committee to whom the tations of cowardice, and refuse to bow down and worship subject was referred, reported that although the arrest at the shrine of this idol god-this modern Moloch "besmeared with blood of human sacrifice."

and confinement of an officer of the House of Representatives for any act by him performed in its service, and in In 1796, General Gunn, a member of the Senate, sent obedience to its orders, must be deemed a high breach of a challenge to Abraham Baldwin, a distinguished member privilege, yet, as the magistrate, in the present case, seems of this House. The matter was laid before the House; rather to have been deceived by false representations, than a committee was appointed. The following extract shows influenced by improper views, the committee cannot consitheir sense of the transaction: "That appears to the der his conduct as a subject of animadversion;" and, therecommittee, from a view of all the circumstances attending fore, resolved that it was "not expedient to take any furthe transaction referred to them, that the same were a ther order on the letter from Joseph Wheaton." On the breach of privileges of this House." General Gunn having question of concurring with the report of the committee, made suitable explanations and apologies to the commit- the journal shows that Gallatin, Macon, and the republican tee, they recommended that no further proceedings should party voted in the negative, from the belief, I presume, that be had, and the House concurred in the report. the conduct of the magistrate did not admit of such exte

The cases of Randall and Whitney, in 1795, and of John nuation. I might multiply citations, but those already made Anderson, in 1817, as well as the decision of the Supreme are sufficient to show that the power to punish contempts Court of the United States in Anderson against Dunn, and breaches of privilege has been repeatedly asserted in have been referred to, and commented on. The gentle- the two Houses of Parliament, in the best periods of their man from Tennessee, [Mr. POLK,] in a former period of history; in the continental Congress; in both Houses of Conthis debate, admitted, reluctantly as I thought, that an at- gress, under the present constitution; and has been sanctempt to bribe a member of Congress might be punished tioned by the highest judicial tribunal of the country. No as a breach of privilege, because the foundation of a re- arguments against this power, however ingenious or refinpresentative assembly was subverted by the corruption of its ed, can shake my conviction that it is founded on reason members. Yet, while he shields the members from temp- as well as on authority. But it is objected that the freetations addressed to their avarice and cupidity, he leaves dom of debate may be perverted to licentiousness and perthem exposed and defenceless against the assaults of vio-sonal abuse. It may; but brute force is not the corrective. lence. What avails it whether a member be bribed or To this House the people have peculiarly entrusted the awed into silence and acquiescence? The citadel of free- redress of grievances, the exposure and correction of dom may be carried by storm as well as by sap. frauds, the vigilant supervision of the Executive DepartIn 1800, John Randolph, a member from Virginia, was ment. Here the power of impeachment is lodged. insulted at the theatre in Philadelphia, by some officers of member of this House is often required, by the impera

A

MAY 10, 1832.]

Case of Samuel Houston.

[H. OF R.

tive call of public duty, to investigate the conduct of pub- the representatives of the people go armed to the teeth, lic men. For this purpose, he has the right to assign his as if an enemy had camped in the ten miles square, and reasons to state his information relative to the subject, the blaze of his watch-fires illumined the darkness of midfrom whatever source it may be derived, whether from night? My friend from Pennsylvania [Mr. COULTER] has the testimony of witnesses, the press, or even from mere portrayed, with feeling and eloquence, the condition of the rumor. If plenary proof were required to set an investi- aged and infirm in this new reign of terror. Experience gation on foot, fraud could rarely be tracked to its lurking and wisdom will no longer be passports to public confiplaces of those who prey on the public spoil. None but dence. The hoary head will no longer be honored; but the veriest bunglers would be detected. A faithful dis- gladiators, skilled in the use of the bludgeon, the pistol, charge of this great duty is not to be attained by imposing and the barbed dirk, will be the fitting representatives of rigorous restraints upon the members of this House. They the people.

must be suffered to speak, and to act, freely and fearlessly. There is another and a cogent reason why this House The injury which may be inflicted by occasionally over- should vindicate its privileges. If rumor has not, as is her stepping the proper boundary, in animadverting on the wont, grossly exaggerated, the President of the United conduct of public men, sinks into nothing when compared States has denounced us as usurping in this case a juriswith the total neglect of public duty, or with a nominal, diction to which we have no rightful claim, as meddling slothful, and heartless performance. A party wantonly with that with which we have no business, as encouraging arraigned is not remediless. He may petition the House our members to slander honester and better men than for redress; he may request an inquiry, and, on proof of themselves, and has declared that this slanderous spirit his innocence of the charge, will cover his malicious accu- would be effectually put down by inflicting the same punser with shame. ishment on a few more of us, as the gentleman from Ohio This is the defence to which an upright and honorable has received. Sir, I wish to treat the Chief Magistrate of man will resort, to repel an unfounded accusation. Pri- this country with that respect due to his station. I will vate transactions, wholly unconnected with public affairs, not trust myself to comment on the language attributed to will seldom, if ever, be dragged into the discussions of him. This only will I say, that, if he has permitted himthis House. Should an instance occur, you, Mr. Speaker, self to give utterance to such sentiments, to indulge in in the discharge of your duty as the presiding officer of such philippics against a co-ordinate department of the Gothe House, would at once suppress such violations of its vernment, such conduct was most disrespectful towards rules. The very fact that the member has not been call- this House, most unbecoming his high station. It beed to order, is a presumption that he has kept within the prescribed limits of discussion. Various and conflicting opinions have been expressed respecting the power of the House to punish contempts and breaches of privilege. Some gentlemen grudgingly admit the power barely to remove those persons who commit offences in its presence; others believe such cases might warrant the infliction of punishment; and others kindly extend protection to members when going to or from the House, or their respective What would this curt and limited privilege avail, if, the moment the member steps beyond the charmed circle, he is exposed to contumely and outrage?

committee rooms.

tee rooms.

comes this House vigilantly to guard against Executive encroachments, to repel every invasion of its privileges, from whatever quarter it may come. The constitution bas created separate branches of the Legislature, and assigned to each its appropriate functions. Each should keep within its allotted sphere, else the whole system will be deranged and menaced with destruction. The general doctrine, with regard to the British Parliament, is thus stated in Hatsell's Precedents, vol. 2, p. 252: "It is highly expedient for the due preservation of the separate branches of the Legislature, that neither should encroach upon the other, or interfere in any matter depending before them, so as to preclude or even influence that freedom of debate, or of action, which is essential to a free council. And, therefore, neither the King, nor Lords, nor Commons are to take notice of any bills or other matters depending, or of votes that have been given, or of speeches which have been held by the members of either of the other branches of the Legislature, until the same have been communicated to them in the usual parliamentary manner."

Why does the constitution exempt members from arrest in all civil cases, but that their time and attention shall not be withdrawn from the high trust committed to them? Our public duties are not confined to this Hall, or the commit We must often resort to the public offices for information to guide our conduct, or to transact the business of our constituents. Nor are our walks for health or recreation to be ambushed. Here, in this city, from the The House of Commons has often, and resolutely, recommencement to the close of the session, is our post of sisted every encroachment, whether attempted by the duty; here is our sphere of action; and the protection af Peers or by the Crown. I will refer to a few instances-forded must be commensurate with the duty enjoined. one will be found in the reign of Charles I, who, misled This conservative power we are now called upon to aban- by evil counsels and false notions of prerogative, violated don. Before we surrender the rights entrusted to us by the laws of the land and the rights of Englishmen, and at the people, and for the people; before we shrink from the length expiated his crimes (or perhaps, in compassion to performance of our duties, let us cast a momentary glance poor human nature, I should say his errors) on the scafat the consequences which must inevitably ensue. Those fold. That monarch, in a speech from the throne, advertwho from consciousness of misconduct dread investiga-ed to a bill then in agitation in both Houses of Parliament, tion, will stop at no means to suppress it. Let this House and not agreed upon, proposed a limitation and provisiononce proclaim itself impotent to protect its members, and al clause to be added to it, and expressed his displeasure who will venture to arraign the misconduct of one high in against some members who had moved doubts and quesoffice, strong in power, circled with troops of friends and tions concerning the same. "This notice of a parliamentretainers? He who strives to "stem the wild torrent of a ary proceeding, the Commons resented as a breach of downward age," must possess no ordinary portion of mo- their privileges, and obtained the consent of the Lords to ral courage and public virtue. Few will be found to achieve a joint remonstrance," in which they declare, that, this task, if, to the obloquy which must fall to their lot, be amongst other the privileges of Parliament, it is their anadded personal violence, deliberate, premeditated outrage. cient and undoubted right that your Majesty ought not to Must the sword of Damocles be suspended over our de- take notice of any matter in agitation of debate in either bates? or must we speak of fraud and corruption in dulcet of the Houses of Parliament, but by their information or tones? Must we complain of tyranny and oppression "with agreement; and that your Majesty ought not to propound bated breath, and whispering humbleness?" Or shall Con- any condition, provision, or limitation to any bill or act in gress assemble, like an ancient Polish Diet, in arms? Must debate or preparation in either House of Parliament, or

time, was then suspended.

[H. OF R.

Mr. REED now renewed the motion to suspend further proceedings until to-morrow.

Mr. KERR advocated it with much warmth.

Mr. WAYNE and Mr. REED also supported the motion,

to manifest or declare your consent or dissent, approba- tion prevailed; and the call having proceeded for some tion or dislike, of the same before it be presented to your Majesty in due course of Parliament; and that every particular member of either House hath full liberty of speech to propound or debate any matter according to the order and course of Parliament; and that your Majesty ought not to conceive displeasure against any man for such opinion by some remarks on the impossibility of getting the quesand propositions as shall be in such debate, it belonging tion this evening, as a number of gentlemen were preparto the several Houses of Parliament respectively to judge ed and anxious to address the House. and determine such errors and offences, which in words or actions shall be committed by any of their members in the handling or debating any matters there depending." Sir, it is refreshing to ascend to the well-spring of English constitutional freedom. There our fathers loved to resort. The Hampdens, Pymmeses, and Hollises of those days were the precursors of the Adamses, the Hancocks, and the Henrys of our own land.

During the ministry of the elder Pitt, and in the zenith of his popularity, in a message from the King, drawn by him, he alluded to a speech made by a member of the House of Commons. Though the allusion was entirely inoffensive, the Commons, to avert the danger of the precedent, caused this entry to be made on their journals: "The mention made in the message of an application being made to this House by a member of this House in his place, was much excepted to in the House, being conceived that it might affect, although not so intended, the privileges of this House, with regard to the freedom of speech in their debates and proceedings; and forasmuch as the maintaining that privilege must ever be of the utmost consequence to the House, the House did direct that this special entry should be made in the journal, lest at any time, hereafter, this case should be endeavored to be drawn into precedent, to the infringement of so important and essential a claim and right of

the House."

One more instance, and the last. In 1783, after the famous East India bill of Mr. Fox had passed the House of Commons, and during its pendency in the House of Lords, the whole influence of the Crown was exerted, and even the personal solicitations of the King to individual peers were resorted to, to prevent its passage. The following resolution was adopted by the Commons, to check this sinister influence:

Mr. McDUFFIE suggested that if it was their wish to have auditors, they had a much better prospect of them at present than might be expected in the morning.

Mr. CRAIG moved to suspend the rule, to allow him to make a motion for the meeting of the House at ten o'clock to-morrow; which prevailed-yeas 170, nays 45. Mr. CRAIG then made his motion.

Mr. BOON moved to postpone the motion indefinitely, but the Chair pronounced the motion to be out of order; and the question being taken, it was resolved that when the House adjourned, it would adjourn to meet at ten o'clock to-morrow morning.

Mr. REED renewed his motion for a postponement. Mr. BOON moved the indefinite postponement of this motion;

But the CHAIR pronounced this motion also out of order;

And the motion was agreed to.

So the further proceedings were postponed to ten o'clock to-morrow. And then the House adjourned.

FRIDAY, MAY 11.

The motion of Mr. JOHNSTON, of Virginia, for the reconsideration of the vote by which the bill for an aqueduct over the Potomac above Georgetown had been rejected, coming up as the order of the day,

Mr. DODDRIDGE moved for the postponement of that subject until Tuesday next; which was agreed to.

BANK OF THE UNITED STATES.

Mr. McDUFFIE presented the report of the minority of the committee appointed to investigate the proceedings of the Bank of the United States, and moved that it be laid upon the table and printed; but withdrew the motion at the request of

Mr. CAMBRELENG, who inquired of Mr. McDUFFIE whether the report had appended to it the replies of the president of the bank to the last set of interrogatories presented to him on the part of the committee.

"That it is now necessary to declare that to repeat any opinion, or pretended opinion of his Majesty upon any bill, or other proceeding, depending in either House of Parliament, with a view to influence the votes of the members, is a high crime and misdemeanor, derogatory to the honor of the Crown, a breach of the fundamental privileges of Parliament, and subversive of the constitution of this Mr. McDUFFIE replying in the affirmative, country." Mr. CAMBRELENG stated that, in order to enable the Such were the breakwaters erected by the Commons president of the bank to answer these interrogatories more of England to resist the ever restless and encroaching at his leisure, they had been left in his hands by the comwave of arbitrary power. If history be philosophy, teach-mittee on their departure from Philadelphia. On looking ing by examples, let us profit by its lessons. Shall an Ame-over the replies which the president had made, Mr. C. rican Congress be found less vigilant than the Commons perceived that many of them were not replies to the queof England to resist Executive encroachments? Shall theries which had been put by the committee. In others, exploded maxims of passive obedience to Executive will the president had denied facts which the committee had be here revived? If we are now to abandon this inherent stated on the ground of the statements submitted by the conservative power, so long maintained, and hitherto unquestioned; if we are to surrender those privileges so necessary to the due discharge of the high trust committed to us by the people, I, for one, will be guiltless of any participation in this suicidal act.

Mr. BURGES having next obtained the floor, Mr. NEWTON moved that the further proceedings in this case be postponed until to-morrow.

The motion was negatived--yeas 67, nays 86.

bank to Government from year to year; and had answered questions which Mr. C. had never asked of him. In consequence of this, Mr. C. took this opportunity to give notice that he should feel it his duty to propound to the president other queries, for the purpose of ascertaining who had been right and who wrong in the matter.

Had that course been pursued in the committee which Mr. C. had proposed and desired, and the president had been permitted to give verbal replies to those interroga

Mr. DRAYTON said that he should not renew the mo- tories, and his answers been taken down, Mr. C. would tion he had made for an amendment.

The question being called for,

have had an opportunity to have prevented all misunderstanding. But he had waived this advantage, and consent

Mr. SPEIGHT moved a call of the House; which mo-ed, for the convenience of the president, to leave the writ