H. OF R.] Suspension of the Habeas Corpus. [JANUARY, 1807. sion into their twopenny gallery,) render all their | maining ideas I have to offer in a few words. proceedings touching the public burdens, or the There is another consideration which renders liberties of the people, highly suspicious. And this bill highly objectionable. I consider the to say the truth, I am not at all surprised that they did close their doors on this occasion, that they might not be under the inspection of the public eye, while they were passing the bill on the table. I say so, because I am willing to abide by the good old principle of judging all men by myself; and if I had introduced such a bill, I should have been glad my name did not appear on the Journals, that the public might not know to whom they were indebted for such a precedent. passage from this House to your lodgings, may be arrested, put on board a vessel and carried whithersoever the military authority may choose. To this I will never give my consent. It has been very well remarked by my colleague, that this is not the first case in which an insurrection has occurred in the United States, but that it is the first case in which an attempt has been made to suspend the precious privilege of the writ of habeas corpus. case as now at issue, whether the United States is under a military or civil government, or, in other words, whether the military government is subject to the civil power, or the civil authority to the military. I conceive that a case has occurred, in which the military has not only usurped the civil authority, but in which it has usurped nothing short of omnipotent power; and I consider this bill as calculated to give a softening and smoothing over to this usurpation; and on this ground I cannot assent to it. SupI have another objection to the bill, besides pose this bill either to pass or not to pass, what that of the quarter from which it originated, or has been the practice under the constitution? the manner in which it has been presented to By the expression, under the constitution, I do the House. It appears to my mind like an not mean conformably to it. Men have been oblique attempt to cover a certain departure taken up by a military tribunal, and have been from an established law of the land, and a cer- transported contrary to law. I say transported, tain violation of the Constitution of the United for if a man can be transported from the disStates, which we are told have been committed trict where the offence with which he is in this country. Sir, recollect that Congress charged was committed, he may also be deportmet on the first of December, that the Presi-ed to Cayenne, or transported to Botany Bay. dent had information of the incipient stage of And even you yourself, (addressing the Speaker,) this conspiracy about the last of September- if such acts be sanctioned by this bill, in your that the proclamation issued before Congress met, and yet that no suggestion, either from the Executive or from either branch of the Legislature, has transpired touching the propriety of suspending the writ of habeas corpus until this violation has taken place. I will never agree in this side-way to cover up such a violation, by a proceeding highly dangerous to the liberty of the country, or to agree that this invaluable privilege shall be suspended, because it has been already violated, and suspended, too, after the I put it to any man, whether, now that we cause, if any there was, for it has ceased to exist. have received information of the extent of this No, I wish to be true to those principles which conspiracy, and when we find that Catiline, I have constantly maintained, and, God willing, Cethegus, and Lentulus, have not as many ever will maintain so long as I have a seat on brother conspirators as themselves, this conspithis floor, or have life. It has heretofore been racy is equal to that in Pennsylvania in 1794 or the glory of those with whom I have acted, 1795? In physical force it is not comparable that in all our battles we have combated for to it, however in intellectual talent it may be. the principles of the constitution and the laws I conceive then that according to the Constituof our country, in the persons of those in whom tion of the United States, there is but one case they have been attempted to be violated, how-in which the writ of habeas corpus can be susever infamous and contemptible. When those principles were prostrated under the sedition law, what did we say? That the character of the man accused could not change the laws of the land, or impair his rights-that we would support the constitutional rights of the citizen, in the person of the meanest reptile, as well as in the persons of those who occupy the highest stations in society. We have done so-let us continue to do so, regardless of popular clamor or odium, and we shall still continue to find ourselves on true ground. We never inquired what kind of a man Callender was-we said, such is the law and the constitution; let justice take its course. I could quote other examples equally strong, but in deference to the feelings of the House I shall desist from doing it. I beg pardon for detaining the House so long. I will, however, endeavor to express the re pended, and I should not go into this view of the subject, if it had not been misstated by all those who have preceded me in the debate. My view of the subject is this-that this privilege can only be suspended in cases in which not merely the public safety requires it, but that the case of the public safety requiring it, must be united with actual invasion or actual rebellion. Now, with whatever epithets gentlemen may dignify this conspiracy, I am not even of the opinion of the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. R. NELSON)-I think it nothing more nor less than an intrigue-and I am happy that I can declare on the honor, not of a soldier, but of a citizen, that I believe it to be a foreign intrigue, availing itself of domestic materials for answering its purposes, and poor indeed must be the soil of this, or of any other state of society, which would not furnish such materials. JANUARY, 1807.] Suspension of the Habeas Corpus. [H. OF R. principle. To be indemnified in his fame by dollars and cents. The injury would be irreparable. At present, all stand under the law. If any one offend, let him be brought under it. But, in this way, to put a man in an oyster boat, or skipper, and transport him to a distance from the place of his arrest, and then say he shall have a remedy, in case of his innocence, against an inferior officer, is absurd. If we pass such a bill, which God forbid! it should contain a large appropriation, and, Government should be obliged to make good the injured party-to afford him redress. I say they should grant a large appropriation, for it is not for men with epaulets and gold buttons to make reparation. If the bill passes, we are told it will be but temporary. Why, the Sedition law was but temporary; and I think, sir, (alluding to the Speaker,) you were one of those who aided its passage A gentleman from Massachusetts has stated | bring an action of damages? Against whom? to the House that the organization and adminis- A man without visible property? And what tration of the Government, at this time, forbids action? An action on the most mercenary the apprehension of any abuse being made of the powers delegated under this law. Surely, sir, the gentleman could not mean to urge this as any thing new. He must have known, if he had consulted history-as doubtless he hasthat the king de facto, and the administration de facto, are always above suspicion. That there never was a proposition brought forward, that did not find a majority ready to say, There is surely no danger of any improper use of this power in our time, for we are all honorable men, and we would not delegate it, if an improper use could be made of it; and that, if we reject a measure, we ought not to do it so much on account of ourselves, as on account of those who come after us. And what will those who come after us say of us? They will follow our example, and declare that the character of their forefathers was above every doubt and every suspicion. Now, for myself, I beg leave much against your will-by being present at to be permitted to disclaim every argument of the altar when it was more than once re-enacted. this kind. I do not, indeed, consider it fair to As to its three months' continuance, I consider introduce such an argument. Let us take up that as one of the most objectionable features the question on its own merits and demerits, of the bill-as a bait to the trap; as the enterwithout any allusion or reference to our own ing wedge. If it is made reconcilable to the virtues, or the degeneracy of posterity. For interests and feelings of this House to pass it myself, I have no hesitation in saying that I for three months, do you think we will then will not grant this power at any time, except feel the same lively repugnance to it that we under the most imperious necessity; and I say now do? No! It has been truly said, that no this without any disrespect to this honorable man became perfectly wicked at once; and it body, or to any of the public functionaries. may be affirmed, with equal truth, that a nation Take man as he is, and in his best estate, you is never enslaved at once. Men must be initiatfind him an animal prone to abuse and corrup-ed by degrees, and their repugnance must be tion. There does not exist a single constitution or law in the world, that does not enforce this salutary truth. I shall consider this bill, if it passes, as establishing a new era in the Government. When I was a boy, I recollect to have consulted such chronological tables as I could get access to. I recollect to have read, that at a certain time, monarchy was abolished in Rome; a little while after, the first Dictator was named; then the second Dictator and I believe, as in a case of apoplexy, she scarcely got over the third fit. I believe a suspension of the writ of habeas corpus might have, here, the same effect as the establishment of the first Dictatorship at Rome. In what situation would it place yourselves and the citizens of this country? It would leave them at the mercy, not merely of a justice of the peace, but at the mercy of every subaltern officer of the army and navy. I believe it would comport as much with the safety and interest of this confederacy to give us power to send these people off, as to put this power in their hands. I believe we should be as trustworthy as they. And, let me ask, what compensation to an innocent man, to a man of honor and feeling, to a man of character, who should be tied neck and heels and sent off to New Orleans, and who should ultimately be proved to be innocent-I ask what compensation it would be to him to VOL. III.-33 gradually overcome. Let me state a case. It is proposed to extend the time of service of the Executive Magistrate from four, to five, or eight years, or for life. If it be prolonged for a term, do you believe we shall stop at its expiration? No! Once extended for life, he will then claim the power to choose his successor, and the hereditary principle will follow. This is the old trick. Let me, however, tell gentlemen that old birds are not to be caught with chaff, though, unfortunately for them, the mass of mankind does not consist of old birds. Pass one other law, and I would quit the country. A twin brother to this same bill was introduced into the British Parliament in 1794; and that bill to prevent seditious assemblies, was brought forward for about as good reasons as this. According to it, if four or five persons assembled, and refused on the notice of a magistrate, to disperse, they were considered guilty of sedition, and were dispersed by force. These two bills form a complete tyranny-and tyranny of the most odious kind, because established under the mask of liberty. Was the tyranny of Robespierre less intolerable, oppressive, or odious, because inflicted in the name of the people, than a like tyranny in Turkey, under the Grand Seignor and his Muftis? Take one other thing along with you. These two fatal wounds, inflicted on the liberties of the English nation, H. OF R.] Suspension of the Habeas Corpus. (JANUARY, 1807. were inflicted by the man who came forward in | be in the country a rebellion or an invasion, bethe character of a reformer-by the man who came forward as the advocate of a Parliamentary reform; from which circumstance he acquired that popularity which enabled him to inflict those deadly wounds on the liberty of his country. Having said so much with regard to the principle, permit me to add one word on the details of the bill. There is a departure in it from the known, accustomed, and received language of the constitution, in the use of the word "authority." The words are "warrant or authority." The expression is, in my opinion, too lax. Perhaps, we may be told, that the bill may be amended on the third reading. But my objection to the principle contained in it is such, that I will not consent to carry to a third reading that which under no amendment can be rendered palatable to my taste. Mr. R. concluded by observing that he had so far exhausted himself that he was unable to go on. fore such an act can be passed. I really doubt whether either of these exist. I really doubt whether a single law of the United States has been, as yet, violated. I will not say this is the fact; but I do not know any thing to prove the contrary. But, supposing that a rebellion does exist, we are then left at liberty to decide whether it is such a one as to endanger the peace of society to such a degree that no ordinary remedy will answer. If an ordinary remedy will not, it may be our duty to apply an extraordinary one. What is this mighty business? What is the opinion of the Executive as to its danger? Does he consider it dangerous? It is a little remarkable that, in every instance under the British Government, the proposition of such a measure originated with the Executive, while here, without any intimation of danger from the Executive, we propose, on our own suggestion, to suspend one of the most valuable privileges that is secured to the citizen. Let us attend to the communication of the President on this subject. He states that, according to his information, the persons concerned in the conspiracy depend on receiving two kinds of aid; foreign aid, and aid derived in their own country. After giving his opinion of the foreign aid expected, he says: "On the whole, the fugitives from the Ohio, with their associates from Cumberland, or any other place in that quarter, cannot threaten serious danger to the city of New Orleans." Mr. SMILIE.-I shall not detain the House long by the remarks which I propose to make on this subject. I shall waive all observations on the mode of proceeding on this occasionwhether we shall reject the bill on its first, or suffer it to go to a second reading. The question is now put, and I am called upon to give my vote, either in the affirmative or negative. I, therefore, feel under a necessity to put my negative upon it. I consider this one of the most important subjects upon which we have been called to act. It is a question which is neither more nor less than, whether we shall The President declares that, in his opinion, exercise the only power with which we are there is no danger to be apprehended. With clothed, to repeal an important part of the con- regard to foreign force, he states his reasons for stitution? It is in this case only, that we have thinking there is no danger. As the Message power to repeal that instrument. A suspension is in the hands of every gentleman, there can of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is, be no necessity for me to read it. But he exin all respects, equivalent to repealing that es- plicitly declares, from the state of our relations sential part of the constitution which secures with other nations, there can be no danger from that principle which has been called, in the that quarter. This being the deliberate opinion country where it originated, the "palladium of of the Executive Magistrate, who is more deeppersonal liberty." If we recur to England, we ly responsible on this occasion than any other shall find that the writ of habeas corpus in that member of the Government, is it not most excountry has been frequently suspended. But, traordinary that we should attempt to take under what circumstances? We find it was steps which can only be justified in the last resuspended in the year 1715, but what was the sort? Are gentlemen aware of the danger of situation of the country at that time? It was this precedent? This is the first attempt ever invaded by the son of James II. There was a made under the Government to suspend this rebellion within the kingdom, and an army was law. If we suspend it when the Executive organized. The same thing happened in the tells us there is no danger, on what occasion year 1745. On this occasion it was found ne- may it not be suspended? Let us suppose that cessary to suspend it. In latter times, when it shall be suspended on this occasion, what will the Government had grown more corrupt, we be its effect? Parties will probably for ever have seen it suspended for an infinitely less continue to exist in this country. Let us supcause. We have taken from the statute book of pose a predominant party to conjure up a plot this country, this most valuable part of our con- to avenge themselves. Do not gentlemen see stitution. The convention who framed that in- that the personal liberty of all their enemies strument, believing that there might be cases would be endangered? I mention this to forewhen it would be necessary to vest a discre- warn gentlemen of the dangerous ground before tionary power in the Executive, have constitut-them. I do not say that our country may not, ed the Legislature the judges of this necessity, and the only question now to be determined is, Does this necessity exist? There must either at some future day, be in such a situation as to justify such a suspension, but I have never yet seen her in such a situation, and, at this mo FEBRUARY, 1807.] Death of the Representative, Levi Casey, Esq. [H. OF R. ment, I think it does not exist. When we see | Bishop, John Blake, jr., Thomas Blount, James M. the great body of the people so firmly attached Broom, Robert Brown, John Boyle, William A. Burto their Government, ought we to be thus well, William Butler, George W. Campbell, John alarmed on beholding a few desperate and un- Campbell, Martin Chittenden, John Claiborne, Joprincipled men attempting to stir up an insur-seph Clay, Matthew Clay, George Clinton, jr., Fredrection? There is another consideration which will induce me to give my hearty negative to this bill. If foreign nations see that we are obliged, under such circumstances, to suspend the writ of habeas corpus, will it not show that the constitution is incapable of supporting itself, without the application of the most dangerous and extraordinary remedies? erick Conrad, Orchard Cook, Leonard Covington, Mr. DANA. I understand that the question The yeas and nays were then taken on the question, "Shall the bill be rejected?"-yeas 113, nays 19, as follows: YEAS.-Willis Alston, jr., Isaac Anderson, David Bard, Joseph Barker, Burwell Bassett, George M. Bedinger, Silas Betton, William W. Bibb, Phanuel | NAYS.-Evan Alexander, John Archer, Barnabas Bidwell, John Chandler, Richard Cutts, Elias Earle, Isaiah L. Green, William Helms, Josiah Masters, Gurdon S. Mumford, Gideon Olin, Thos. Sanford, Henry Southard, David Thomas, Joseph B. Varnum, Daniel C. Verplanck, Matthew Walton, Eliphalet Wickes, and Nathan Williams. MONDAY, February 2. Death of the Representative, Levi Casey, Esq. Resolved, unanimously, That a committee be appointed to take order for superintending the funeral of General LEVI CASEY, late a Representative from the State of South Carolina. Ordered, That Mr. THOMAS MOORE, Mr. EARLE, Mr. D. R. WILLIAMS, Mr. MARION, Mr. EARLY, and Mr. HOLLAND, be appointed a com Resolved, unanimously, That the members of this House will testify their respect for the memory of General LEVI CASEY, late one of their body, by wearing crape on the left arm for one month. On motion of Mr. HOLLAND, Resolved, unanimously, That the members of this House will attend the funeral of the late General LEVI CASEY this day, at one o'clock. Resolved, unanimously, That a message be sent to the Senate to notify them of the death of General LEVI CASEY, late a member of this House, and that his funeral will take place, this day, at one o'clock. THURSDAY, February 5. GUNBOATS. The House resumed the consideration of the unfinished business of yesterday, being the report of a committee on fortifying our ports and harbors. The question was taken on the amendment offered by Mr. VAN CORTLANDT, which was disagreed to-ayes 51, noes 54. The question then recurred on filling the blank in the 2d resolution with "$250,000," for building fifty gunboats. [FEBRUARY, 1807. If he were convinced that the expenditure of $150,000 or even $1,500,000 would answer the proposed end, he would cheerfully give it. But, as had been observed, the system of gunboats was matter of experiment, and if they should eventually turn out good for nothing, the House would be of opinion that they had vested as large a capital in a worthless project as would be deemed necessary. He would not undertake to say that they were good for nothing-far from it. But there was no information before the House which entitled him to say they were good for much. When you compare, said Mr. R., the lavish appropriation made on this subject in Committee of the Whole, and view the economy this House always practises on every branch of expenditure, relative to the regular army and navy, looking with an eagle eye on every dollar before they part with it-it surprises me to see them voting away hundreds of thousands of dollars for a species of vessel, which, in all human probability, may be used for river craft in a few years. One thing has been ascertained. Ships of war are defensive and offensive, too, but the House will vote no money for an addition to them. I do not censure them for it; but if they will not appropriate for objects, the physical powers of which are ascertained, why vote the public treasure by handfuls for vessels, the powers of which have never been tried? Let the experiment be made, and, if it succeeds, let us appropriate liberally; but, till then, let us not vote more money than has been already appropriated. I believe there is one situation in which they may be useful-in the Mississippi. I wish, however, not to be understood as speaking as a man of science on this business. I only wish some evidence of the value of this machine, be Mr. MUMFORD.-I hope a majority of this House will agree to strike out the whole resolution respecting gunboats, with a view to appropriate that money to solid and durable fortifications. I was opposed to it in Committee of the Whole. I did then, and do now consider, that there is no necessity for any more gunboats. There are, in my opinion, a sufficient number already for the Southern sections of the Union, for which places they appear to be only adapted, except in a very few places to the North, where there is shoal water. They may answer a very good purpose in shoal water, but are inadequate for the defence of your ports and harbors to the north of the New Jersey shore; and I very much doubt, whether, in a gale of wind, they would not even sink at their mooring at the entrance of either of the harbors of Portsmouth, Salem, Plymouth, Newport, or New York. It has been asserted that this was an election-fore I vest so large a capital in it. I hope, thereeering scheme, and that as soon as our Spring elections were over, no more would be thought of it until the next election. I wish, sir, to put this question to eternal rest, by stating the plain matter of fact. Why, sir, it has been considered of so serious a nature in its consequences, and of so much importance, that the Legislature of the State of New York, in their last session, did enter into formal resolutions, instructing their delegation, in both branches of the Legislature of the United States, to use their utmost endeavors for the defence and protection of the port and harbor of New York: the whole State is alive on this subject-and the memorials now lying on your table from the Mayor and Corporation of that city, together with the petitions from the citizens of all political parties, tend to one and the same object, protection to their persons and to their property; there is not, there cannot be any dissenting voice with them on this subject. Mr. J. RANDOLPH was too unwell to go far into the subject, but he would ask the House whether they were acting with their accustomed caution and distrust, where the expenditure of public money was involved? He thought not. fore, that the blank will not be filled with $150,000. As it has been stated, I think it will be extremely disproportionate to vote $20,000 for the fortification of all our harbors, and $150,000 for gunboats. Mr. ELMER said that, under existing circumstances, he was opposed to appropriating 150,000 dollars to building additional gunboats. The House had determined that they would not authorize the President to man those already built. It appeared to him very bad economy to suffer the public vessels to lie in dock, and to build other vessels, the utility of which was not ascertained. There might be situations in which gunboats would be useful, but had they not enough of them already? If it should be ascertained that thirty or forty gunboats should be wanted for any particular purpose, Mr. E., said it might be prudent to authorize their erection. He said he had been in favor of giving authority to the President to man and equip the armed vessels and gunboats. The House had, however, refused this. If, then, they would not authorize the President, whatever the emergency, to man the present vessels, why build additional vessels? |