the purpose of the administration of govern-
ment; but on the contrary, it hastened the
effort to open the door to faction, insubordi-
nation and sedition, in all governments, be-
cause men are prone to rebel against unjust,
oppressive and inhuman laws. That is a
fundamental principle of government, de-
clared and taught to us by the fathers of the
republic, and we should not heedlessly ne-
glect Its teachings.
Has anything occurred within the limits of
this State, to justify us in opening the door
to this power of oppression? We know that
when the power of confiscation and forfei-
ture of all property has been exercised, it
has been by the exercise of the high hand of
government, without resort to the civil au-
thority. Now are we willing here to encour-
age the exercise of that power in that man-
ner? I do not wish to see it exercised under
any circumstances, even by the civil arm of
the government. It has been indicated to
us here that tor the prevention of crime, we
should do—what? why, visit upon innocent
and helpless descendants and offsprings the
punishment of crimes committed by their
fathers. Now, although we are taught that
He who made us all, and who governs the
universe, does visit the sins of the father up-
on the helpless child, I have taken it with
faith not with the conviction of my judg-
ment, or any reasoning of my finite under-
standing. It is one of those doctrines, above
human comprehension, and which only, by
looking to divine omnipotence, can we rea-
eon ourselves into the belief that it is right
because He who said it is the embodiment of
all that is right. But with us poor weak
mortals, with passions lashed into fury by
the events which surround us, that we should
undertake to arrogate to ourselves a policy an(
power like that, is beyond my comprehen-
sion .
Have you any clause in your bill of right
saving that a man shall or shall not be hung
for this offence, or that offence? No, sir, it is
left to the legislative arm of the government
to prescribe and point out the measure of
punishment for any offence committed under
the criminal code. But here is a case pointed
out substantially, clearly, specifically, per
.manently, which, whenever the exercise of,
the power has been permitted has been exer-
cised by governments to abuse it, and to
abuse it to the oppression of mankind, and
more especially of the innocent part of it.
Now, with these views, not upon any pre-
sumed theory that this is to prerent treason
in all time to come, because the past history
of criminal jurisprudence in all the world
has proved that where yon prescribe a pun-
ishment for an offence, unproportioned an
over-violent, it is but an incentive to sedi
tion and crime—that being true, I cannot see
why we should, at this day, open the door to
oppression. We are here to prevent the |
probable exercise of oppression. We are
here to make a Constitution to tie up the
powers of your government, and prevent
them from Infringing upon private rights
and the rights of the people in general. The
people have sent. us here to make a Constitu-
tion, and to prescribe and limit the powers
that they are about to delegate to their agents,
and tell them that they may go so far and no
farther.
At this day, when I believe the tendency of
opinion is to consolidation and power, I am
opposed to the giving any power from the
people to any branch of the government, the
executive, judicial or the legislative, which it
is not prominently and glaringly necessary to
give to them. I would act upon the doctrine,
conceded, I believe, to he a fundamental one,
resting at the foundation of all government,
that that government is best which governs
least. It was a cardinal doctrine with the
father—not of democracy, because I do not
desire to use that term—but the author of the
pillar of liberty, your Declaration of Inde-
pendence, and for one I am willing to take
his authority. There is no modern light,
certainly none within the last three or tour
days, which it seems to me should lead the
gentleman from Baltimore, city (Mr. Stirling)
to take this track. I am sure if he had gone
to my section of the country, where there may
have been men guilty of treason—but men
who have taken their stand boldly with the
enemy against their country—but who have
left their innocent wives and children behind
them, he would have seen them day by day
turned out naked and helpless upon the cold
charities of the world. Could that child, it may
be five days old or twelve months old, have
stayed the arm of the parricide of his country ?
I say that the man who would raise his arm
against the government of his country is
guilty of an offence for which no punishment
can be inflicted upon his head loo deep or
too overwhelming in its character. But pro-
vide your punishment against the parricide
visit it upon him to any extent you please
but I implore you, by all the history of the
past, by the scenes that are transpiring be-
fore our eyes daily, stay the hand, and let it
not go beyond that extent. I have witnessed
these things, and know that you cannot stay
the hand of the parricide by telling him that
if he commits this crime his innocent child
shall suffer. A man who will be guilty of
that offence, who will commit that crime
owns no domestic ties; because the traitor to
his country is a traitor to his home, and no
angelic, looks and words of his offspring will
stay his arm,
For these reasons I am opposed to this
proposition. I believe that no good can re
suit from it. And I endorse the more forci-
ble argument of my friend from Ann
Arundel (Mr. Miller) that if you undertake
to tear from the lips of the perishing babe |
