7 OF ss t.hcI rcf Edd Iunmored, as VT
refes 70 large nuu,btr ofthe members Of tn,


hoult, that Congress was obliged to adjourn
FOR numerous resfons, il was thought improper
| that the PrcGdent Of tie United States fhould


wait upon Mr.. Cooper, when it evidently ap,
peared that he had made this requra merely to


delay and pei pi,x tie proc ed;ngs of the court
The members Of the houfe, after waiting 6v;
hours, were told that they would not be want
ed. Such vas the conduit Of Cooper Whole
trial was one of the fareG and nolf deliberate
that ever was had. And yet his cafe was cited
by Mr. Davis, as an inllance Of judicial cruelty
and iniuaice. Mr. Davis declared that he had
nothing to fear rom the fedition law, as, IN 6i5
oCvn opinion Be pd5 an bosJP man. " He believed
new order of things would commence, that
the old writings would be burnt up, and we
fhould begin anew, A new order Of things was
highly defrable, and fuch one be believed
and trufied il would be, as no man need 10
fear" The people Of france were uniformly
told, previous 70 revolution in their fyhemS
Of government, that new order of things was
defirabIe, and even necefary, and this pretence
was fuRcient to iulfy indifcriminae Piilag1
and profcription. In fpeaking Of me eontttu.
tionality of the law Mr. Randolph obltrved
that How fropgy foever the gentleman fuP-
pofed that queaion TO have been decided by the
Congreis who pafed the law /; the judges who
gave their opinion uPoni;, or the juries who
had fettled the cafes exhibited to them, he would
tell that gentleman and all lis adherent7, tha
he had a ilill higher tribunal 10 appeal to, and
higher than than they could produce he mean
the >4,ne,ie1s feqbt. Their voice was more
powerful than thofc ccuIts, thde two branches
Of The legilsure, tbefc judges, and this pref
deat, to whom the gentleman referred" This
founds like revolutionary language, and comes
WIFI q DdO 01~ iltu liA''oi- ~ ~ y q
law has paGed both houf:s cf Congrefs. been
approved by the Preiijent, and declared to be
conaitutional by the judges, is there nil an
appeal to the peoPl4 Does our eonRitution
recognize the people, as forum competent to
decide upon The conRitutionality Of law p
Should this new doctrine Of Mr.. Randolph IS
comeinto operation, the conaituton would be
annhilated, the people erected into revoiDfian-
0ry tyiIHAal, and new order Of things begin.


WHY are dcnocrats oPpofcd TO The con
tinualion Of this law, under the prolPea Of a
change in the administration If they are sll
as hcnea as Mr.. Davis believes himlelfto be,
and have 70 itch for 1ander. how can this law
appear 70 formidable to them, when it allows
the truth TO be given in evidence. But it is
their objed TO uie the common law as Gcoop
ner, to catch every man, who lays any thing a
gaina the new adminilration, whether true or
f4lfe--their oppoGtion to its continuance is per
fealy in character.