Mr. PAGE rose and said, he wished to call the attention of the House,
before they adjourned, to a subject which he thought of importance, and
which ought no longer to be in the undecided state it had been in since
the last session; it was this, whether the persons who had taken down
and published the debates of the House, by the tacit consent of the
members during the last session, and who had withdrawn from the seats
they then held in the House, to the gallery, during this session, might
not return to the same seats. He supposed that they had modestly
withdrawn, on the supposition that the debate which took place just
before the adjournment, showed that the sense of the members was against
their sitting in the House; but the contrary was the case; that he knew
their publications had given great satisfaction to many of the
constituents of that House; that the House was applauded for its conduct
on that occasion, both at home and abroad, and had been highly commended
for it in some British publications; that he was anxious that the
short-hand writers should resume their seats in the House, lest it might
be insinuated by the jealous enemies of our Government, that the House
of Representatives were more republican and indulgent the last session
than this; that removing those writers to the gallery, was but a step
towards removing them from the House, and that this suspicion would be
increased by circumstances which, however innocent, nay proper in
themselves, might be misunderstood and excite uneasiness. The doors of
the gallery had been two days shut, the House had made a parade through
the streets, and had displayed their eagle in their hall; that these
circumstances, if followed by the exclusion of the short-hand writers,
might spread an alarm which ought to be avoided; he therefore hoped that
those gentlemen who had retired to the gallery might be informed that
they might return to the seats they occupied in the last session--that
he avoided making a regular motion to this effect, because he knew that
some worthy members who wished to admit those writers, or any others,
did not think their admission ought to be sanctioned by vote, and appear
on the journals, lest that might sanction and authenticate erroneous
publications; but that if he should not discover that the sense of the
members present was in favor of the ideas he had expressed, that
to-morrow he would bring forward a motion made by a member from South
Carolina, (Mr. TUCKER,) last session, for that purpose, for he had no
fears that a vote of the House to authorize the admission of such
writers, would make the House answerable for their publications.
Mr. HARTLEY withdrew his motion for adjournment, in order that the
subject alluded to by the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. PAGE) might be
understood.
Mr. WHITE said, he felt averse to enter into a positive resolution for
the admission of any person to take down the debates, but wished them
permitted to a convenient seat within the bar for the purpose of hearing
with greater accuracy. But he feared that a vote of the House would give
a sanction to the details, which the publications ought not to have. Not
that he thought them worse than similar publications in other countries;
on the contrary, he thought them better, if he judged from what had
fallen under his particular observation, and what he recollected to have
from others. He did not wish a positive motion for the admission of
short-hand writers, because gentlemen might object to a vote of the
kind, and he should be very loth to discourage publications of the
advantages of which he was well convinced; he knew they had given great
satisfaction to the people of America, and it was a satisfaction of
which he would not deprive them. Although these publications had not
given an exact and accurate detail of all that passed in Congress, yet
their information had been pretty full, and he believed the errors not
very many; those that were made, he supposed to arise rather from haste
or inadvertence, than from design. He was convinced of this, from the
disposition the publishers had manifested to correct any errors that
were pointed out, and the pains they sometimes took to ask gentlemen
what were their particular expressions, when they either did not hear
distinctly, or did not comprehend the speaker's meaning. He wished,
therefore, the business might go on; but silently, as it had heretofore
done, without the express approbation of the House. He was fully
convinced, that neither the editor of the Register, nor any other man,
but the members of the House, had a right to a seat within those walls,
without the consent of every member; but he thought this consent would
be tacitly given if no gentleman opposed their introduction, and in this
way he most heartily concurred with his colleague in agreeing to the
admission of such persons as thought themselves qualified, and were
inclined to take down and publish their debates and proceedings; he
should be glad to see them in the seats they had last session, but he
should object to the vote being entered on the journals of the House.
Mr. BOUDINOT thought the mode proper to be pursued on this occasion,
would be to give a discretionary power to the Speaker to admit such
persons as he thought proper. Under such a regulation, short-hand
writers might be admitted, without giving to their publications any
degree of legislative authority.
Mr. THATCHER hoped that it was not the intention of gentlemen to confine
the business to one person only, because others might appear of equal
capacity, and equally deserving of encouragement.
Mr. PAGE said, he did not wish to confine the vote to any two or three
writers, he cared not how many were admitted. It ought to be remembered,
that he said, when this subject was before the House at the last
session, that he saw no reason why Mr. FENNO should not be within the
House as well as Mr. LLOYD, instead of being in the gallery. He had no
objection to admitting any number of short-hand writers, provided they
did not incommode the members.
Mr. SMITH, (of South Carolina.)--I do not wish, Mr. Speaker, to exclude
others from a convenient seat; but at the same time, I think those who
were here before, have a pre-emption right to the best. I assure you,
sir, I am sorry for the loss of them off the floor, because I think
their publications had a salutary tendency. It has been said, that it
was the design of the short-hand writers to give a partial
representation of our proceedings. I believe, if they are not correctly
given, it is owing to the hurry in which business of this kind is
conducted, and I am confirmed in this opinion, by some errors which I
have discovered in the publication of our proceedings. It was said that
a committee was appointed to bring in a bill for the preservation and
safe-keeping of the _accounts_ of the United States. I thought within
myself that we were not so tenacious on this head, therefore suspected
some mistake, and on consulting the journals I found that a committee
had been appointed to bring in a bill for the safe-keeping and
preservation of the _acts_ of the United States. The similarity of the
letters in those two words, and the great abridgment short-hand writers
are obliged to make for the sake of expedition, may have caused him to
substitute the one for the other. In another place I found a greater
blunder still; it was said, that the House had appointed a committee for
the regulation of the _barbers_ of the United States; this struck me as
a very gross misrepresentation, for I could hardly believe that the
Legislature of the Union would, at so early a day, attempt to usurp an
authority not vested in them by the constitution, and that, too, over a
body of men who could at any time put an end to the tyranny with the
edge of the razor; but on searching the minutes in this case, I found
that a bill was brought in for the regulation of the _harbors_ of the
United States. Upon the whole, I believe, inaccurate as this work is, it
has given to our constituents great satisfaction, and I should be glad
to see our _Argus_ restored to his former situation behind the Speaker's
chair, from whence he could both see and hear distinctly every thing
that passed in the House.
TUESDAY, January 19.
The bill for enumerating the inhabitants of the United States was read a
second time, and ordered to be committed to a Committee of the Whole.
WEDNESDAY, January 20.
JAMES MADISON and JOSIAH PARKER, from Virginia, appeared and took their
seats.
THURSDAY, January 21.
GEORGE LEONARD, from Massachusetts, PETER SYLVESTER, from New York, and
THOMAS FITZSIMONS, from Pennsylvania, appeared and took their seats.
MONDAY, January 25.
_Census of the Union._
The House resolved into Committee of the Whole on the bill providing for
the actual enumeration of the inhabitants of the United States, Mr.
BALDWIN in the chair.
Mr. MADISON observed, that they had now an opportunity of obtaining the
most useful information for those who should hereafter be called upon to
legislate for their country, if this bill was extended so as to embrace
some other objects besides the bare enumeration of the inhabitants; it
would enable them to adapt the public measures to the particular
circumstances of the community. In order to know the various interests
of the United States, it was necessary that the description of the
several classes into which the community is divided should be accurately
known. On this knowledge the Legislature might proceed to make a proper
provision for the agricultural, commercial, and manufacturing interests,
but without it they could never make their provisions in due proportion.
This kind of information, he observed, all Legislatures had wished for;
but this kind of information had never been obtained in any country. He
wished, therefore, to avail himself of the present opportunity of
accomplishing so valuable a purpose. If the plan was pursued in taking
every future census, it would give them an opportunity of marking the
progress of the society, and distinguishing the growth of every
interest. This would furnish ground for many useful calculations, and at
the same time answer the purpose of a check on the officers who were
employed to make the enumeration; forasmuch as the aggregate number is
divided into parts, any imposition might be discovered with
proportionable ease. If these ideas meet the approbation of the House,
he hoped they would pass over the schedule in the second clause of the
bill, and he would endeavor to prepare something to accomplish this
object.
The committee hereupon agreed to pass over the part of the bill alluded
to.
Mr. LIVERMORE moved to amend the last clause of the bill, by striking
out all that related to the mode of compensating the Marshal and his
assistants, which were specified sums, proportioned to the service, and
to substitute a provision, authorizing the Marshal, or his assistants,
to receive from every male white inhabitant above the age of twenty-one,
five cents; and of the owner of every male slave, of like age, three
cents; reserving, for his own use, four cents out of every five, and
paying the other one cent to the Marshal. He thought this was an
equitable tax, agreeable to the spirit of the constitution; that it
might be collected with safety and satisfaction; while, on the other
hand, the mode proposed in the bill would be extremely inconvenient; it
would draw a considerable sum out of the Treasury, which their present
situation did not enable them to spare.
On the question this motion was lost.
The committee then, after making some small amendments, rose and
reported progress.
THURSDAY, January 28.
_Report of the Secretary of the Treasury._
Mr. AMES observed, that the subject of the Secretary's report, on the
means of promoting public credit, is the order for this day; but when I
consider the circumstances under which this order was entered into, I am
inclined to wish for an extension of the time. It will be recollected
that this report was ordered to be printed, in order that the members
might have it in their hands for consideration; when this was done, it
was expected that the printing would be more expeditiously executed than
the event has demonstrated it could be, of consequence our time for
deliberation has been curtailed; and those gentlemen who were against so
early a day before, will think the present rather premature. In order to
accommodate them, I shall move you a longer day than otherwise I might
be disposed to do; and if I am seconded, I move that the order of the
day be postponed till next Monday week.
Mr. JACKSON.--The report of the Secretary of the Treasury, Mr. Speaker,
embraces subjects of the utmost magnitude, which ought not to be lightly
taken up, or hastily concluded upon. It appears to me to contain two
important objects, worthy of our most serious and indefatigable
disquisition. The first is, that all idea of discrimination among the
public creditors, as original holders and transferees, ought to be done
away; and on this head, I must own to you, sir, that I formerly
coincided in something like the same opinion, but circumstances have
occurred, to make me almost a convert to the other. Since this report
has been read in this House, a spirit of havoc, speculation, and ruin,
has arisen, and been cherished by people who had an access to the
information the report contained, that would have made a _Hastings_
blush to have been connected with, though long inured to preying on the
vitals of his fellow-men. Three vessels, sir, have sailed within a
fortnight from this port, freighted for speculation; they are intended
to purchase up the State and other securities in the hands of the
uninformed, though honest citizens of North Carolina, South Carolina,
and Georgia. My soul rises indignant at the avaricious and moral
turpitude which so vile a conduct displays.
Then, sir, as to the other object of the report, the assumption of the
State debts by the General Government, it is a question of delicacy as
well as importance. The States ought to be consulted on this point, some
of them may be against the measure, but surely it will be prudent in us
to delay deciding upon a subject that may give umbrage to the community.
For my part, before I decide, I should be glad to know the sentiments of
the Legislature of the State from which I come, and whether it would, in
their opinion, be more conducive to the general and particular interests
of these United States, than retaining them on their present footing. I
trust I am not singular on this point; for gentlemen desirous of
deciding on full information, will not only wish for the sense of the
Legislatures of the several States, but of every individual also.
Perhaps gentlemen of the neighboring States may think it proper to take
up this business at an early day, because they can learn the desires of
their constituents in a short time; but let those gentlemen consider for
a moment, that the distant States ought to have an equal opportunity,
and we cannot hear the voice of Georgia in a week, nor a month. I should
therefore be as much in the dark on Monday week, as I am at present; I
would wish, if the postponement is intended to answer any valuable
purpose, that it should be extended to a longer period. I think the
first Monday in May would be sufficiently soon to enter upon it, and
shall therefore move it. In this time, the State Legislatures may have
convened, and be able to give us their sentiments on a subject in which
they are so deeply concerned.
Mr. BOUDINOT agreed with the honorable gentleman who was last up, that
this subject is a matter of the highest importance, and worthy of due
deliberation; that speculation had risen to an alarming height; but this
consideration bade him to be in favor of the only measure which could
put a stop to the evil, that is, appreciating the public debt, till the
evidences in the hands of the creditors came to their proper value. I
also agree, said he, with the gentleman, that it would be a desirable
thing to have the sense of the State Legislatures, and every part of the
community, because it would tend to elucidate the subject; but we should
not be led by visionary pursuits to defer a business of this magnitude
too long. I think we may go into a Committee of the Whole on Monday
week, without coming to a final determination; but if it is put off for
a long period, it will cause a still greater fluctuation in the market,
and increase those circumstances which the honorable gentleman laments
as injurious to the peace and happiness of the community. We had better,
therefore, look the business in the face, take it into consideration,
and go through it deliberately; but, at the same time, as expeditiously
as the novelty of our circumstances will admit. In this way also we may
acquire information, because we obtain more from listening to each
other's sentiments, than we can procure from any other source. But if,
after all, gentlemen should find themselves unprepared on Monday week,
the business may be postponed to a further day. But I would by no means
consent to lose sight of it for so long a period as from now till May.
Mr. JACKSON.--If the members of this body had known the plan in
contemplation, and they had had an opportunity of consulting their
constituents on the subject, then, I venture to say, this demon of
speculation would not have extended its baleful influence over the
remote parts of the Union. It arose and seized on us by surprise,
advantages are taken without any warning, and such as cannot but
exasperate. But, sir, waiving all these reflections, let us recollect
that the State of North Carolina forms a part of this Union; this
measure is to affect her, as well as the States who are represented on
this floor. Shall we then proceed without them? Her citizens are
indubitably as much concerned in the event as others, and will you bind
her in a case of this importance, when she has not a single
Representative within these walls? If no other consideration can induce
gentlemen to defer this business, deference to a sister State who has so
lately acceded to the Union ought. But, in addition to this, I contend
that the State Legislatures ought to be consulted; and I declare myself,
that I shall not know how to vote until I learn the sense of my
constituents. If we consent to this proper and reasonable delay, our
constituents will be prepared for our decisions, and a stop will be put
to the speculation; or if any man burns his fingers, which I hope to
God, with all the warmth of a feeling heart, they may, they will only
have their own cupidity to blame. The people will then generally remain
satisfied, under the general assurance, that Congress will pursue proper
measures for the support of public credit, and little or no evil can be
apprehended; but much substantial good may arise from a delay of a few
months.
Mr. SHERMAN hoped the business would be conducted in such a way as to be
concluded before the end of the present session. As to obtaining the
sense of the State Legislatures, he did not think that necessary. The
people appointed the members of this House, and their situation enabled
them to consult and judge better what was for the public good, than a
number of distinct parts, void of relative information, and under the
influence of local views. He supposed that Congress contained all the
information necessary to determine this or any other national question.
As to the first observation of the gentleman from Georgia, that
speculations had been carried on to a great extent, he had only to
observe, that this had been the case from the time when the public
securities were first issued, and he supposed they would continue until
the holders were satisfied with what was done to secure the payment.
As to the State debts, it was a subject which he apprehended would not
be ultimately decided, till the sense of the people is generally known;
and on this occasion, it might be well to be acquainted with the sense
of the State Legislatures; he hoped, therefore, that it would be the
case. But with regard to the foreign and domestic continental debts, he
did not hesitate to say, it was proper for Congress to take them into
consideration as speedily as possible; for the sooner they are
discussed, the sooner will the House make up there judgment thereon. He
believed they were possessed of all the facts they could be possessed
of, and therefore any great delay was improper. He was in favor of
making the business the order of the day for Monday week.
Mr. SEDGWICK.--I believe the House at present have not come to a
conclusion in their own opinion, on the various circumstances which are
necessary to be attended to in the report of the Secretary of the
Treasury; therefore, I think some delay is necessary, but it should be
as early a day as we could act upon it understandingly. The ardent
expectations of the people on this subject want no other demonstration
than the numerous body of citizens assembled within these walls.[32] And
while the public expectation is kept thus alive and in suspense,
gentlemen cannot but suppose designs will be framed and prosecuted that
may be injurious to the community. For, although I do not believe that
speculation, to a certain degree, is baneful in its effects upon
society, yet, when it is extended too far, it becomes a real evil, and
requires the administration to divert or suppress it. If the capital
employed in merchandise is taken from that branch of the public
interest, and employed in speculations no way useful in increasing the
labor of the community, such speculation would be pernicious. The
employment of the time of merchants in this way, in addition to the
employment of their capital, is a serious and alarming circumstance. A
spirit of gambling is of such evil tendency, that every legislative
endeavor should be made to suppress it. From these considerations, I
take it, Mr. Speaker, that there are two things very evident; first,
that the postponement should be so long as to enable us to enter upon
the task with understanding; and that this pernicious temper, or spirit
of speculation, should be counteracted at as early a period as can
possibly take place.
Mr. GERRY.--I am a friend to the postponement, Mr. Speaker, though not
for so long a time as the gentleman from Georgia proposes. It will be
agreed, on all hands, that public credit is the main pillar on which
this Government is to stand; but so embarrassed are our finances, that
they require both time and consideration for their due arrangement.
With respect to the suppression of speculation, I do not conceive that
possible, by either a longer or a shorter postponement. Does any
gentleman expect, while we have a public debt, to prevent speculation in
our funds? If they do, they expect to accomplish what never was
effected by any nation, nor, in my opinion, ever will be. But if they
could accomplish it, they would do an injury to the community; for
speculation gives a currency to property that would lie dormant; all
public debts would hereafter be contracted on terms ruinous to the
debtors. As to the policy of speculation, I doubt whether the
speculation of foreigners in our funds is not rather advantageous than
disadvantageous to the community. If we look abroad, and judge by
comparative reasoning, we shall be led to believe that nations derive
great advantages from being possessed of the money of foreigners; they
not only endeavor to acquire it by direct, but also by indirect loans.
During the late war, the Dutch held 40 or 50,000,000 sterling, in the
funds of Great Britain, and she was sensible of the benefit. The
speculations of individuals have perhaps been of the greatest advantage
to those who held public securities, by giving a circulation to the
certificates. Hence it has been thought that a public debt is a source
of great emolument to a nation, by extending its capital, and enlarging
the operations of productive industry.
Mr. JACKSON.--I know, sir, that there is, and will be, speculation in
the funds of every nation possessed of public debt; but they are not
such as the present report has given rise to, by the advantage those at
the seat of Government obtained of learning the plan contemplated by the
principal of the Treasury Department, before others had heard a word
thereof. If we had either received this report privately, or not sat in
a large city, then, sir, none of these speculations would have arisen,
because Congress could have devised means of diffusing the information
so generally as to prevent any of its ill effects. Under these
impressions, I am led to express my ardent wish to God, that we had been
on the banks of the Susquehanna or Potomac, or at any place in the
woods, and out of the neighborhood of a populous city; all my
unsuspecting fellow-citizens might then have been warned of their
danger, and guarded themselves against the machinations of the
speculators. To some gentlemen, characters of this kind may appear to be
of utility; but I, sir, view them in a different light; they are as
rapacious wolves, seeking whom they may devour, and preying upon the
misfortunes of their fellow-men, taking an undue advantage of their
necessities. This, sir, is the sentiment of my heart, and I will always
use its language. I say, sir, whatever might be the happy effects of
speculation in other countries, it has had the most unhappy and
pernicious effects in this. Look at the gallant veteran, who nobly led
your martial bands in the hour of extreme danger, whose patriotic soul
acknowledged no other principle than that his life was the property of
his country, and who evinced it by his repeated exposures to a vengeful
enemy. See him deprived of those limbs, which he sacrificed in your
service! and behold his virtuous and tender wife sustaining him and his
children in a wilderness, lonely, exposed to the arms of savages, where
he and his family have been driven by these useful class of citizens,
these speculators, who have drained from him the pittance which a
grateful country had afforded him, in reward for his bravery and toils,
and a long catalogue of merits. Nor is their insatiable avarice yet
satisfied, while there remains a single class of citizens who retain the
evidence of their demands upon the public; the State debts are to become
an object for them to prey upon, until other citizens are driven into
scenes of equal distress. Is it not the duty of the House to check this
spirit of devastation? It most assuredly is. If by the ill-timed
promulgation of this report, we have laid the foundation for the
calamity, ought we not to counteract it? This may be done by postponing
the subject, until the sense of the State Legislatures is obtained, with
respect to their particular debts. Then these men may send off other
vessels to countermand their former orders; and, perhaps, we may yet
save the distant inhabitants from being plundered by these harpies.
MONDAY, February 1.
GEORGE GALE, from Maryland, appeared and took his seat.
TUESDAY, February 2.
THEODORE BLAND, from Virginia, appeared and took his seat.
WEDNESDAY, February 3.
The engrossed bill for enumerating the inhabitants of the United States
was read the third time, and then ordered to lie on the table.
_Rule of Naturalization._
The House then went into a Committee of the Whole on the bill
establishing a uniform rule of Naturalization, Mr. BALDWIN in the chair.
The first clause enacted, that all free white persons, who have, or
shall migrate into the United States, and shall give satisfactory proof,
before a magistrate, by oath, that they intend to reside therein, and
shall take an oath of allegiance, _and shall have resided in the United
States for one whole year_, shall be entitled to all the rights of
citizenship, except being capable of holding an office under the State
or General Government, which capacity they are to acquire after a
residence of two years more.
Mr. TUCKER moved to strike out the words "and shall have resided within
the United States for one whole year;" because he conceived it the
policy of America to enable foreigners to hold lands, in their own
right, in less than one year; he had no objection to extending the term,
entitling them to hold an office under Government, to three years. In
short, the object of his motion was, to let aliens come in, take the
oath, and hold lands without any residence at all.
Mr. HARTLEY said, he had no doubt of the policy of admitting aliens to
the rights of citizenship; but he thought some security for their
fidelity and allegiance was requisite besides the bare oath; that is, he
thought an actual residence of such a length of time as would give a man
an opportunity of esteeming the Government from knowing its intrinsic
value, was essentially necessary to assure us of a man's becoming a
citizen. The practice of almost every State in the Union countenanced a
regulation of this nature; and perhaps it was owing to a wish of this
kind, that the States had consented to give this power to the General
Government. The terms of citizenship are made too cheap in some parts of
the Union; to say, that a man shall be admitted to all the privileges of
a citizen, without any residence at all, is what can hardly be expected.
The policy of the old nations of Europe has drawn a line between
citizens and aliens: that policy has existed to our knowledge ever since
the foundation of the Roman Empire; experience has proved its propriety,
or we should have found some nation deviating from a regulation inimical
to its welfare. From this it may be inferred, that we ought not to grant
this privilege on terms so easy as is moved by the gentleman from South
Carolina. If he had gone no further in his motion than to give aliens a
right to purchase and hold lands, the objection would not have been so
great; but if the words are stricken out that he has moved for, an alien
will be entitled to join in the election of your officers at the first
moment he puts his foot on shore in America, when it is impossible, from
the nature of things, that he can be qualified to exercise such a
talent; but if it was presumable that he was qualified by a knowledge of
the candidates, yet we have no hold upon his attachment to the
Government.
Mr. SHERMAN thought that the interest of the State where the emigrant
intended to reside ought to be consulted, as well as the interests of
the General Government. He presumed it was intended by the convention
who framed the constitution, that Congress should have the power of
naturalization, in order to prevent particular States receiving
citizens, and forcing them upon others who would not have received them
in any other manner. It was therefore meant to guard against an improper
mode of naturalization, rather than foreigners should be received upon
easier terms than those adopted by the several States. Now, the
regulation provided for in this bill, entitles all free white persons,
which includes emigrants, and even those who are likely to become
chargeable. It certainly never would be undertaken by Congress to compel
the States to receive and support this class of persons; it would
therefore be necessary that some clause should be added to the bill to
counteract such a general proposition.
Mr. PAGE was of opinion, that the policy of European nations and States
respecting naturalization, did not apply to the situation of the United
States. Bigotry and superstition, or a deep-rooted prejudice against the
Government, laws, religion, or manners of neighboring nations had a
weight in that policy, which cannot exist here, where a more liberal
system ought to prevail. I think, said he, we shall be inconsistent with
ourselves, if, after boasting of having opened an asylum for the
oppressed of all nations, and established a Government which is the
admiration of the world, we make the terms of admission to the full
enjoyment of that asylum so hard as is now proposed. It is nothing to
us, whether Jews or Roman Catholics settle amongst us; whether subjects
of kings, or citizens of free States wish to reside in the United
States, they will find it their interest to be good citizens, and
neither their religious nor political opinions can injure us, if we have
good laws, well executed.
Mr. BOUDINOT was against striking out the words, because he would rather
choose to alter it from one year to two years, than strike out all that
respected the capacity of an alien to be elected into any office. He
conceived, that after a person was admitted to the rights of
citizenship, he ought to have them full and complete, and not be
divested of any part.
Mr. WHITE noticed the inconvenience which would result from permitting
an alien to all the rights of citizenship, merely upon his coming and
taking an oath that he meant to reside in the United States. Foreign
merchants and captains of vessels might by this means evade the
additional duties laid on foreign vessels; he thought, therefore, if the
words were struck out, that another clause ought to be added, depriving
persons of the privilege of citizenship, who left the country and staid
abroad for a given length of time.
Mr. LAWRENCE was of opinion, that Congress had nothing more to do than
point out the mode by which foreigners might become citizens. The
constitution had expressly said how long they should reside among us
before they were admitted to seats in the Legislature; the propriety of
annexing any additional qualifications is therefore much to be
questioned. But this bill is not confined to the qualifications of the
General Government only, it descends to those of the State Governments;
it may be doubly questioned how far Congress has the power to declare
what residence shall entitle an alien to the right of a seat in the
State Legislatures.
The reason of admitting foreigners to the rights of citizenship amongst
us is the encouragement of emigration, as we have a large tract of
country to people. Now, he submitted to the sense of the committee,
whether a term, so long as that prescribed in the bill, would not tend
to restrain rather than encourage emigration? It has been said, that we
ought not to admit them to vote at our elections. Will they not have to
pay taxes from the time they settle amongst us? And is it not a
principle that taxation and representation ought to go hand and hand?
Shall we then restrain a man from having an agency in the disposal of
his own money? It has been also observed, that persons might come and
reside amongst us for some time, and then leave the country; he did not
doubt that such might be the case, but it was not presumable, that after
they had once taken an oath that they meant to reside here, and had
become citizens, that they would return as soon as the occasion which
required their absence had terminated.
Mr. MADISON.--When we are considering the advantages that may result
from an easy mode of naturalization, we ought also to consider the
cautions necessary to guard against abuses. It is no doubt very
desirable that we should hold out as many inducements as possible for
the worthy part of mankind to come and settle amongst us, and throw
their fortunes into a common lot with ours. But why is this desirable?
Not merely to swell the catalogue of people. No, sir, it is to increase
the wealth and strength of the community; and those who acquire the
rights of citizenship, without adding to the strength or wealth of the
community, are not the people we are in want of. And what is proposed by
the amendment is, that they shall take nothing more than an oath of
fidelity, and declare their intention to reside in the United States.
Under such terms, it was well observed by my colleague, aliens might
acquire the right of citizenship, and return to the country from which
they came, and evade the laws intended to encourage the commerce and
industry of the real citizens and inhabitants of America, enjoying at
the same time all the advantages of citizens and aliens.
I should be exceedingly sorry, sir, that our rule of naturalization
excluded a single person of good fame that really meant to incorporate
himself into our society; on the other hand, I do not wish that any man
should acquire the privilege, but such as would be a real addition to
the wealth or strength of the United States.
It may be a question of some nicety, how far we can make our law to
admit an alien to the right of citizenship, step by step; but there is
no doubt we may, and ought to require residence as an essential.
Mr. SMITH (of South Carolina) thought some restraints proper, and that
they would tend to raise the Government in the opinion of good men, who
are desirous of emigrating; as for the privilege of electing, or being
elected, he conceived a man ought to be some time in the country before
he could pretend to exercise it. What could he know of the Government
the moment he landed? Little or nothing: how then could he ascertain who
was a proper person to legislate or judge of the laws? Certainly
gentlemen would not pretend to bestow a privilege upon a man which he is
incapable of using?
Mr. HARTLEY said that the subject had employed his thoughts for some
time, and that he had made up his mind in favor of requiring a term of
residence. The experience of all nations, and the constitutions of most
of the States induced the same opinion. An alien has no right to hold
lands in any country, and if they are admitted to do it in this, we are
authorized to annex to it such conditions as we think proper. If they
are unreasonable, they may defeat the object we have in view, but they
have no right to complain; yet, considering the circumstances of this
country, he was favorable to easy terms of admission, because, he
thought, it might be some inducement to foreigners to come and settle
among us. It has been remarked, that we must admit those whom we call
citizens to all the rights of citizenship at once. This opinion, he
presumed, was not well founded; the practice of this country in no
instance warrants it. The constitutions of the several States admit
aliens to the privilege of citizenship, step by step; they generally
require a residence for a certain time, before they are admitted to vote
at elections; some of them annex to it the condition of payment of taxes
and other qualifications; but he believed none of the States render a
foreigner capable of being elected to serve in a legislative capacity,
without a probation of some years. This kind of exception is also
contemplated in the Constitution of the United States. It is there
required, that a person shall be so many years an inhabitant before he
can be admitted to the trust of legislating for the society. He thought,
therefore, that this part of the objection is not well supported.
Mr. WHITE doubted whether the constitution authorized Congress to say on
what terms aliens or citizens should hold lands, in the respective
States; the power vested by the constitution in Congress, respecting the
subject now before the House, extends to nothing more than making a
uniform rule of naturalization. After a person has once become a
citizen, the power of Congress ceases to operate upon him; the rights
and privileges of citizens in the several States belong to those States;
but a citizen of one State is entitled to all the privileges and
immunities of the citizens in the several States. Now, if any State in
the Union should choose to prohibit its citizens from the privilege of
holding real estates, without a residence of a greater number of years
than should be thought proper by this House, they could do it, and no
authority of the Government, he apprehended, could enforce an obedience
to a regulation not warranted by the constitution. So, in the case of
elections, if the constitution of a particular State requires four,
five, or six years residence, before a man is admitted to acquire a
legislative capacity, with respect to the State Government, he must
remain there that length of time notwithstanding you may declare he
shall be eligible after a residence of two years; all, therefore, that
the House have to do on this subject, is to confine themselves to a
uniform rule of naturalization, and not to a general definition of what
constitutes the rights of citizenship in the several States.
Mr. JACKSON conceived the present subject to be of high importance to
the respectability and character of the American name; the veneration he
had for, and the attachment he had to, this country, made him extremely
anxious to preserve its good fame from injury. He hoped to see the title
of a citizen of America as highly venerated and respected as was that of
a citizen of old Rome. I am clearly of opinion, that rather than have
the common class of vagrants, paupers, and other outcasts of Europe,
that we had better be as we are, and trust to the natural increase of
our population for inhabitants. If the motion made by the gentleman from
South Carolina, should obtain, such people will find an easy admission
indeed to the rights of citizenship; much too easy for the interests of
the people of America. Nay, sir, the terms required by the bill on the
table are, in my mind, too easy. I think, before a man is admitted to
enjoy the high and inestimable privileges of a citizen of America, that
something more than a mere residence amongst us is necessary. I think he
ought to pass some time in a state of probation, and at the end of the
term, be able to bring testimonials of a proper and decent behavior; no
man, who would be a credit to the community, could think such terms
difficult or indelicate: if bad men should be dissatisfied on this
account, and should decline to emigrate, the regulation will have a
beneficial effect; for we had better keep such out of the country than
admit them into it. I conceive, sir, that an amendment of this kind
would be reasonable and proper; all the difficulty will be to determine
how a proper certificate of good behavior should be obtained; I think it
might be done by vesting the power in the grand jury or district courts
to determine on the character of the man, as they should find it.
Mr. PAGE.--I observed before, Mr. Chairman, that the European policy did
not apply to the United States. I gave my reasons for it; they are such
as have not been controverted, and I presume cannot be.
With respect to the idea of excluding bad men from the rights of
citizenship, I look upon it as impracticable; hard terms of admission
may exclude good men, but will not keep out one of the wretches alluded
to; they will come in various forms, and care little about citizenship.
If we make use of the grand jury for this purpose, as proposed by the
member from Georgia, (Mr. JACKSON,) we must, to complete the plan,
authorize the grand jury to indict such emigrants as are unworthy to
become citizens, and expel them. We must add an inquisition, and as it
will not be sufficient for our views of having immaculate citizens, we
should add censors, and banish the immoral from amongst us. Indeed, sir,
I fear, if we go on as is proposed now, in the infancy of our republic,
we shall, in time, require a test of faith and politics of every person
who shall come into these States. As to any precautions against
admitting strangers to vote at elections, though I think them of less
importance than some gentlemen, I object not to them; but contend, that
every man, upon coming into the States, and taking the oath of
allegiance to the Government, and declaring his desire and intention of
residing therein, ought to be enabled to purchase and hold lands, or we
shall discourage many of the present inhabitants of Europe from becoming
inhabitants of the United States.
Mr. LAWRENCE.--We are authorized to establish a uniform rule of
naturalization; but what are the effects resulting from the admission of
persons to citizenship, is another concern, and depends upon the
constitutions and laws of the States now in operation. I have therefore
an objection to that part of the bill which respects the qualification
of the members of the State Legislatures. But with respect to residence,
before a man is admitted, I am of opinion with the gentleman from
Virginia, (Mr. PAGE,) at least it may be questioned, whether any good
can result from it, to compensate for the evil it may effect by
restraining emigration. The gentleman has said he would admit none but
such as would add to the wealth or strength of the nation. Every person
who comes among us must do one or the other; if he brings money, or
other property with him, he evidently increases the general mass of
wealth, and if he brings an able body, his labor will be productive of
national wealth, and an addition to our domestic strength. Consequently,
every person, rich or poor, must add to our wealth and strength, in a
greater or less degree.
Mr. TUCKER had no object in making his motion, but to enable people to
hold lands, who came from abroad to settle in the United States. He was
otherwise satisfied with the clause, so far as it made residence a term
of admission to the privilege of election; but there was a seeming
contradiction in making them freeholders, and, at the same time,
excluding them from the performance of duties annexed to that class of
citizens. He thought the citizens had a right to require the performance
of such duties, by every person who was eligible under their State laws
and constitutions. Now, if the motion could be modified in any way to
accomplish his object with consistency, he would cheerfully acquiesce
therein.
He had no doubt the Government had a right to make the admission to
citizenship progressive; the constitution pointed out something of this
kind, by the different ages and terms of residence they annexed to the
right of holding a seat in this House and in the Senate, and of being
chosen President. No inhabitant can become President of the United
States, unless he has been an inhabitant fourteen years; which plainly
infers that he might have been a citizen for other purposes, with a
shorter residence. But it goes still further, it enables Congress to
dictate the terms of citizenship to foreigners, and to prevent them from
being admitted to the full exercise of the rights of citizenship by the
General Government; because it declares that no other than a
natural-born citizen, or a citizen at the time of the adoption of this
constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President.
Mr. SMITH (of S. C.) hoped the question would not be put to-day, as he
wished to reflect further on the subject. A variety of observations had
been made, which merited the serious attention of the committee; he
would suggest another. An alien, in Great Britain, is not permitted to
inherit, or hold real estate for his own use; consequently, a citizen of
the United States, and a subject of Great Britain, would not be on an
equal footing with respect to estates descended to them by inheritance.
He thought this, and other weighty observations, would induce the House
to postpone the subject till to-morrow.
Mr. SEDGWICK was against the indiscriminate admission of foreigners to
the highest rights of human nature, upon terms so incompetent to secure
the society from being overrun with the outcasts of Europe; besides, the
policy of settling the vacant territory by emigration is of a doubtful
nature. He believed, in the United States, the human species might be
multiplied by a more eligible and convenient mode, than what seemed to
be contemplated by the motion now before the committee. He was well
satisfied for himself, that there existed no absolute necessity of
peopling it in this way; and, if there was no absolute necessity, he
thought Congress might use their discretion, and admit none but
reputable and worthy characters; such only were fit for the society into
which they were blended. The citizens of America preferred this country,
because it is to be preferred; the like principle he wished might be
held by every man who came from Europe to reside here; but there was at
least some grounds to fear the contrary; their sensations, impregnated
with prejudices of education, acquired under monarchical and
aristocratical governments, may deprive them of that zest for pure
republicanism, which is necessary in order to taste its beneficence with
that gratitude which we feel on the occasion. Some kind of probation, as
it has been termed, is absolutely requisite, to enable them to feel and
be sensible of the blessing. Without that probation, he should be sorry
to see them exercise a right which we have gloriously struggled to
attain.
Mr. BURKE thought it of importance to fill the country with useful men,
such as farmers, mechanics, and manufacturers, and, therefore, would
hold out every encouragement to them to emigrate to America. This class
he would receive on liberal terms; and he was satisfied there would be
room enough for them, and for their posterity, for five hundred years to
come. There was another class of men, whom he did not think useful, and
he did not care what impediments were thrown in their way; such as your
European merchants, and factors of merchants, who come with a view of
remaining so long as will enable them to acquire a fortune, and then
they will leave the country, and carry off all their property with
them. These people injure us more than they do us good, and, except in
this last sentiment, I can compare them to nothing but leeches. They
stick to us until they get their fill of our best blood, and then they
fall off and leave us. I look upon the privilege of an American citizen
to be an honorable one, and it ought not to be thrown away upon such
people. There is another class also that I would interdict, that is, the
convicts and criminals which they pour out of British jails. I wish
sincerely some mode could be adopted to prevent the importation of such;
but that, perhaps, is not in our power; the introduction of them ought
to be considered as a high misdemeanor.
Mr. STONE had no doubt but an alien might be admitted to the rights of
citizenship, step by step; but he questioned the power of the House to
say that a man shall be citizen for certain purposes, as it respects the
individual State Governments; he concluded that the laws and
constitutions of the States, and the constitution and laws of the United
States would trace out the steps by which they should acquire certain
degrees of citizenship. Congress may point out a uniform rule of
naturalization; but cannot say what shall be the effect of that
naturalization, as it respects the particular States. Congress cannot
say that foreigners, naturalized under a general law, shall be entitled
to privileges which the States withhold from native citizens.
Mr. BOUDINOT.--An exchange of sentiment on this floor I find always
tends to throw more light on a subject than is generally to be obtained
in any other way. But, as the subject is not yet fully elucidated, I
shall be in favor of letting it remain undecided till to-morrow, for
which reason, I move the committee to rise.
This motion being put, the committee rose, and reported progress, after
which the House adjourned.
=Tuesday=, February 4.
_Rule of Naturalization._
The House again resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole on the
naturalization bill, Mr. BALDWIN in the chair.
Mr. TUCKER'S motion was still before the committee.
The committee being about to take a question on the motion,
Mr. PAGE wished it delayed until he saw the gentleman from South
Carolina (Mr. BURKE) in his place.
Mr. SMITH (of S. C.) said, he believed the object of his colleague was
nothing more than to let foreigners, on easy terms, be admitted to hold
lands; that this object could be better effected by introducing a clause
to that purpose, and he had no doubt but it would be equally
satisfactory to his colleague.
Mr. GOODHUE was against the motion, because it made our citizenship too
cheap; after it was decided against, he would move to make the term two
years, instead of one, before an alien should be entitled to the
privilege of a citizen.
Mr. JACKSON.--It was observed yesterday, Mr. Chairman, that we could not
modify or confine our terms of naturalization; that we could not admit
an alien to the rights of citizenship progressively. I shall take the
liberty of supporting the contrary doctrine, which I contend for, by a
reference to the very accurate commentator on the laws of England,
_Justice Blackstone_, I., 10.--"Naturalization," says he, "cannot be
performed but by an act of Parliament; for by this an alien is put in
exactly the same state as if he had been born in the King's legiance,
_except_ only, that he is incapable, as well as a denizen, of being a
member of the Privy Council, or Parliament, holding offices, grants, &c.
No bill for naturalization can be received in either House of Parliament
without such disabling clause in it." So that here we find, in that
nation from which we derive most of our ideas on this subject, not only
that citizens are made progressively, but that such a mode is absolutely
necessary to be pursued in every act of Parliament for the
naturalization of foreigners.
The same learned Judge then goes on to show the attempts that were made
to introduce a general system of naturalization, and how they failed;
and that, to this day, even of their meritorious naval and military
characters they make an exception, as to sitting in Parliament, &c., and
holding grants of land from the Crown, within the Kingdoms of Great
Britain and Ireland. After this, I presume, it will not be contended
that we cannot found our law on the principle of a progressive and
probational naturalization.
Mr. HUNTINGTON.--The terms of the bill are too indefinite; they require
the emigrant to take an oath that he intends to reside in the United
States; but how long, and for what purpose, is not ascertained. He may
determine to stay here until he accomplishes a particular object; and he
may go into the most obscure part of the Union to take this oath. The
community certainly will not be benefited by such emigrants, and
therefore they ought not to be admitted to the privileges of
citizenship. The mode of naturalization, pointed out in this bill, is
much too easy. In the State to which I belong, said he, no person could
be naturalized, but by an act of the Legislature; the same is the case
in several of the other States, and in Britain. He never knew a good
inhabitant, who wished to be admitted to the rights of citizenship, but
what found this mode sufficiently easy. The term that an emigrant should
reside ought to be sufficiently long to give him an opportunity of
acquiring a knowledge of the principles of the Government, and of those
who are most proper to administer it; otherwise he cannot exercise his
privilege with any advantage to himself, or to the community. He
therefore wished that the clause might be amended, in such a manner as
to leave the naturalization of foreigners to the State Legislatures.
Mr. BURKE.--Unless some residence is required, it may be attended with
confusion. In large cities, like Boston, New-York, or Philadelphia, an
election may be carried by the votes of the body of sailors who happened
to be in port. If the French fleet was here at such a time, and a spirit
of party strongly excited, perhaps one of the candidates might get the
crews of every ship in the fleet, and after qualifying them, by taking
an oath of no definite meaning, carry them up to the hustings, and place
himself or his friend on this floor, contrary to the voice of
nine-tenths of the city. Even a residence of one year is too short, it
ought to be two, three, or four; but seven is too long. Indeed, the
whole of this bill seems somehow objectionable; there are some cases
also omitted, which may show the necessity of recommitting it.
The case of the children of American parents born abroad ought to be
provided for, as was done in the case of English parents, in the 12th
year of William III. There are several other cases that ought to be
likewise attended to.
Mr. JACKSON had an objection to any persons holding land in the United
States without residence, and an intention of becoming a citizen; under
such a regulation the whole Western Territory might be purchased up by
the inhabitants of England, France, or other foreign nations; the
landholders might combine and send out a large tenantry, and have
thereby such an interference in the Government as to overset the
principles upon which it is established. It will be totally subversive
of the old established doctrine that allegiance and land go together; a
person owing no allegiance to a sovereign, ought not to hold lands under
its protection, because he cannot be called upon and obliged to give
that support which invasion or insurrection may render necessary. But
with respect to residence and probation, before an alien is entitled to
the privilege of voting at elections, I am very clear it is necessary;
unless gentlemen mean to render the rank of an American citizen the
maygame of the world. Shall stories be told of our citizenship, such as
I have read in the Pennsylvania Magazine, of the citizenship there: if
my memory serves me right, the story runs, that at a contested election
in Philadelphia, when parties ran very high, and no stone was left
unturned, on either side, to carry the election, most of the ships in
the harbor were cleared of their crews, who, ranged under the masters
and owners, came before a magistrate, took the oath of allegiance, and
paid half-a-crown tax to the collector, as the constitution required,
then went and voted, and decided the contest of the day. On the return
of one of the vessels, whose crew had been employed in the affair of the
election, they fell in with a shoal of porpoises off Cape Henlopen:
"Ha!" said one of them, "what merry company have we got here! I wonder
where they are going so cheerfully?" "Going," replied one of his
comrades, "why, going to Philadelphia, to be sure, to pay taxes and vote
for Assembly men!" I hope, Mr. Chairman, we have more respect for our
situation as citizens, than to expose ourselves to the taunts and jeers
of a deriding world, by making that situation too cheap.
Mr. BURKE said, no person ought to be permitted to inherit by descent in
America, unless the same privilege was reciprocated by other nations;
perhaps this point would be properly settled by treaty, and it would be
well to introduce a provisionary clause to this effect. He was also in
favor of admitting foreigners to hold lands on easy terms, if they would
come to reside among us: and here he would take an opportunity of doing
justice to some of them, as it might be supposed, from what had fallen
from various parts of the House, that foreigners, educated under a
monarchy, were inimical to the pure principles of republicanism. He was
convinced that this doctrine was untrue, because he had often remarked,
that foreigners made as good citizens of republics as the natives
themselves. Frenchmen, brought up under an absolute monarch, evinced
their love of liberty in the late arduous struggle; many of them are now
worthy citizens, who esteem and venerate the principles of our
Revolution. Emigrants from England, Ireland, and Scotland, have not been
behind any in the love of this country; so there is but little occasion
for the jealousy which appears to be entertained for the preservation of
the Government.
Mr. TUCKER thought the bill must be recommitted; but he did not wish it
done till the sense of the House was known on some of the various points
that had presented themselves during the debate. With respect to the
latter part of the first clause, he agreed with the gentleman from
Maryland, (Mr. SENEY,) that we ought to provide a rule of
naturalization, without attempting to define the particular privileges
acquired thereby under the State Governments. By the Constitution of the
United States, the electors of the House of Representatives are to have
the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of
the State Legislatures. He presumed it was to be left to the discretion
of the State constitutions, who were to be the electors of the State
Legislatures, and therefore the General Government had no right to
interfere therein.
Mr. HARTLEY observed, that the subject was entirely new, and that the
committee had no positive mode to enable them to decide; the practice of
England, and the regulations of the several States, threw some light on
the subject, but not sufficient to enable them to discover what plan of
naturalization would be acceptable under a government like this. Some
gentlemen had objected to the bill, without attending to all its parts,
for a remedy was therein provided for some of the inconveniences that
have been suggested. It was said the bill ought to extend to the
exclusion of those who had trespassed against the laws of foreign
nations, or been convicted of a capital offence in any foreign kingdom;
the last clause contains a proviso to that effect, and he had another
clause ready to present, providing for the children of American citizens
born out of the United States.
Mr. LIVERMORE thought the bill very imperfect, and that the committee
ought to rise, and recommend it to be referred to a select committee;
observing, that it was extremely difficult for fifty or sixty persons to
arrange and make a system of a variety of motions and observations that
had been brought forward.
On the question being put, the committee rose and reported, and the bill
was recommitted to a committee of ten.[33]
MONDAY, February 8.
_Public Credit._
The House then resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole on the
state of the Union. The report of the Secretary of the Treasury relative
to a provision for the support of public credit was before them. Mr.
BALDWIN in the chair.
After a silence of some minutes,
Mr. LIVERMORE asked, what part of the report it was expected that
gentlemen should speak to? He wished some gentleman would select such
parts as he conceived to be of importance, and submit them to the
committee.
Mr. SMITH (of South Carolina) was of opinion, that the committee had
better consider the object of the report, in separate points of view, by
which means they would be able to go through the investigation with a
greater degree of accuracy than if they were left to range at large in
the extensive field before them. The report contains objects so various,
that it is possible gentlemen may agree, with respect to one or two, and
yet differ on a third: from this consideration, he was induced to
suggest the idea of single and independent resolutions, and had prepared
the following: if the manner met the approbation of the committee, he
would lay them on the table for consideration. They were to the
following effect:
_Resolved_, That Congress ought not adjourn, until they have adopted
such measures as will make an adequate provision for the public debt.
_Resolved_, That in making such provision, no discrimination shall be
made between the original holders of the evidences and the assignees
thereof.
_Resolved_, That such of the debts of the individual States as have been
incurred by them, during the late war, ought to be assumed by the
General Government, and like funds provided for them.[34]
_Resolved_, That the arrearages of interest, on the Continental and
State debts, ought to be funded, and consolidated with the principal.
_Resolved_, That the interest to be paid thereon does not exceed ----
per cent. per annum, for the present.
These motions were severally expressive of objects contemplated in the
Secretary's report. The last was upon a principle of modification, such
as was held out in the plan for reloaning the debt.
TUESDAY, February 9.
_Public credit: Providing for the public debt: Assuming the
State debts: Funding their certificates: Report of General
Hamilton, Secretary of the Treasury._
[To the first object, that of providing for the public
debt, there was no objection; to the assumption and the
funding there was a strenuous opposition, and their
adoption became one of the landmarks of party.]
Mr. JACKSON.--Believe me, Mr. Chairman, I have as high a sense of the
obligation we are under to the public creditors, and feel as much
gratitude towards them as any man on this floor. I shall ever cheerfully
acknowledge the duty we owe to our benefactors, and in a peculiar manner
to those brave soldiers who, at the risk of their lives and fortunes,
secured the independency of America. I have also the most sincere wishes
for the re-establishment of public credit, and that upon firm and solid
ground, and on principles which cannot be called in question; but there
appears to me a previous question, which has not yet been brought
forward; it is this, whether there exists an immediate necessity for
funding the national debt in the permanent manner proposed?
The high regard I have for the nature and circumstances of the foreign
debt, induced me to let the first proposition pass without any
animadversion. The vote which has been taken on that point will serve to
show foreigners that we are concerned to preserve our credit with them
by a rigid performance of our stipulations; trusting, at the same time,
that our fellow-citizens cannot object to a distinction so just and
proper in itself; for, notwithstanding what the domestic creditors may
say, it is the money of foreigners that has, in a great measure,
established our independence.
It is doubtful with me whether a permanent funded debt is beneficial or
not to any country; some of the first writers in the world, and who are
most admired on account of the clearness of their perceptions, have
thought otherwise, and declared that wherever funding systems have been
adopted in a Government, they tend more to injure posterity than they
would injure the inhabitants to pay the whole debt at the time it was
contracted. The principle, I apprehend, is demonstrated by experience;
the first system of the kind that we have any account of originated in
the State of Florence in the year 1634; that Government then owed about
£60,000 sterling, and being unable to pay it, formed the principal into
a funded debt, transferable with interest at five per cent. What is the
situation of Florence in consequence of this event? Her ancient
importance is annihilated. Look at Genoa and Venice; they adopted a
similar policy, and are the only two of the Italian Republics who can
pretend to an independent existence, but their splendor is obscured;
they have never been able since the period at which a funding system was
introduced to raise themselves to that formidable state to which they
were before. Spain seems to have learned the practice from the Italian
Republics, and she, by the anticipation of her immense revenue, has sunk
her consequence beneath that level which her natural situation might
have maintained. France is considerably enfeebled, and languishes under
a heavy load of debt. England is a melancholy instance of the ruin
attending such engagements. In the reign of King William, 1706, the
policy of the English Parliament laid the foundation of what is called
their national debt; but the sum was inconsiderable; it little exceeded
£5,000,000 sterling; the example then set has been closely followed. In
1711, it amounted to £9,177,769 sterling, during the wars in the reign
of Queen Anne; since that, the capital of the debt of Great Britain
amounted, in 1777, to about £136,000,000 sterling; and to such a pitch
has the spirit of funding and borrowing been carried in that country,
that in 1786, their national debt had increased to £230,000,000
sterling; a burthen which the most sanguine mind can never contemplate
they will ever be relieved from. If future difficulties should involve
that nation still further, what must be the consequence? The same effect
must be produced that has taken place in other nations; it must either
bring on a national bankruptcy, or annihilate her existence as an
independent empire. Hence I contend that a funding system in this
country will be highly dangerous to the welfare of the Republic; it may,
for a moment, raise our credit, and increase our circulation by
multiplying a new species of currency; but it must hereafter settle upon
our posterity a burthen which they can neither bear nor relieve
themselves from. It will establish a precedent in America that may, and
in all probability will be pursued by the sovereign authority, until it
brings upon us that ruin which it has never failed to bring, or is
inevitably bringing, upon all the nations of the earth who have had the
temerity to make the experiment. Let us take warning by the errors of
Europe, and guard against the introduction of a system followed by
calamities so universal. Though our present debt be but a few millions,
in the course of a single century it may be multiplied to an extent we
dare not think of; for my part, I would rather have direct taxes imposed
at once, which, in the course of a few years, would annihilate the
principal of our debt. A few years' exertion in this way will save our
posterity from a load of annual interest, amounting to the fifth, or
perhaps the half of the sum we are now under engagements to pay.
But why, Mr. Chairman, should we hasten on this business of funding? Are
our debts ascertained? The report of the Secretary of the Treasury
proposes that we should not only fund the debts that are ascertained,
but the unliquidated and unsettled debts due from the Continent; nor
does the plan stop here, it proposes that we should assume the payment
of the State debts--debts to us totally unknown. Many of the States,
sir, have not yet ascertained what they owe; and if we do not know the
amount of what we owe, or are to be indebted, shall we establish funds?
Shall we put our hands into the pockets of our constituents, and
appropriate moneys for uses we are undetermined of? But more especially
shall we do this, when, in doing it, it is indisputably certain, that
the encumbrance will more than exceed all the benefits and conveniences?
Gentlemen may come forward, perhaps, and tell me, that funding the
public debt will increase the circulating medium of the country, by
means of its transferable quality; but this is denied by the best
informed men. The funding of the debt will occasion enormous taxes for
the payment of the interest. These taxes will bear heavily both on
agriculture and commerce. It will be charging the active and industrious
citizen, who pays his share of the taxes, to pay the indolent and idle
creditor who receives them, to be spent and wasted in the course of the
year, without any hope of a future reproduction; for the new capital
which they acquire must have existed in the country before, and must
have been employed, as all capitals are, in maintaining productive
labor. Thus the honest, hard-working part of the community will promote
the ease and luxury of men of wealth; such a system may benefit large
cities, like Philadelphia and New York, but the remote parts of the
continent will not feel the invigorating warmth of the American
treasury; in the proportion that it benefits one, it will depress
another.
Mr. SMITH, (of South Carolina.)--The report of the Secretary of the
Treasury contains a proposition for the establishment of a sinking fund.
I wish the gentleman who brought forward the resolutions under
consideration, had included that part of the system in his
propositions, as it might have had a tendency to ease the mind of the
honorable gentleman from Georgia, and to have shown him that the public
debt is not intended to acquire the permanency which he dreads. If our
present debt cannot be paid off at once, all that can be done is to
provide such funds for its gradual extinction as will morally ensure the
object.
The gentleman has contended, that public funding is a public injury. I
agree with him that funding a debt to a very great amount may be very
injurious; yet funding a small debt is beneficial. But whether this is,
or is not a fact, is not the object of our present inquiry; we are not
in a situation to determine whether we will or will not have a public
debt. We have it already, and it appears to me to be a matter of
necessity that we should appropriate some funds for the payment of the
interest upon it. When we consider the nature of the contract, for what
it is we owe the money, and our ability to comply, it follows, of
consequence, that we must pay; it follows as close as the shadow follows
its substance; or as close as the night follows the day. The only
question that can come before us is, the mode of doing it.
With respect to that part of our debt which is yet unascertained, I
would just beg leave to observe, that it is not our fault that it
remains in an unsettled state; neither is it the fault of those who have
brought in their accounts and had them liquidated. Hence, it appears to
me extremely hard that we should refuse to provide for the payment of
those to whom we acknowledge ourselves to be indebted, because there are
others whose claims against us are not yet adjusted. The argument,
therefore, which relates to this point, as well as that which relates to
the Western Territory, will apply ten years hence as well as now, and
form an eternal pretext for deferring the business.
Mr. FITZSIMONS said, that the circumstances of the foreign debt were
such as left no choice in our power, according to the plan proposed by
the Secretary of the Treasury; but we have it in our power, and are
recommended to make a different arrangement with respect to the domestic
debt. I stated, when I introduced the resolutions, that they were
intended to bring the Secretary's plan fairly before the committee. This
resolution is differently worded on that account; but it may be
observed, that the foreign creditors are not here to make a contract
with the people of the United States, but the domestic creditors are;
and we may hold out a modification to them for their acceptance. With
respect to the means by which we shall be enabled to pay the interest
and principal of our debt, this resolution has nothing to do, it leaves
it to the consideration of the committee; and every gentleman will be
perfectly at liberty to propose and support such as he supposes to be
most suitable to our abilities.
Mr. LIVERMORE.--I do not clearly understand the import of the resolution
before the committee. It seems worded rather in a doubtful manner. If
it means, that funds ought to be appropriated for the payment of the
interest and principal of the domestic debt, as the amount appears on
the face of the certificates, I shall be totally against it; whether it
pointedly carries that meaning or not, I cannot say.
For my part, I consider the foreign and domestic debt to carry with them
very material distinctions. The one is not like a debt, while the other
has all the true qualities of one. However gentlemen may think on this
subject, there is a great difference between the merits of that debt
which was lent the United States in real coin, by disinterested persons,
not concerned or benefited by the revolution, and at a low rate of
interest, and those debts which have been accumulating upon the United
States, at the rate of six per cent. interest, and which were not
incurred for efficient money lent, but for depreciated paper, or
services done at exorbitant rates, or for goods or provisions supplied
at more than their real worth, by those who received all the benefits
arising from our change of condition. It is within the knowledge of
every gentleman, that a very considerable part of our domestic
loan-office debt arose in this manner. It is well known that loan-office
certificates were issued as a kind of circulating medium, when the
United States were in such straits for cash, that they could not raise
the necessary supplies in any other way. And it is very well known, that
those who sold goods or provisions for this circulating medium, raised
their prices from six to ten shillings at least.
There is another observation I would beg leave to make. The prices at
which our supplies were procured were such, even in hard money, that it
might be said specie had depreciated, or, what amounted to the same
thing, the commodities were sold for more than their current price; in
many cases, half the price would now purchase the same thing. If so,
there is as much reason that we should now consider these public
securities in a depreciated state, as every holder of them has
considered them from that time to this. There was a period at which they
were considered of no greater value than three or four shillings in the
pound; at this day they are not at more than eight or ten. If this,
then, is the case, why should Congress put it upon the same footing as
the foreign debt, for which they received a hard dollar for every dollar
they engaged to pay? Could any possible wrong be done to those who hold
the domestic debt, by estimating it at its current value? I do not speak
of those only who have speculated in certificates. With respect to them,
I do not see how a difference can be made. By the resolutions of
Congress, and from the face of the papers, it appears that they were
transferable.
It may be said, that there was some part of the domestic debt incurred
by loans of hard money. There might be a small part lent in this way,
but it was very small indeed, compared with the whole of the domestic
debt. It is in the memory of every gentleman, that, before the beginning
of the revolution, every State issued paper-money; it answered the
exigencies of Government in a considerable degree. The United States
issued a currency of the same nature, which answered their purposes,
except in some particular cases, and these were effected by loans of
certain sums of hard money. If any distinctions are to be made among the
domestic creditors, they ought to be made in favor of such only, and
that in consequence of the origin of the debt; while the great mass
given for the depreciated paper, or provisions sold at double prices,
ought to be liquidated at its real value. I cannot think it injustice to
reduce the interests on those debts. I should therefore be against
passing this resolution, if it carries in it the idea of paying the
principal and interest, according to the face of the paper. It is well
known, that a large proportion of this domestic debt was incurred for
paper-money lent. To be sure Congress acknowledged its value equal to
its name; but this was done on a principle of policy, in order to
prevent the rapid depreciation which was taking place. But money lent in
this depreciated and depreciating state, can hardly be said to be lent
from a spirit of patriotism; it was a mere speculation in public
securities. They hoped, by putting their money in the loan-office,
though in a depreciated state, to receive hard money for it by and by. I
flatter myself this prediction will never be effected.
The Secretary of the Treasury has offered some alternatives to the
creditors, out of which they may make their election; but it seems to me
that they, all of them, propose a reduction in the principal and
interest, that they may have an annuity of two-thirds, at six per
centum, or for the whole sum at four per centum, or they may accept of
the other terms. Though this may make a reduction favorable to the
public, yet this is not such a reduction as justice, in my opinion,
requires; and as the resolution before the committee is intended to make
way for the adoption of those principles, I shall vote against it,
though I would rather it was passed over for the present, in order to
see what is the sense of the House on making a specific provision for
the payment of the debt.
Mr. PAGE was glad that the question had been asked the mover of the
propositions on the table what was the object of the resolution now
under consideration, because it was liable to be misunderstood. But now,
he presumed, the answer had satisfied every gentleman's mind.
The gentleman from New Hampshire was pleased to observe, that foreigners
were not interested in the late revolution; that what they did was from
such motives as demanded our gratitude; but our citizens were deeply
interested, and, I believe, if they were never to get a farthing for
what is owing to them for their services, they would be well paid; they
have gained what they aimed at; they have secured their liberties and
their lives; they will be satisfied that this House has pledged itself
to pay to foreigners the generous loans they advanced us in the day of
distress. If we were to make distinctions adverse to their interests, we
could never expect from them a further favor in the future exigencies of
this country. But we may also look with confidence at home for loans and
services; on such occasions they will be supplied us on the principles
of patriotism; the adoption of the first resolution was therefore
politic and just, but the motion of my worthy colleague is not
necessary. I feel for my fellow-citizens who have gloriously exerted
themselves in the salvation of their country by their services in the
field, or the supplies which they yielded, as much as any man can do. I
acknowledge the debt of gratitude the community owes to those select
citizens, and am willing to pay it as far as we possibly can; but they
cannot, they will not complain of the deference we have shown to others,
whose particular situation merited such regard at our hands.
Mr. SCOTT.--I find myself obliged to consider the Government of the
United States in a very different situation, with respect to our foreign
and domestic creditors. With respect to the foreign debt, we, the
representatives of the United States, are vested with full power, and we
are bound in duty to provide for the punctual payment according to the
nature of the contract; but when I turn my eyes to the domestic debt, I
find myself in a very different situation. I conceive myself a mere
arbiter among the individuals of which the Union is composed. A part of
the people have a claim upon somebody. I think that claim is against the
people at large, and we are not only to provide for the payment of that
claim, if just, but to determine whether that claim is just or not. One
part of the community applies to us to recover of the other what is due
to it; the other says, the debt is too large, it is more than is justly
due; you must try and determine between us, and say what part is just,
and what is not. This brings clearly into my view the whole subject, as
a thing within the power of Congress to new model or modify, if we find
that justice demands it; but we have no such authority with respect to
the foreign debt. It is very clear to me, that we have the power to
administer justice and impartiality among the members of the Union; and
this will lead me freely to assert, that we have not only authority, but
it is our duty, if, on examination, we find that not more than half the
sum that is claimed is justly claimed, to strike off the other half.
Mr. BOUDINOT.--I am glad to see gentlemen bring into view principles on
which to determine the great question before us; because, when they are
once established, they will enable us to proceed with certainty to a
decision. If the principles brought forward by the honorable gentleman
from Pennsylvania are just, his arguments are of great weight; but if,
on consideration, we shall find that the principles are unjust, then I
presume, however cogent the system of reasoning he has founded thereon,
it will not prevail. He supposes we sit here as judges to determine the
different claims of the creditors of the United States. If we are in
that predicament, I agree we ought not to proceed but on full evidence
and hearing of those claims. But I have never hitherto been led to
consider Congress in this light, nor can I now consider them in any such
point of view. I consider the Congress, who entered into these
engagements, as complete representatives of the United States, and, in
their political capacity, authorized, by the articles of Confederation,
to contract the debts for which our public faith is pledged; instead of
being judges, or arbitrators, on this occasion, we are parties to the
contract; nor is our case varied, by the dissolution of the old
Confederacy, because the existing constitution has expressly recognized
the engagements made under the former. All debts contracted before the
adoption of this constitution, shall be as valid against the United
States, under this Government, as under the Confederation. Now is the
moment to establish the principle; if the constitution admits the
borrowing of money, or paying for supplies, to be a contract, we are one
of the parties to this contract, and all idea of being arbiters must
vanish. We cannot judge in our own cause. The case will now stand clear;
we owe a debt, contracted for a valuable consideration. The evidences of
our debt are in the hands of our creditors, and we are called upon to
discharge them; if we have it in our power, we ought to consider
ourselves bound to do it, on every principle of honor, of justice, and
of policy; but as we have not the ability to pay the whole off, nor,
perhaps, the whole interest, we must endeavor to make such a
modification as will enable us to satisfy every one. Not that this
modification shall take place without the consent of the creditors; this
would be improper and unjust. Each party is as much to be consulted on
this occasion, as it was at the time of the first contract. If, then,
Congress is bound by the first contract, no gentleman can say we are
judges. If we are parties, what would be the decision before a court of
justice? The creditor produces my bond, by which I have bound myself to
pay a hundred dollars; I cannot gainsay the fact; no man is allowed to
plead that he has made a bad bargain, and that at other times, he could
have purchased what he got of the creditor at half the sum he was forced
to allow him. The inquiry with the judges is not, whether the debtor
made a good bargain or not, but whether he did it fairly and
voluntarily. We are in the same predicament if we fairly and honestly
received the _quid pro quo_; we are bound, as parties to the honest
performance of the contract, to discharge the debt; otherwise, what
avails the clause in the constitution, declaring all debts contracted,
and engagements entered into, before the adoption to be as valid against
the present Government as they were under the old Confederation? The
debt was _bona fide_ contracted; it was acknowledged by the United
States; and the creditor received a certificate as to the evidence of
his debt. It is immaterial to us what he did with it. I confess, if the
original holder was to come forward, and say that he had been robbed of
such evidence, we ought not to pay it until the point was ascertained in
a court of justice.
Some observations were made to point out a difference between the
foreign and domestic debt. I admit there is a distinction, and that in
another instance, which has not been mentioned. His Most Christian
Majesty, when he first became our important ally, presented Congress
with a large sum of money; but this being insufficient to procure us the
necessary supply of military stores, a loan was made us from the royal
coffers of France. But this also being inadequate, we endeavored to
obtain further aid from foreigners. The credit of the United States was
so much impaired, as to hold out but little encouragement to individuals
to trust us with their money. The French King added another mark of his
distinguished attention: he guarantied the loan, and the money was
obtained--obtained of the widow and fatherless; of persons whose all
depended upon a punctual payment of the interest. On this point I could
refer you to letters from our commissioners in Europe, who beg that we
may not put them on this business, unless we are certain that the United
States will carefully provide for the payment of the interest; because,
in case of failure, hundreds must perish for want. This is another
motive why we should attend to the performance of our contracts; and I
will repeat again, it is what we are called upon to do upon every
principle of honor, justice, and policy.
Mr. LAWRENCE.--The observations of the honorable gentleman from
Pennsylvania, (Mr. SCOTT,) if I rightly understand them, apply to the
principal, and not the interest of the domestic debt. He imagines it to
be too large; that is, that the individual who performed services, or
rendered supplies during the late war, received evidences of rather too
great nominal value; and that, at this period of time, it is necessary
to investigate every particular claim, and judge whether the balances
are respectively due or not. The gentleman has distinguished between the
foreign and domestic creditor on this point; he supposes the foreign
debt ought not to be re-examined, because the holders of it are
unconnected with our Government. They lent us money, and we are bound
according to the precise terms of the contract. Here I agree with him;
but that there should be a solid distinction in justice between the
foreign and domestic creditor is to me a singular thing. It was
observed, that the citizens of America would be well paid for their
loans, supplies, and services, by the benefits and profits arising to
them by the revolution; but are we to sacrifice the claims of
individuals of the community for the advantage of the whole? Who are
benefited by the revolution? Every citizen. Then every citizen is bound
to contribute his equal part of the expenses attending the procurement.
Should those of our citizens who furnished the supplies, or loaned their
money, be the only class who are injured? Every citizen is bound to pay
according to his ability, because every one has participated in the
benefits: then the only question to ask is, whether this discrimination
should be made to ascertain or new proportion the debt? This will lead
me to inquire whether it is proper for us, after the resolution we
passed at the last session, after the resolution we have just now
passed, to scale the public debt anew? Shall we say that the evidence
carries on its face fraud and deception? I contend we shall not. Why
shall we liquidate a debt which is established upon a complete and final
settlement? From the face of the evidences arises the demand, and that
is the demand we are to make provision for. Shall we go to our officers
and soldiers who served during the late war, individually, and say that
the balance struck to be due to them is an imposition on the public,
when the Government itself has determined that they were entitled to
such particular reward? If, at the time those securities were given to
them, Government had paid them in money, would any gentleman now contend
that their accounts ought to be reliquidated, and every individual
called upon to refund a part of what he acquired in conformity to the
laws of this country? Certainly no gentleman would contend for such a
measure. How is the nature of the case altered from the circumstances of
our having been so unfortunate as to pay those worthy men with a
certificate in lieu of the money which was due? The nature of the case,
I conceive, is perfectly the same; and we are in duty bound to make a
full compensation. The face of the paper expresses what that is, and it
is to be our guide; the demand surely is not to be lessened.
Mr. JACKSON said there were, most surely, principles on which to ground
a discrimination betwixt a foreign and domestic creditor; if there was
no other, there was this, that the domestic creditors are those that are
bound to pay the foreign creditors their demand; they ought,
consequently, to do justice to others, by a punctual payment, before
they require a discharge of their own claims.
Mr. AMES did not conceive it material to inquire whether there be an
equal obligation on the people of the United States to pay their foreign
and domestic creditors, when they meant to pay both; but if it is
intended to reduce the principal of either, it will lead us into a
discussion of the principles on which such a measure ought to be
founded. The honorable gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. SCOTT) probably
intends by the amendment to have a reduction of the debt; I have, said
he, so much respect for the good sense and upright intentions of that
honorable gentleman, that I will not impute to him unworthy motives; nor
do I believe that he governs his conduct in private life by maxims
which I suspect to be contained in the amendment now before us. I would
not be understood, by any means, to convey an improper reflection upon
the opinions of any one. The science of finance is new in America; a
gentleman may therefore propose the worst of measures with the best
intentions. What, let me inquire, will be the pernicious consequences
resulting from the establishment of this doctrine? Will it not be
subversive of every principle on which public contracts are founded? The
evidences of the debt, possessed by the creditors of the United States,
cannot, in reason, justice, or policy, be considered in any other light
than as public bonds, for the redemption and payment of which the
property and labor of the whole people are pledged. The only just idea
is, that when the public contract a debt with an individual, that it
becomes personified, and that with respect to this contract, the powers
of Government shall never legislate. If this was not the case, it would
destroy the effect it was intended to produce; no individual would be
found willing to trust the Government, if he supposed the Government had
the inclination and power, by virtue of a mere major vote, to set aside
the terms of the engagement. If the public in such a case is, as I have
said, personified, what conceivable difference is there, except in favor
of the creditor, between the public and an individual in the case? If,
then, the public contract is a solemn obligation upon us, we are bound
to its true and faithful performance. What is the object for which men
enter into society, but to secure their lives and property? What is the
usual means of acquiring property between man and man? The best right to
property is acquired by the consent of the last owner. If, then, an
individual is possessed of property, in consequence of this right, how
can Government, founded on this social compact, pretend to exercise the
right of divesting a man of that object which induced him to combine
himself with the society? every gentleman may determine this question by
his own feelings. Shall it be said that this Government, evidently
established for the purpose of securing property, that, in its first
act, it divested its citizens of seventy millions of money, which is
justly due to the individuals who have contracted with Government! I
believe those gentlemen, who are apprehensive for the liberties and
safety of their fellow-citizens, under the efficiency of the present
constitution, will find real cause of alarm from the establishment of
the present doctrine. I have heard, that in the East Indies the stock of
the labor and property of the empire is the property of the prince; that
it is held at his will and pleasure; but this is a slavish doctrine,
which I hope we are not prepared to adopt here. But I will not go
further into a consideration of the idea of discrimination. I will ask,
though, is this country ever to be in a settled and quiet state? Must
every transaction that took place, during the course of the last war,
be ripped up? Shall we never have done with the settlement and
liquidation of our accounts?
Mr. LIVERMORE.--The arguments advanced by the gentlemen from
Massachusetts and New York prove too much, and therefore prove nothing.
That the late Congress had, at all times, from their first institution,
the power to contract debts, for the benefit of the United States,
cannot be denied; and that we are authorized to pay such debts, is
equally certain. But this by no means contravenes the opinion of those
gentlemen who think, that the whole may be properly considered and
discharged at the rate which justice requires; for the same argument
which is urged for the payment of the public securities at their nominal
value, might be urged in favor of paying off the Continental debts of
credit, according to the sums expressed on the face of them. They were
issued with as much confidence, and were received with as much reliance
on the public faith, as any species of securities whatever; yet, it
seems to be given up on all hands, that the owners of the old
Continental paper bills ought not to be paid according to their nominal
value. Perhaps it may be said, on comparing them with the loan-office
certificates, that the United States had not the benefit of that money;
but had they not the value of it? It will be answered, that when the
money was first issued, Congress had nearly the value for it; but
afterwards the money greatly depreciated, and they had not the full
value for it, yet the obligation to pay it is as explicit as words can
make it. No advocate will be found for making all that money good. It
has been thought proper, and it is just, that it should be reduced from
its nominal value; if it is reduced on a scale of one hundred for one,
the holders of it, I dare say, would cheerfully receive that sum. If the
United States then had value for it, and if they had not value for the
certificates, who can doubt of the justice of reliquidating, and duly
ascertaining the public debt? All I contend for is this, that the
present Government pay the debts of the United States; but as the
domestic part of the debt has been contracted in depreciated notes, that
less interest should be paid upon it than six per cent. Six per cent.
was the usual interest upon the certificates when they were issued by
Congress; but if the possessor has received no part of this six per
cent. until this time, that now the principal and interest be
consolidated into one sum, hereafter to bear an interest of three or
four per cent.; then those citizens, who now stand as creditors of the
Union, will find that part of their property has been the most
productive of any, much more productive than the property of the
citizens of the United States has generally been. Those who lent their
money to individuals before and during the late war, generally lost or
suffered by the depreciation some three-quarters of the capital; nay,
some thirty-nine fortieths. But is this the case of the domestic
creditor of the United States? No! he will preserve his property,
through the chaos of the revolution, and be put now in a more eligible
situation than he was at the time when he loaned the money. The capital
sum which he lent is now increased, and very rapidly increased, for six
per cent. is a very large interest. He will now receive 160 dollars for
his 100, and putting that into the funds, at three or four per cent. he
will find it more productive than any other method in which he could
employ his money; for, I contend, that neither improved, nor unimproved
lands, will give an interest near half of what the public creditor will
receive. People who have held real property have sunk, with the taxes,
and other losses, the greatest part of it; but the public creditor has
let his run through the confusion of the revolution, and nevertheless
gets it returned to him safe; and, so far from being impaired, that he
has prodigiously accumulated, not only in a manner superior to the
property of his fellow-citizens, but superior to the foreigner who lent
his money at four per cent. Justice and equity require, on the behalf of
the community, that these people be content with reasonable profit. They
ought not, therefore, to receive, on a funded debt, so much as six per
cent.; whether three or four, or something between three and four, would
be a proper sum, I shall not pretend to determine. But I consider it a
proper question for this committee to consider, in justice to those who
are to pay, as well as to those who are to receive; nor do I believe the
domestic creditors would be dissatisfied with it, provided they were
sure of receiving this annual interest; for their debts, on such a
footing, would be better to them than if they were established on an
extravagant plan that could never be effected, but which would be likely
to throw the nation into confusion. Every body has suffered more or less
by the depreciation, but the public creditors very little, in regard to
that part of their property which they had deposited in the hands of
Government: it is true, that it has slept; but it is now waked up to
some purpose.
Mr. SCOTT.--A great deal has been said on a great principle that must be
attended to in some stage of this business; but gentlemen have been led
into a more extensive discussion on the doctrine of discrimination than
I had any idea of when I proposed the amendment. It has been urged by
some of the gentlemen, that however just my principle is, that the
Legislature is in the quality of an arbitrator, yet we cannot adopt the
amendment; others again have said, that the debt is a contract between
the Government and the individual, and that we being parties we cannot
be judges; for it is contrary to the principles of the law, that we
should be judges in our own cause. If, in national transactions like
this, interesting to our citizens only, the Government is to be supposed
one party, and the individual the other party, I would ask the gentleman
who is the judge? Can two parties exist in a well organized Government
to dispute about property, and have no judge? The very idea must induce
the gentleman to abandon his ground. It has been said, as the foundation
of an opinion, that there is a great similitude between a certificate
and a bond that is brought into court to demand payment upon; that no
opposition can be made; that no plea can be entered; but I would wish to
ask the gentleman who made the remark, as a professional man, whether
the want of consideration would not be a good plea? In Courts of Equity,
relief can be given against _prima facie_ evidence.
Mr. BOUDINOT.--I am a friend to the discussion of every principle on
which the great business before us may be supposed to turn, because I
have a great desire that they should be settled on full information,
that the public, as well as ourselves, may be satisfied with their
propriety. This leads me again to notice the arguments which have been
urged in favor of considering this body as judges or arbitrators between
the public and the individuals who have claims upon the public.
It must appear to the satisfaction of every unprejudiced mind, from the
resolutions of the late Congress, that they acknowledge themselves a
party on behalf of the public, to every engagement they entered into for
services, supplies, or moneys loaned. If then it is admitted that the
late Congress were parties to the contract, we must agree that our
situation is precisely the same, because we stand in their shoes; and in
my former argument I urged, if we are parties we cannot be judges.
Mr. JACKSON.--If there is no part of the debt of the United States
unliquidated, besides the two millions which the gentleman alludes to,
yet there is a very considerable part of what is in contemplation to
fund, as Continental debt, not at present ascertained. I mean the State
debts. The Secretary himself had no evidence before him, from which he
could make a probable guess of the amount; if these are to be assumed by
the General Government, I presume the General Government ought to be at
liberty duly to ascertain them; and, therefore, the amendment proposed
by the honorable gentleman from Pennsylvania ought to be admitted.
The honorable gentlemen who are in opposition, contend that no sort of
discrimination ought to take place; yet from what they have let fall, on
this occasion, I am led to believe that they favor that part of the
report of the Secretary which makes a discrimination, in fact, equal to
a loss of one-third of the principal. What will hold good in one case
ought to hold good in another, and a discrimination might take place
upon the same principles, between those to whom the Government was
originally indebted, and who have never received satisfaction therefor,
and those who had nothing to do with the Government in the first
transaction; but have merely speculated, and purchased up the evidence
of an original debt. Some gentlemen think, that the claims of this
latter class merit a greater degree of attention, because by their
actions, they seem to have evinced a greater degree of confidence in the
Government than those who sold them. But, sir, these men have had more
information, they have been at the seat of Government, and knew what was
in contemplation before citizens of other parts of the Union could be
acquainted with it. There has been no kind of proportion of knowledge
between the two classes--to use the expression of a British Minister,
the reciprocity has been all on one side. The people in this city are
informed of all the motions of Government; they have sent out their
money, in swift sailing vessels, to purchase up the property of
uninformed citizens in the remote parts of the Union. Were those
citizens acquainted with our present deliberations, and assured of the
intention of Congress to provide for their just demands, they would be
on an equal footing; they would not incline to throw away their property
for considerations totally inadequate. Such attempts at fraud would
justify the Government in interfering in the transactions between
individuals, without a breach of the public faith; but this, sir, is not
the object of the present motion, it only goes so far as to ascertain
the amount of the debt, before we make provision for the payment; and
this appears to me to be proper upon every principle of justice and
discretion.
Mr. BURKE wished the question postponed till to-morrow, as it was a
subject of such high importance. He moved the committee to rise;
whereupon the committee rose, and reported progress.
WEDNESDAY, February 10.
_Public Credit._
The House again went into a Committee of the Whole, Mr. BALDWIN in the
chair, on the report of the Secretary of the Treasury.
Mr. SCOTT'S amendment being still under consideration.
Mr. SCOTT.--Some time was spent yesterday in the consideration of this
subject; in my opinion, that time was not ill spent, nor would two or
three days more be ill spent in discussing the question, for it involves
in it the whole doctrine of discrimination and liquidation. If these two
great points are once settled, the way will be clear and open before us
to proceed to the discussion of the report: for if the principles of the
report are good, I believe the plan itself is good. I believe, upon the
principles which it holds forth, that it is wisely and judiciously drawn
out, and does great honor to the officer who framed it. But it is
incumbent on us to examine its principles before we adopt it; if they do
not consist with equity and justice among the several inhabitants of the
Union, they must be rejected. Now I doubt whether they consist with that
equity and justice; I think there are others on this floor who have
their doubts also. I wish, therefore, that we should coolly examine
those principles, consult our judgment and understanding, and when we
have collected all the information we can get from each other, we may
determine; and when we have determined this, and the two grand points I
have mentioned, our business will be easy.
In support of the principles held out in the report, it is said that a
solemn contract is entered into that cannot be violated; that the debt
is ascertained and cannot be extinguished, but by the absolute payment
of what it acknowledged to be due. Now, I doubt whether the necessary
concomitants of a contract to the amount mentioned on the face of the
paper, really accompanies the public securities. Let us revert back to
the time that this contract was entered into. At the close of the war,
at the commencement of issuing final settlements, there was a demand
against the United States for real and essential services rendered; the
claimants came forward, and asked something for their demand. Congress
having no money to give them, offered something; what? A certificate to
a certain nominal amount; nay more, of a certain known value; the
nominal amount was twenty shillings, the certain known value was two and
sixpence. Did the soldier accept of this offer? Yes. On what principle
did he accept it? He knew it was putting the capstone on the building
which he had erected by his labor and cemented with his blood. I have
done you services, said he, to the amount of twenty shillings, but you
are poor and unable to pay me; I will accept now of your two and
sixpence, and give you a discharge. Thus, the soldier who had, through
blood and slaughter, established the liberties of his country, crowned
the whole by the sacrifice of pecuniary emoluments. His consent was
given to the contract, and he received two and sixpence in the pound.
Now, if there is any other contract existing like this, I cannot see it.
The soldier never received it, nor the officer who handed it out, never
believed it to be worth more than two and sixpence in the pound. It was
like compounding a debt by the consent of the creditor, and there an
equal liquidation ought to take place. If this reasoning is right, we
know the value at once of our paper currency; if it is not right, I
would wish to know upon what principle of rationality, a rate can be
established for the value of our certificates.
Mr. BOUDINOT.--I am convinced that the principles laid down by the
gentleman from Pennsylvania, if true, ought to effect the final
determination of this question; and if I was satisfied with them, I
should clearly vote with him. If I was convinced that the certificates,
at the time they were given out, were worth no more than 2_s._ 6_d._ in
the pound, and that the creditors received them at that price, in full
discharge of their demands, I should be very loath to raise them to so
great a value; I would treat them precisely the same as Continental
money. I should think that the public did complete justice by complying
with the terms of their contract; while this is a matter of dispute we
can never agree in our determination. But if I can show that this is not
the case, that he has not looked into the origin of this debt, so as to
be well ascertained of the fact, I hope he will give up his opinion, and
join with me in the conclusion.
The debt of the United States is of four kinds; first, paper money;
second, money lent; third, the pay to the army, including commutation,
and the allowance for depreciation; and fourth, certificates, or
evidences of the debts due from the United States to individuals, for
supplies furnished, or services rendered at different periods of the
last war. As to the bills of credit, I mentioned yesterday that they
stand upon a different footing from the rest; because it was one of the
parties who ascertained their depreciation, contrary to the opinion of
the other, who had a desire of keeping them up to their nominal value.
The money loaned to the United States, is a debt which we are bound to
pay, on every principle of honor and justice; nor can it be said that
the certificate given to the person who loaned the money, was given as a
payment in discharge of the debt. With respect to the army, including
commutation, I shall beg leave to read two or three resolutions of
Congress, to show that Congress had a different idea of the certificates
they gave to the officers and soldiers, in evidence of the balance of
their account, which is still due. When they were first issued to the
soldiers, Congress guarded them from being transferable; but as the
soldiers could get nothing for them in that form, upon representation,
Congress passed another resolution, by which they were made
transferable, in order that the soldier might avail himself of the
acknowledgment of Congress in his favor; (the resolutions referred to
were in May, 1783, April, 1784, and June, 1784.) This recurrence to the
resolutions of Congress, under which the evidences of the debt were
issued, sufficiently explodes a supposition, that they were understood
to be worth no more than 2_s._ 6_d._ in the pound, at the time they were
issued and received. From the personal knowledge I have of the
transactions of that time, I can venture to say, that no idea of payment
was ever entertained. They were, in fact, and were so considered,
evidences of the liquidated and specific sums due to the creditors of
the United States. The step which Congress took for the benefit of the
army, in making their certificates transferable, so far from
accommodating them, would have proved a real injury. If the assignee had
supposed himself to stand in a less eligible situation than the
assignor, he never would have been induced to have given him the price
which he did. If the soldier had received a certificate of twenty
shillings, as only 2_s._ 6_d._ nobody would have inclined to have given
him 2_s._ 6_d._ for it, because he could never expect to obtain a
repayment of a greater sum, even in such money as Congress should find
convenient; upon every principle of assignation of debts or contracts,
such an idea ought to be reprobated.
Mr. SEDGWICK.--I will express my idea on the point which the gentleman
has made an inquiry respecting, in a few words. I said, that I conceived
a delay of this business would endanger the peace of the Union by
diminishing the energy of the Government, without which this
constitution would be of no value. These are considerations which must
appear weighty and important, if justly considered by the committee. A
great and respectable body of our citizens are creditors of the United
States. There are a variety of opinions prevailing respecting their
claims, with respect to funding, discrimination, and interest. This
diversity of opinion may probably irritate and produce heats and
animosities, which may terminate in forming factions among the people.
The State debts may produce a difference between the General and
particular Governments. If the matter is taken up as the business of a
party, one may be pitted against the other, until, in the end, they
disturb the public tranquillity, or sacrifice the general welfare to
opposition and party spirit. Besides this, the reputation, the credit of
the Government is at stake; the public expectation is alive to all the
measures of Government at the present moment. They expect that justice
and equity will be administered as far as the abilities of our country
extend; it lies with the Legislature to realize this expectation. If
Congress pursue the present inquiry, and come to a determination without
delay, the public sentiment will be brought to a point, and a general
acquiescence may be expected; but if it is postponed to a future
session, such may be the effect of faction and disappointment during the
recess, that the probability is, that no one party will comprise a
sufficient number to comprehend the majority of the whole.
Mr. JACKSON.--Do not gentlemen think there is some danger on the other
side? Will there not be ground of uneasiness when the soldier and the
meritorious citizen are called upon to pay the speculator more than ten
times the amount they ever received from him for their securities? I
believe, Mr. Chairman, there is more just reason of alarm on this than
on the other side of the question.