WEDNESDAY, March 24.
JOHN BAPTIST ASHE, another member from North Carolina, appeared and took
his seat.
THURSDAY, April 22.
_Benjamin Franklin._
Mr. MADISON rose and addressed the House as follows:
Mr. SPEAKER: As we have been informed, not only through the channel of
the newspapers, but by a more direct communication, of the decease of an
illustrious character, whose native genius has rendered distinguished
services to the cause of science and of mankind in general; and whose
patriotic exertions have contributed in a high degree to the
independence and prosperity of this country in particular; the occasion
seems to call upon us to pay some tribute to his memory expressive of
the tender veneration his country feels for such distinguished merit. I
therefore move the following resolution:
"The House being informed of the decease of BENJAMIN
FRANKLIN, a citizen whose native genius was not more an
ornament to human nature than his various exertions of it
have been precious to science, to freedom, and to his
country, do resolve, as a mark of the veneration due to his
memory, that the members wear the customary badge of
mourning for one month."
Which was agreed to.
THURSDAY, June 24.
_Officers of the Navy._
On motion of Mr. HARTLEY, the report of the committee on the memorial of
the Officers of the Navy was taken into consideration by the committee
of the Whole: the report is as follows:
The committee report, that they do not find any reason
sufficient to justify the difference that has been made in
the compensation of the officers of the army and of the
navy of the United States, and are, therefore, of opinion,
that a law ought to pass for granting five years' pay,
equal to the commutation of half-pay, and also a bounty of
land, to the officers of the navy, upon the same
principles, and in the same manner, as has been granted to
the officers of the army of the United States.
Mr. SHERMAN observed, that, by the memorial and the report, it appears
that the memorialists do not pretend to have any claim on the public by
virtue of any existing resolutions of Congress. The subject is very
fully before the committee; it lies with Congress, therefore, to
determine what is proper to be done under such circumstances. The
application stands entirely on the basis of its own merits, and he could
conceive of no difficulty in deciding on it.
Mr. STONE observed, that it is true there is no claim by virtue of any
antecedent contract or promise; nor was commutation, he believed,
promised to the officers of the army. In this view, the officers of the
navy stand exactly upon the same footing with those of the army. He then
entered into a consideration of the merits, services, and sufferings, of
the officers of the navy; and from these and other considerations, urged
the justice of their claims, as he could see no reason for the
difference that had been made.
Mr. HUNTINGTON said, but a little consideration was necessary to
recollect the reason of the difference between the officers of the navy
and army. The officers of the army were first in the public service; the
navy was not formed until some time after hostilities commenced. The
officers of the navy were put on the same footing, in respect to pay, as
the army; the former had some advantages in point of rank, and they were
entitled to a part of their captures. He then gave an account of the
origin of commutation--which was granted on account of the peculiar
exigencies of affairs at that time. During the time this business was in
agitation there were very few navy officers in the public service, and
no application was made by them for half-pay or commutation. They were
ashore, and many of them had retired to civil life. The reason,
therefore, why they are not included in the commutation was, there did
not appear at the time any necessity for the measure, as the United
States did not then want a navy; whereas the public exigencies with
respect to the army were such as rendered the resolution for the
commutation to them absolutely necessary. He, however, thought the claim
of the navy officers founded on justice; and justice, said he, is the
strongest plea that can be urged in support of any demand whatever.
Mr. HARTLEY supported the memorial. He gave the officers great credit
for their bravery, services, and attachment to the cause of their
country. He dilated on the hardships and sufferings they endured; he
adverted to the advantages they derived from captures, which he stated
to be very inconsiderable. Their claims, said he, appear to me to be
founded on the the strictest and most impartial justice; he hoped,
therefore, that the report would be accepted, and a committee appointed
to bring in a bill accordingly.
Mr. BALDWIN, who was one of the select committee which made the report,
stated some of the reasons which influenced the committee; also the
considerations which were supposed to have led to the distinction
between the navy and army, in respect to commutation--one of which was,
that the officers of the navy were in the line of their particular
calling, and which they were enabled to pursue with perhaps greater
advantages than they ever did before. Other circumstances were mentioned
by him, tending to invalidate their claim.
Mr. SHERMAN observed, that if this report is adopted, it will open a
very wide door indeed to applications for half pay or commutation. He
then gave a history of the origin of commutation or half pay, which, he
said, was considered at the time as a measure of necessity, and not of
justice; and has been very much complained of by several of the States.
The above necessity did not exist with respect to the officers of the
navy, as, at the time, there were but two or three ships in service.
From this state of facts, he inferred that no precedent could be drawn
in favor of extending the commutation to the officers of the navy. He
thought that their case was entitled to the consideration of the
Legislature, on the principles of equity; he should, therefore, be for
the committee's making full inquiry into the circumstances of the whole
business, and making such provision as justice should point out; but he
was against the report in its present latitude.
Mr. BURKE replied to the observations of Mr. BALDWIN, respecting the
officers of the navy being in the way of their profession; and, from the
nature of the service, he showed that there was little weight in the
observation. Their circumstances were very much altered for the worse,
and they were now left in a very destitute situation; whereas the
officers of the army are enjoying posts and places of honor and profit.
Their silence on the subject has been mentioned. He observed that their
dispersed situation had been the principal reason of their not coming
forward with their petition before. Mr. B. observed, that the officers
of the navy were not treated like other prisoners when they were taken;
they suffered peculiarly, not as prisoners of war, but were treated like
rebels, whose crimes were of the blackest nature.
Mr. SENEY said he was, and always had been an advocate for the claims of
the officers of the navy: he thought their memorial founded on the
strictest justice. He introduced the representation to Congress of the
"illustrious" Commander-in-chief of the late army, on the subject of
half pay and pensions, which he read. He then entered into a comparative
view of the relative merits of the army and navy; and said it was well
known that many of them made as great sacrifices as the other
description of officers. With respect to prize money, he doubted whether
they had ever been benefited by it. In some instances, where they had
expected the most, they had, through the failure of agents, received
only a certificate, worth about five shillings in the pound; and that
received only for a part of what was due. He replied to the several
objections which had been offered, and concluded by saying it would be
unjust and impolitic not to grant their claims.
Mr. SEDGWICK observed, that no gentleman in the committee had deeper
impressions made upon him, by the grateful recollection of the merits
and services of those brave men to whom America owed its freedom, than
himself. Yet, under the present circumstances of the country, he thought
it a duty he owed the people who had confided their interest to his
management, to examine, on principle, the demands which were made upon
the Government for pecuniary grants. The applicants in the present
instance, did not place their demand on the ground of contract. For the
contract, under which the services had been rendered, had been complied
with according to the specified terms, and performed to the extent of
the powers of the Government, in the same manner as other claims of a
similar nature had been satisfied. It was further, he said, to be
noticed, that during the time those services were performing, no
dissatisfaction had been manifested by the present memorialists. From
these observations, then, it clearly followed, that, in point of
contract, the claims of the officers of the navy were in all respects
similar to those of every other individual in the community, who had
received satisfaction by the same means. It would then become gentlemen
to reflect on the consequences which would result from the establishment
of a precedent, which would go to the invalidation of all the final
settlements which had been made.
Mr. SEDGWICK said, gentlemen had supported the claim of the applicants
from a supposed analogy of their circumstances to those of the gentlemen
of the army. He said there was the difference which arose from the
circumstance already mentioned. The commutation was founded in contract;
the present claim was destitute of that support. There were also other
material circumstances which very widely differed in the two cases. The
officers of the army were called from pursuits by which they were
enabled to support and provide for their families, and to abandon their
prospects of establishment by the business to which they had been
educated. On the other hand, the gentlemen of the navy were promised
handsome wages for continuing in that business to which they had been
educated, and for which they were best, if not only qualified; and this,
too, at a time when, by the destruction of our commerce, many of them
otherwise must have wanted employment. They had likewise additional
encouragement from a participation in the avails of prizes, while the
army derived no emolument from any such source. That the report of the
Select Committee being unsupported either on the ground of contract, or
the principles on which the grant to the officers of the army was made,
the application was merely to the generosity of the Government. He said
it was a principle, from which he professed himself determined never to
depart, not to dissipate that property in idle or visionary projects of
generosity, which is necessary to the performance of justice. That the
arduous scenes in which we had been engaged, had imposed the necessity
of practising a rigid economy. That the conduct which we might, under
present embarrassments, pursue, it would be improper hereafter to
consider as a precedent. That it would, indeed, be a noble and generous
sentiment to compensate all those losses which our friends had sustained
by the war. But he asked, if such would not be a vain attempt? Can we
compensate all the desolation of fire and wanton depredation, provoked
from the enemy by the patriotism of particular districts in this
country? Can we retribute the sufferings which have been caused by the
depreciation of our currency? Or the ruin of thousands and thousands by
our delays of payment, and the consequent depreciation of our
securities? Can we administer to the relief of the vast number of widows
and orphans, who, from those circumstances, have been reduced from
affluence to want and beggary? Remember, too, he said, the sages, who,
in the hour of danger, watched over your security; and who, in their
best days, abstracted themselves from every lucrative pursuit, and
devoted all their time and talents to the service of their country.
These patriots, now in the evening of life, are the most meritorious
objects of the generosity of the Government, yet they would nobly
disdain to ask, or to receive the aid of the Government, however
necessary to them, until efficient provision was made for the
performance of those contracts, which we are under the most solemn
obligation, if in our power, to fulfil. And he concluded by observing,
that when the improving resources of our country should enable the
Government generously to compensate the sufferings of those several
descriptions of persons, then, and not till then, might we extend to the
memorialists the relief which they now sought for.
Mr. JACKSON supported the claim of the officers. He observed, that if
the country had not derived so extensive advantages from the exertions
of the navy, it must be imputed to peculiar circumstances, and not to
any deficiency in the officers and sailors; so far as their abilities
could be exerted, no men distinguished themselves more. Had ours been a
maritime instead of an agricultural country, the importance of a navy
would have struck us more forcibly. Their claims he considered as
founded in the strictest justice, and he had no doubt that if they had
applied to the old Congress they would have granted their request; but
restrained by a consideration of the embarrassments of the United
States, they did not obtrude their petitions upon them; and now this
very circumstance is urged as a reason for not granting their petition.
In his opinion, this did them great honor; since that time, they have
been scattered through all parts of the Union. This and other
circumstances have delayed their application to this time, but have not
lessened the equity of it. He added many other observations, and
concluded by saying that he was fully in favor of the report.
FRIDAY, June 25.
_Foreign Intercourse._
The House proceeded to consider the amendments last proposed on the part
of the Senate to the bill providing the means of intercourse between the
United States and foreign nations. The first amendment was to strike out
thirty thousand, and to insert forty thousand dollars.
It was moved that the House should agree to this amendment; this motion
was opposed.
It was said that the committee had exceeded their commission in
proposing this alteration in the bill, as both Houses had agreed in the
sum of thirty thousand dollars. It was further said that more than one
Minister Plenipotentiary was unnecessary; that the Court of Great
Britain had sent only a Consul to this country; and that, from the
present appearances, no advantages could be expected to arise from
sending a Minister, equivalent to the expense; the necessity contended
for is merely conjectural; and by that rule, the Ministers
Plenipotentiary may be increased, and one sent to Spain and another to
Portugal. If only one Minister is sent to Europe, the first sum will be
sufficient; with respect to the Court of London, a Chargé des Affaires
will answer every purpose.
In support of the motion, it was urged that the President of the United
States is, by the constitution, vested with the power of appointing such
foreign officers as he may think necessary, and it must devolve upon the
Legislature to make provision for defraying the expense. The Committee
of Conference did not rely on their own judgment, they consulted the
Secretary of Foreign Affairs. His opinion was, that in the present
situation of this country with respect to foreign nations, two Ministers
and two Chargés des Affaires were necessary; a Minister at the Court of
Versailles is generally conceded to be requisite. The peculiar situation
of this country with respect to the posts, the Northern and Eastern
frontiers, and the state of our commerce in respect to Great Britain,
can scarcely leave a doubt of the necessity and importance of sending a
Minister to that country. This being the state of affairs, a less sum
than that proposed, it is demonstrably evident, will not be found
adequate.
The question on concurring in this amendment was carried in the
affirmative.
The other amendments were agreed to, with amendments.
TUESDAY, July 6.
_Seat of Government._
The House resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole on the bill sent
from the Senate for establishing the temporary and permanent seat of
the Government of the United States, Mr. BOUDINOT in the chair.
Mr. SHERMAN.--As this bill respects the permanent residence of the
Government, which is an important subject, it ought to be a matter of
inquiry, whether the place proposed is the real centre of population and
territory or not? He thought it too far southward. He moved, therefore,
that the Potomac should be struck out, and a district to include the
town of Baltimore be inserted.
Mr. BURKE seconded this motion.
Mr. LEE desired the gentleman to inform the committee where he meant the
temporary residence should be, provided this motion should be carried.
Mr. SHERMAN said, he had no objection to making Philadelphia the
temporary residence, as soon as it was convenient. He then mentioned
several particulars which would render it inconvenient to go there at
present.
Mr. HUNTINGTON said, that the only reason for removing, which he had
ever heard was, that this place is not so central. If there is any force
in the reasoning, he wished not to go to a place less central. He
adverted to the mode of conveyance to this place, generally adopted by
members to get to the seat of Government. He supposed that the present
centre was somewhere between Philadelphia and Baltimore; but the place
contemplated is very much removed from the centre, more than three
hundred miles west. With respect to centrality, he said that it is not
an idea which predominates in regard to any other country of which he
knew any thing respecting the geography; other and various important
considerations operated in fixing the seat of Government.
Mr. WHITE observed, that if this House was alone to be consulted, on the
principle of accommodation, Baltimore might answer; but when it is
considered that this bill originated in the other House, who have an
equal voice with us in determining the question, and in which this place
has been repeatedly rejected, it is evident, that, if the clause is
struck out the bill will be lost. He then controverted the calculations
of the gentleman last speaking, and stated the difference of travel
between the Southern and Northern distances, which is made to be as four
and one-half to one; but he said, that so far as respected himself, he
should make no difficulty on that account; but the accommodation of the
citizens who may have business at the seat of Government is a
consideration of very great importance. With respect to the uncentral
situation of the seat of Government in other countries, this arose from
the mere whims of the sovereigns of those kingdoms; but modern policy
has obliged the people of European countries, (I refer particularly to
Great Britain,) to fix the seat of Government near the centre of trade.
It is the commercial importance of the city of London which makes it the
seat of Government; and what is the consequence? London and Westminster,
though they united send only six members to Parliament, have a greater
influence on the measures of Government than the whole empire besides.
This is a situation in which we never wish to see this country placed.
He concluded by observing, that if this amendment is agreed to, the bill
will be lost, and we shall be without either a temporary or permanent
residence.
Mr. LEE, after a few introductory observations, entered into a
consideration of the relative interests of the Southern, Middle, and
Northern States. He interspersed a variety of reflections, tending to
conciliate and blend those different interests--and to disseminate the
sentiments of union and concord. He alluded particularly to the great
object of funding the debts of the United States; the seat of Government
will concentrate the public paper. Hence he inferred the necessity of a
situation from whence all parts of the Union may be equally benefited.
From these considerations, he deduced the necessity of placing the
Government in a central situation. He observed, that while the present
position continued to be the seat of Government, the agriculture of the
States to the eastward is invigorated and encouraged, while that to the
southward is languishing and expiring. He then showed the fatal tendency
of this preponderating encouragement to those parts of the country,
already considered as the strongest parts of the Union--and from the
natural operation of these principles he inferred that the interest of
the Southern States must be eventually swallowed up. The decision of the
Senate, said he, affords a most favorable opportunity to manifest that
magnanimity of soul, which shall embrace, upon an extensive, liberal
system, the best interest of the great whole. This cannot be done while
the present unequal situation of the seat of Government of the United
States continues. Nations have their passions as well as individuals. He
drew an alarming picture of the consequences to be apprehended from
disunion, ambition and rivalship. He then gave a pleasing sketch of the
happy effects to be derived from a national, generous, and equal
attention to the Southern and Northern interests. Will gentlemen, said
he, blast this prospect by rejecting the bill? I trust they will not.
He then entered into the merits of the question. The States of Delaware,
Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Virginia, which contribute more than
one-half to the revenue, and which have the only rival claim to the
permanent seat of Government, are satisfied with the arrangement in the
bill. That Philadelphia is the nearest centre of the present wealth and
population of the United States, the gentlemen from New York themselves
will confess; the Potomac will become the nearest centre for a permanent
residence probably by the period proposed--to oppose this, therefore,
will be acting from merely local motives.
The gentleman moves to insert Baltimore. Mr. L. insisted that Baltimore
is as far South as the place proposed, besides being exposed by its
frontier position on the sea; we are not confined, said he, to a
particular spot on the Potomac; we may fix on a place as far North as
the gentleman from Connecticut wishes. I consider the motion, therefore,
calculated to destroy the bill, and ought to be opposed by every one who
is in favor of a Southern situation.
This State has no pretensions to the permanent residence. It is true the
citizens of this place have put themselves to a great expense to
accommodate the Government, and are entitled to much praise for their
exertions; but he wished to take up the subject on national ground, and
to have it decided on principles which apply to the best interests of
the whole. He then referred to a map of the Potomac, and the adjacent
country, which lay on the table, and which had been sent from the
Executive of the State of Virginia. He referred also to other papers and
documents.
Mr. BURKE said, he wished that the whole business of the temporary and
permanent residence might now be settled. He exculpated the members who
are in favor of Baltimore from all design to defeat the present bill. He
referred to some observations which had been made on the conduct of the
members of the States south of Virginia, and said, that they had
consulted the interest of the whole. One reason why he was in favor of
the motion was, because he preferred Baltimore to Conococheague. He
thought a populous city better than building a palace in the woods.
Another reason was, that there was no political necessity existing for
removing the Government from New York to Philadelphia. He said that the
measure would excite the most turbulent passions in the minds of the
citizens. It is unjust to the people of this city, to remove from this
place till the expense they have incurred is repaid them. It is a breach
of honesty and justice. It is injustice to the State--to the whole
nation. He entered into a consideration of their sacrifices and
services. He thought it a very extraordinary measure indeed. It is
calculated, said he, to arrest the funding system, and to throw every
thing into confusion. If the bill is passed in its present form,
Congress will never leave Philadelphia; for the Commissioners to be
appointed will incur no penalty for a neglect of doing their duty. This
is a most essential defect in the bill, and there are other defects in
it. He spoke in handsome terms of the State of Pennsylvania. He said he
had as high an opinion of that State, as any man whatever, but he was
afraid of their influence; and that State was the last in which he would
ever consent the permanent seat of Government should be. He then
adverted to the influence of the members from that State, who by their
political management, had raised a storm in the United States. [Here Mr.
BURKE was called to order.] After a short interruption, he proceeded,
and said a Quaker State was a bad neighborhood for the South
Carolinians. Here he adverted to the Quaker business last winter. He
objected to Philadelphia, also, on account of there being no gallery in
the House proposed for the accommodation of Congress--an open gallery he
considered as a very important check to the Legislature.
Mr. LAWRENCE.--The gentleman from Virginia has observed, that the object
of the amendment is to defeat the bill. He has also mentioned the States
which are most particularly interested in the question. Mr. L. said, the
State of New York might have been considered. He wished the motion might
succeed, because he thought that it would conduce to the peace of the
Union. He objected to the place proposed for the permanent residence; by
the bill it is conceded that the place is not, at present, a suitable
position. By what magic can it be made to appear it will be more proper
at the end of ten years? What reason can be given why those parts of the
Union should not populate which are at a distance from the Potomac, in
proportion to those parts in the vicinity of that place? I presume none
can be assigned. Why, then, is a period of ten years to expire, previous
to going there? The reason is plain. The people would not now consent to
have the Government dragged to so remote a part of the United States. He
then adverted to the funding business, and other important matters which
remain to be decided on, and very strongly intimated that these
questions were to be determined agreeable to the fate of this bill. He
showed, from a variety of particulars, that Philadelphia would become
the permanent residence. He then adverted particularly to the several
parts of the bill. The first was respecting the place where it is
proposed to erect the public buildings. He said, they could not be
erected within the time mentioned, and showed the various difficulties
which would attend the whole business. He then stated the advantages of
Baltimore, and said that that place would have obtained in the Senate,
if the Maryland Senators would have voted for it. He concluded by
observing, that, as no necessity exists for removing the temporary
residence, he hoped that Congress would sit down contented where they
are.
Mr. BLOODWORTH observed, that as the funding bill had been alluded to,
he could wish that the objection from that quarter might be taken out of
the way. He moved that the committee should rise, in order to take up
the ways and means.
Mr. STONE.--All we seem to differ about is whether Baltimore or the
Potomac shall be the seat of the Government; and if this was all, the
Delegates of that State might fold their arms and sit down contented;
but the State of Maryland has been placed in the situation of Tantalus.
He then stated how the gentlemen had formerly voted, who now appear in
favor of Baltimore. Had the bill come down from the Senate with
Baltimore inserted, instead of Potomac, he should have had no difficulty
in determining how to act; but he conceived, that if the amendment now
proposed should take place, nothing would be done, and the business will
be left in a very inauspicious state. From this and other
considerations, he was resolved not to be drawn off from his present
determination by any motion, amendment, or modification of the bill
whatever. With respect to himself, he had no election between the town
of Baltimore and the Potomac; yet, as a Marylander, he would, if he saw
a prospect of success, vote for the town of Baltimore; but as it
respects the United States, he should vote for the Potomac; and on this
idea he was willing to make some sacrifices. He considered the subject
as one of the most painful and disagreeable that could be agitated, and
he wished to have the business finally and unalterably fixed.
Mr. SENEY also considered this as an unhappy question to come before the
House at this time. The State of Maryland is as much divided on the
subject as the United States appeared to be; a great rivalship subsists
between the Potomac and Susquehanna rivers, and he doubted not but that
when the question was ultimately decided, it would be either on the one
or the other of those rivers. He agreed with Mr. LEE, that Pennsylvania,
Maryland and Virginia, were the only States who could make any
reasonable pretensions for the seat of Government; but a majority of
voices from these States had been against the Potomac. Pennsylvania and
Maryland, he observed, had given the preference to the Susquehanna. Mr.
S. then noticed some transactions of the Legislature of Maryland, which
he said clearly evinced their determination to support the pretensions
of the Susquehanna. Maryland certainly had an equal right with
Pennsylvania and Virginia to have her interests consulted. The interests
of Maryland, it appeared, were now to be sacrificed to those two
adjoining States. And however flattering it may seem to Maryland to fix
the seat of Government on her side of the Potomac, the real advantages
were in a great measure nugatory, as it would be but a very small
portion of that State that could reap any benefit therefrom. The real
advantages would undoubtedly result to Pennsylvania and Virginia. It
appeared somewhat extraordinary to him, that gentlemen should be willing
to confine the residence to a particular spot, previous to their
removing to a permanent residence. Why is it necessary to fix upon
Philadelphia for ten years? Surely this is putting the Government in a
very ineligible situation, for it is by no means improbable that many
serious and important occurrences might render a removal highly
expedient, perhaps unavoidable. Besides, after the Government shall have
remained ten years in Philadelphia, the probability of quitting it for
the Potomac appeared to be very slight indeed. For though it was
understood by the bill that the offices were to be removed to the
Potomac, yet if a majority in either House were opposed to going there,
Congress would remain at Philadelphia, and they would be obliged to
repeal the bill from necessity.
Mr. SCOTT said, he should not notice many things which had been offered
on the subject. He would only observe, that from the town of Baltimore
there is no water conveyance to the interior country; but from the
proposed site on the Potomac, there are two hundred miles navigation
directly into the heart of the country. Nor is Baltimore more northerly
than the position contemplated. A connection with the Western country is
of the utmost consequence to the peace and union of the United States,
let the gentlemen from the sea-coast say what they will.
Mr. MADISON.--In order to decide this question rightly, we ought to
compare the advantages and disadvantages of the two places as they
relate to the good of the United States. Now, I will defy any gentleman,
however sanguine he may be with respect to Baltimore, to point out any
substantial advantage that is not common to the Potomac; and I defy them
to disprove that there are not several important advantages belonging to
the Potomac, which do not appertain to Baltimore. The committee have had
ample information with respect to the Northern and Southern positions of
the two places. In point of salubrity of air, without disparaging the
pretensions of Baltimore, the Potomac is at least equally favored in
that respect. In regard to centrality of situation, the Potomac has
undoubtedly the advantage. In respect to security from invasion, I aver
the Potomac has the advantage also. With relation to the Western
country, there is not a shadow of comparison. If we should go as far
South as Baltimore, why not an equal distance south-west to the Potomac?
Those who are acquainted with the country on the Potomac, and that in
the neighborhood of Baltimore, do not hesitate to give the preference to
the Potomac. It is true, that Baltimore has respectable resources; her
rapid growth is a clear proof of it; but look at the resources of the
Potomac; the great range of rich country that borders on it, and see if
these are not advantages that must, in a short time, produce a
commercial town. Sir, a period might be named, not exceeding ten years,
within which the town of Baltimore obtained the greater part of its
increase and consequence; a period of ten years will produce the same
effects on the Potomac, because the same causes exist; and when,
superadded to this, the residence of Government shall be there, there
can be no doubt but that there will be every accommodation that can be
desired.
It is said, that before the ten years expire, a repeal of the act may
take place, and thus Congress be kept at Philadelphia. But what more can
we do than pass a law for the purpose? It is not in our power to guard
against a repeal. Our acts are not like those of the Medes and Persians,
unalterable. A repeal is a thing against which no provision can be made.
If that is an objection, it holds good against any law that can be
passed. If those States that may have a superiority in Congress at a
future day will pay no respect to the acts of their predecessors, or to
the public good, there is no power to compel them.
But I flatter myself that some respect will be paid to the public
interest, and to the plighted faith of the Government. As to centrality,
the best evidence we have at this time in favor of the Potomac is the
different travelling of the members; and this, sir, proves incontestably
that the proposed place on the Potomac is near the centre. If any
arguments could be brought against it, it is its being too far to the
northward. For the mileage south of the Potomac is twelve thousand seven
hundred and eighty-two miles, to the north of it twelve thousand four
hundred and twenty-two miles. If to this Rhode Island be added, it will
not be more than equal. If the bill once passes, I am not under any
apprehensions of a repeal; but if danger of repeal does exist, it is of
that kind against which we cannot guard. Sir, we should calculate on
accepting the bill as it now stands; we ought not to risk it by making
any amendment. We have it now in our power to procure a Southern
position. The opportunity may not again speedily present itself. We know
the various and jealous interests that exist on this subject. We should
hazard nothing. If the Potomac is struck out, are you sure of getting
Baltimore? May no other place be proposed? Instead of Baltimore, is it
not probable we may have Susquehanna inserted, perhaps the Delaware?
Make any amendment, sir, and the bill will go back to the Senate. Are we
sure that it will come back into our possession again? By amending, we
give up a certainty for an uncertainty. In my opinion, we shall act
wisely, if we accept the bill as it now stands, and I beg leave to press
it on gentlemen not to consent to any alteration, lest it be wholly
defeated and the prospect of obtaining a Southern position vanish for
ever.
Mr. GERRY said, he rose with greater reluctance on this than he ever did
on any former occasion; and it is because it appears pretty evident the
advocates of the bill are sure of a majority, and are determined not to
change their minds let what arguments will be offered on the subject.
The business of establishing the permanent residence is contrary to the
sentiments of a majority of the members of this House, and of the
Senate, as they have both negatived a bill for this purpose the present
session. It is to be regretted that it has ever been brought forward,
for it is very evident that it has had a very pernicious influence on
the great business of funding the public debt. He then mentioned the
former removals of Congress, which had never been complained of, as the
public business was never neglected. He said, that if the present bill
is carried into execution, a very great uneasiness will ensue; for the
measures of Congress, and not their residence, are the objects of
concern to the people. Those States who think that they shall be
injured, it cannot be expected will then acquiesce. He then gave an
account of the process of this measure the last session. The travelling
has been mentioned. This, he said, could not be considered as an
argument in favor of the bill, for the expense is not paid by particular
States, it comes out of the common treasury. He asserted that the
accessibility to New York is better than to the Potomac. He contended
that the risk by land is greater than by water. He stated the advantages
that the Southern members derived from coming to the northward, while,
on the other hand, is there, asked he, any thing to balance the risk and
difficulties which the Northern members must encounter in such a
Southern situation? He said it was highly unreasonable to fix the seat
of Government in such a position as to have nine States out of thirteen
to the northward of the place. He adverted to the sacrifices which the
Northern States are ready to make in being willing to go so far south as
Baltimore. He contended that the explicit consent of the Eastern States
ought to be obtained, before they are dragged still further south. He
ridiculed the idea of fixing the Government at Conococheague. He did not
think there was any serious intention of ever going to this Indian
place. He considered the whole business as a mere manoeuvre. Baltimore
holds out the only prospect of a permanent seat of Government. He
recapitulated the account which before had been given. From this he
adverted to the general expectation of the public with respect to the
Government's tarrying here till the permanent seat was established. He
particularized the expenses that had been incurred by the citizens, and
for which they merited great honor. He said, it had been promised to New
York that this place should be the temporary residence of Congress, and
on this engagement they came into an unconditional adoption of the
constitution. Should this bill pass, what can it be denominated but a
delusion, a deception, sanctioned by Congress itself? He remarked on the
several observations offered by Messrs. MADISON, LEE, STONE, and SCOTT.
Mr. VINING.--When I find arguments made use of to inflame the minds of
gentlemen against the members of this House, I think it my duty to
notice such observations. Attempts are made to hold up, in an odious
point of light, the members of Pennsylvania. Sir, it is a fact, which
your Journals will justify, that the members from Pennsylvania voted the
last session against Philadelphia. I trust that none of those
observations will have the least influence on the mind of one single
individual. We are sent here to do the public business, and I trust that
our constituents have not sent men that are to be deterred from doing
their duty by such insidious insinuations, such ill-founded suggestions
of deceiving and deluding the citizens of this place. Mr. V. added some
more strictures on Mr. GERRY's observations, and then entered largely
into the merits of the question. He supported the bill on general
principles, and noticed the several objections that had been made by
different members. He imputed the embarrassments of the public business
to the assumption, and not to the subject of residence.
Mr. CLYMER made a few remarks on the observations of Mr. BURKE, which
were not distinctly heard.