An engrossed bill making certain appropriations therein mentioned was
read the third time, and passed.
The bill sent from the Senate entitled "An act providing for the
compensation of Ebenezer Storer," was read twice and committed.
_Official Conduct of the Secretary of the Treasury._
The House again resolved itself into a Committee of the whole House on
the third, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, and eighth resolutions
contained in the motion of Thursday last, respecting the official
conduct of the Secretary of the Treasury. The third resolution being
still under consideration, in the words following, viz:
"_Resolved_, That the Secretary of the Treasury has
violated the law passed the 4th of August, 1790, making
appropriations of certain moneys authorized to be borrowed
by the said law, in the following particulars, viz: First,
by applying a certain portion of the principal borrowed to
the payment of interest falling due upon that principal,
which was not authorized by that or any other law.
Secondly, by drawing a part of the said moneys into the
United States, without the instructions of the President of
the United States."
A motion was made, and the question being put, that the House do agree
with the Committee of the whole House in their disagreement to the
resolution, it was resolved in the affirmative--yeas 40, nays 12, as
follows:
YEAS.--Fisher Ames, Robert Barnwell, Egbert Benson, Elias
Boudinot, Shearjashub Bourne, Benjamin Bourne, Jonathan
Dayton, Thomas Fitzsimons, Elbridge Gerry, Nicholas Gilman,
Benjamin Goodhue, James Gordon, Christopher Greenup, Samuel
Griffin, William Barry Grove, Thomas Hartley, James
Hillhouse, William Hindman, Philip Key, Aaron Kitchell,
John Laurance, Amasa Learned, Richard Bland Lee, George
Leonard, Samuel Livermore, Frederick Augustus Muhlenberg,
William Vans Murray, Nathaniel Niles, Theodore Sedgwick,
Jeremiah Smith, Israel Smith, William Smith, John Steele,
Samuel Sterrett, Jonathan Sturges, George Thatcher, Thomas
Tudor Tucker, Artemas Ward, Hugh Williamson, and Francis
Willis.
NAYS.--John Baptist Ashe, Abraham Baldwin, William Findlay,
William B. Giles, Andrew Gregg, Nathaniel Macon, James
Madison, John Francis Mercer, Andrew Moore, Alexander D.
Orr, John Page, and Josiah Parker.
A motion was then made, and the question put, that the House do agree
with the Committee of the whole House in their disagreement to the
fourth resolution, in the words following:
"_Resolved_, That the Secretary of the Treasury has
deviated from the instructions given him by the PRESIDENT
OF THE UNITED STATES, in executing the authorities for
making loans, under the acts of the fourth and twelfth of
August, one thousand seven hundred and ninety."
It was resolved in the affirmative--yeas 39, nays 12, as follows:
[The same as above.]
Another motion was then made, and the question being put, that the House
do agree with the Committee of the whole House in their disagreement to
the fifth resolution, in the words following:
"_Resolved_, That the Secretary of the Treasury has omitted
to discharge an essential duty of his office, in failing to
give Congress official information, in due time, of the
moneys drawn by him from Europe into the United States;
which drawing commenced December, one thousand seven
hundred and ninety, and continued until January, one
thousand seven hundred and ninety-three; and of the cause
of making such drafts:"
It was resolved in the affirmative--yeas 33, nays 15, as follows:
YEAS.--Fisher Ames, Robert Barnwell, Egbert Benson, Elias
Boudinot, Shearjashub Bourne, Benjamin Bourne, Jonathan
Dayton, Thomas Fitzsimons, Elbridge Gerry, Nicholas Gilman,
Benjamin Goodhue, James Gordon, Thomas Hartley, James
Hillhouse, William Hindman, Philip Key, Aaron Kitchell,
John Laurance, Amasa Learned, George Leonard, Samuel
Livermore, Frederick Augustus Muhlenberg, William Vans
Murray, Theodore Sedgwick, Jeremiah Smith, William Smith,
John Steele, Samuel Sterrett, Jonathan Sturges, George
Thatcher, Thomas Tudor Tucker, Artemas Ward, and Hugh
Williamson.
NAYS.--John Baptist Ashe, Abraham Baldwin, William Findlay,
William B. Giles, Samuel Griffin, William Barry Grove,
Richard Bland Lee, Nathaniel Macon, James Madison, John
Francis Mercer, Andrew Moore, Nathaniel Niles, John Page,
Josiah Parker, and Israel Smith.
Another motion was then made, and the question being put, that the House
do agree with the Committee of the whole House in their disagreement to
the sixth resolution, in the words following:
"_Resolved_, That the Secretary of the Treasury has without
the instruction of the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES,
drawn more moneys, borrowed in Holland, into the United
States, than the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES was
authorized to draw, under the act of the twelfth of
August, one thousand seven hundred and ninety, which act
appropriated two millions of dollars only, when borrowed,
to the purchase of the public debt; and that he has omitted
to discharge an essential duty of his office, in failing to
give official information to the commissioners for
purchasing the public debt, of the various sums drawn from
time to time, suggested by him to have been intended for
the purchase of the public debt:"
It was resolved in the affirmative--yeas 33, nays 8, as follows:
[Yeas as above.]
NAYS.--John Baptist Ashe, Abraham Baldwin, William Findlay,
William B. Giles, Nathaniel Macon, James Madison, John
Francis Mercer, and Josiah Parker.
Another motion was then made, and the question being put, that the House
do agree with the Committee of the whole House in their disagreement to
the seventh resolution, in the words following:
"_Resolved_, That the Secretary of the Treasury did not
consult the public interest, in negotiating a loan with the
Bank of the United States, and drawing therefrom four
hundred thousand dollars, at five per centum per annum,
when a greater sum of public money was deposited in various
banks, at the respective periods of making the respective
drafts:"
It was resolved in the affirmative--yeas 33, nays 8, as follows:
[Same as above.]
Another motion was then made, and the question being put, that the House
do agree with the Committee of the whole House in their disagreement to
the eighth resolution, in the words following:
"_Resolved_, That the Secretary of the Treasury has been
guilty of an indecorum to this House, in undertaking to
judge of its motives in calling for information, which was
demandable of him, from the constitution of his office, and
in failing to give all the necessary information within his
knowledge relatively to the subjects of reference made to
him of the nineteenth of January, one thousand seven
hundred and ninety-two, and of the twenty-second of
November, one thousand seven hundred and ninety-two, during
the present session;"
Mr. WILLIAM SMITH said, that, after the vote which had just prevailed by
so considerable a majority on the preceding resolutions, the committee
could not, with any propriety, criminate the Secretary of the Treasury
for failing to give the information alluded to, because by that vote it
had been established that the Secretary had only acted under the
authority of the PRESIDENT, and conformably to his instructions. If
there had been any omission to communicate information to Congress, that
omission was surely not chargeable to the Secretary. But it had been
already clearly shown, by documents in the possession of the House, that
the necessary information had been communicated. The Treasurer's
accounts, which had been from time to time laid before the House,
exhibited the amount of moneys proceeding from the sale of bills, and
the Secretary's report of February, 1791, conveyed full information of
the drawing. It was true, there was a sum of about $600,000, the
proceeds of bills which, as had been remarked by a gentleman, (Mr.
MADISON,) did not appear in the Treasurer's account, but this was owing
to the sales of the bills by the bank not having been closed at the time
the last quarterly account was rendered, and consequently that sum could
not appear in the Treasurer's account.
[Mr. MADISON said, he had not meant to blame the Treasurer.]
Mr. SMITH proceeded. The gentleman, however, had attributed misconduct
to the Secretary, for withholding information of the amount of moneys in
the Treasury accruing from foreign loans, when directed by the House,
January 19th, 1792, to report whether the existing revenues were
adequate to face the additional expense of the Indian war. Mr. S. could
not forbear expressing great surprise at this remark of the gentleman
from Virginia, (Mr. MADISON,) when he recollected what had been just
before said by the same gentleman in support of the former resolution.
The gentleman, on that occasion, in his attempt to disprove the right of
the Secretary, _ex officio_, to superintend the moneys derived from the
foreign loans, had endeavored to establish a nice distinction between
the ordinary internal revenues of the country, and the resources
resulting from foreign loans. The law constituting the Treasury
Department, he had said, gave the Secretary power only over the
revenues, which embraced only the ordinary resources, whereas loans were
distinct things, the management of which was specially intrusted by law
to the Supreme Magistrate, and in relation to which the Secretary could
exercise no authority whatever that was not derived from the PRESIDENT.
The gentleman now argued that the Secretary was blameable in not giving
information of the state of these extraordinary resources, which were
not within his department, when only called upon to state the amount of
the ordinary revenues, which were within his department. He left it to
the gentleman to reconcile this contradiction, for certainly his
doctrine was erroneous on the former occasion, or it must be so now. If
the moneys obtained from foreign loans were to be deemed the revenues of
the country, then they fell of course under the management of the Head
of the Treasury Department, and it was wrong in the gentleman to impute
misconduct to the Secretary for exercising a legal authority; if, on the
contrary, those moneys were viewed as an extra resource, and not within
the purview of the Secretary's functions, then it was wrong to censure
him for not communicating the state of those moneys, when required only
to report the ordinary revenues.
But though the Secretary would not have been censurable for omitting to
give the information, the truth was, that the PRESIDENT's Speech of 8th
December, 1790, the Secretary's Report of 25th February, and the act of
the 3d of March, 1791, were conclusive proofs that the Legislature knew
that the proceeds of the loans were in a train of being brought to the
United States and the accounts of receipts and expenditures presented in
the first week of the session, informed the House that a large sum had
been drawn for, and the Treasurer's quarterly account contained further
information on the subject, all which was prior to any call of the House
for such information. Hence, Mr. S. deduced, that it was not a fact that
the Secretary had failed to give the information, as stated in the
resolution, and that had he even so failed, he would not have been
censurable for a breach of an essential duty of his office. It had been
said, by a member from Pennsylvania, (Mr. FINDLAY,) that the lateness of
the information from the Secretary made it inconvenient to go into an
inquiry of his official conduct so near the close of the session. To
this, Mr. S. replied, that he did not expect such a remark from that
quarter of the House. If the gentleman had not been prepared for the
inquiry, or thought it an improper season to enter upon it, why did he
second the motion for bringing forward the charges? If suspicion had so
long existed against the integrity of the Secretary, why was not
information called for at the beginning of the session? Why was the call
delayed till the session was within a few weeks of its termination? It
was admitted that the Secretary had obeyed the order of the House with
wonderful alacrity and promptitude. It was indeed strange that the
gentleman who brought forward the charges, should be the first to
complain that there was not time for their consideration.
Mr. S. concluded by noticing the observation of Mr. MERCER and Mr.
MADISON, that the opinion of the House on the preceding resolutions
would not change the truth of facts, and that the public would
ultimately decide whether the Secretary's conduct was criminal or not.
This, said Mr. S., was like the conduct of a prosecutor, who, having
chosen his jurisdiction, and being nonsuited, wished to appeal to
another tribunal. Why were the resolutions brought before the House? Was
it not to substantiate the truth of them by a vote? And had the
prosecution succeeded, would the Secretary have had an appeal to the
public? No, the resolutions would have been sent to the PRESIDENT, and
the Secretary would have been removed, disgraced, and ruined for ever,
without appeal.
The question was then taken, and it was resolved in the
affirmative--yeas 34, nays 7, as follows:
YEAS.--Fisher Ames, Robert Barnwell, Egbert Benson, Elias
Boudinot, Shearjashub Bourne, Benjamin Bourne, Jonathan
Dayton, William Findlay, Thomas Fitzsimons, Elbridge Gerry,
Nicholas Gilman, Benjamin Goodhue, James Gordon, Thomas
Hartley, James Hillhouse, William Hindman, Aaron Kitchell,
John Laurance, Amasa Learned, George Leonard, Samuel
Livermore, Frederick Augustus Muhlenberg, Nathaniel Niles,
Josiah Parker, Theodore Sedgwick, Jeremiah Smith, William
Smith, John Steele, Samuel Sterrett, Jonathan Sturges,
George Thatcher, Thomas Tudor Tucker, Artemas Ward, and
Hugh Williamson.
NAYS.--John Baptist Ashe, Abraham Baldwin, William B.
Giles, William Barry Grove, Richard Bland Lee, Nathaniel
Macon, and James Madison.
SATURDAY EVENING, March 2.
A message from the Senate informed the House that the Senate having
completed the Legislative business before them, are now about to
adjourn.
_Resolved._ That Mr. BOUDINOT, Mr. SEDGWICK, and Mr. HINDMAN, be
appointed a committee jointly, with a committee on the part of the
Senate, to wait on the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, and inform him
that Congress is ready to adjourn without day, unless he may have any
farther communications to make to them.
A message from the Senate informed the House that the Senate have agreed
to the resolution of this House for the appointment of a joint
committee, to wait on the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, and inform him
of the intended recess of Congress, and have appointed a committee for
that purpose, on their part.
On a motion made and seconded,
"That the thanks of the House of Representatives be presented to
JONATHAN TRUMBULL, in testimony of their approbation of his conduct in
the chair, and in the execution of the difficult and important trust
reposed in him, as SPEAKER of the said House,"
It was resolved unanimously: Whereupon,
Mr. SPEAKER made his acknowledgments to the House, in manner following:
"GENTLEMEN: You have made me very happy by this testimony
of your approbation of my conduct in the chair. I feel, at
the same time, an additional pleasure in the opportunity of
rendering to you my sincere acknowledgments for the kind
candor and indulgence, as well as the constant aid and
support, which I have experienced in the performance of the
duty which you were pleased to assign me. Be assured,
gentlemen, I shall ever retain a grateful sense of your
goodness; and you will suffer me to add, that my best
wishes for your welfare and happiness, in public and
private life, will attend each member of this honorable
body."
Mr. BOUDINOT, from the joint committee appointed to wait on the
PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, and inform him of the intended recess of
Congress, reported that the committee had performed that duty, and that
the PRESIDENT was pleased to say he had no farther communication to make
during the present session: Whereupon,
Mr. SPEAKER adjourned the House _sine die_.