Mr. HARPER said, he believed that the appointment of such a committee
was very unusual, without having some ground stated to the House for the
proceeding. A vote of this kind would imply a censure upon the conduct
of our public officers, which certainly ought not to be done hastily, or
without first having, at least, some ground of suspicion laid before
them upon which to act. The House had not yet received the statements
which had been called for relative to this business; they were directed
to be laid before the House in the last week in January, and might,
therefore, be soon expected.
[Several gentlemen said it was the first, and not the last week in
January, in which the accounts had been ordered to be laid before the
House.]
Mr. H. said the delay, he supposed, had been occasioned by the officers
having been obliged to remove from the city during the fever. He had,
however, been informed that these statements would be ready in a few
days. And would it not be extraordinary, he asked, if, before they
received these statements, they were to appoint a committee of inquiry?
He thought it would. He believed the officers of this department of
Government were very desirous of the inquiry taking place; but this was
not a sufficient reason for the House to proceed in the business without
having first some ground to suppose the money had been misapplied, and
this he believed could not be ascertained until the expected statements
were before the House. When these were looked into, it was possible the
House might be satisfied with respect to the expenditure of the money,
and it would, therefore, be improper to appoint a committee to inquire
into a matter which might so shortly appear satisfactory. If, on the
other hand, these accounts should not be satisfactory, he would readily
concur in the appointment of a committee of inquiry.
Mr. J. WILLIAMS said, the gentleman from South Carolina ought to
recollect that the inquiry was produced by a further appropriation being
called for. It might be best to defer the inquiry until the accounts
which had been called for were laid before the House; and he should have
been satisfied with the business taking that course, if a further
appropriation had not been called for in the mean time. But when they
are called upon to appropriate a further sum of money for any object, it
was natural to inquire what was become of that already voted; and the
only way of doing this was to appoint a committee who would look into
all the different statements which had from time to time been laid
before the House, and those which might shortly be communicated, and
state their opinion thereon to the House. He thought those gentlemen who
were most friendly to the frigates ought not to oppose the appointment
of a committee; because, if it should appear that the money had been
justly expended, there would be little objection to a further
appropriation.
Mr. LIVINGSTON said, from the full discussion of this subject, which,
though incidentally produced, had taken place on a former occasion, he
did not think it would either have been becoming or necessary to have
again stated the reasons which gave rise to this resolution, especially
as he felt an aversion to say any thing which might be unnecessary, or
which might tire those who heard him. Mr. L. said, that he had before
observed that the patience of the House had been worn out by the
repeated applications which had been made for money for this object;
that the expense had exceeded all belief; that the most extended
imagination could not have conceived an amount like that which Congress
had from time to time been blindly led to appropriate. But the
proposition was objected to, because it would cast an odium upon our
officers. This he was perfectly indifferent about. Whatever might be the
private opinion he had of the characters of these officers, however
incapable he might believe them of doing wrong, or of acting corruptly,
yet, when his duty called upon him to make an inquiry into the
expenditure of public money, he was deaf to all considerations of a
private nature. But, in this case, he did not see the necessity for this
remark. The House had been told (he believed by the gentleman from South
Carolina himself) that the extraordinary expense had been occasioned by
our inexperience in business of this kind, by the high price of labor,
materials, &c. If this were the case, the result of the inquiry would be
honorable to those concerned, and highly satisfactory to the House. It
was a proceeding which our public officers ought to wish for; nay,
gentlemen say they do wish for it.
But, Mr. L. said, it had been alleged, that the statements ordered a
year ago to be laid before the House during the first week in this
month, should be waited for before any inquiry took place. He would
reply, if these officers had not, in the mean time, called upon the
House for a fresh supply of money, this inquiry would not have been
thought of. Besides, the accounts asked for last year would not give the
satisfaction required. The request only extended to all the expenditures
previous to the 1st of January, 1797. The House would wish to know what
had been expended since, and they had no reason to expect further
information than was asked for. Mr. L. said every member who was present
at the time must remember that whenever the House had been applied to
for further appropriations, they had been told that the frigates would
be ready for sea at such and such a time; and that they would then bear
our flag triumphantly over the ocean. And yet, though the House had been
four or five times deceived by these representations, they were told
there was no ground for inquiry. For his part, he should consider
himself as neglecting his duty were he not to call for this inquiry
immediately; for, if the House were to wait a week for the statements
called for, they might wait another for their being printed; they might
then be found to be deficient, fresh statements might be necessary, and
the session might expire without effecting the wished-for inquiry. He
thought all parts of the House ought to favor the inquiry; for, he
believed, if it should appear that frigates could not be built for less
than $500,000 a piece, the project of a navy ought to be given up; but
if, on the other hand, difficulties and expenses had occurred in the
commencement of this business, which would not return, and their
frigates may in future be built for half the sum, (which was his
opinion,) there would be some encouragement to proceed in the business.
Mr. SEWALL was sorry that the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. HARPER)
had given the occasion, and that the gentleman last up had so eagerly
seized it, to thwart any measures which might be necessary for the
general defence, by ridiculing the resources of the country. The
present, he said, was a time of danger and apprehension, and thus to
talk of the resources of the United States added to the apprehension and
the danger. The gentleman from South Carolina had said, that to pass
this resolution would be to pass an odium upon our public officers. He
did not think so. He thought an inquiry of this kind at all times proper
where there was any doubt as to the expenditure of money. He agreed with
the gentleman from New York, that the inquiry (if it had a favorable
issue, which he did not doubt) would forward the design of providing a
navy; as it would appear that the extraordinary expenses had been such
as it would not be necessary to incur in future. He was, therefore,
sorry to hear the gentleman from New York first up (Mr. WILLIAMS) say he
should be disinclined to vote any further appropriation until he saw how
the last had been expended. However improvidently the money already
appropriated had been expended, yet, in order to secure what had been
voted, and to keep the work in progress, they ought to vote a further
sum, as soon as wanted, whether the statements called for were received
or not.
Mr. LIVINGSTON desired to know wherein he had attempted to ridicule the
resources of this country? The gentleman from Massachusetts must excuse
him when he asserted he had never made a more hasty or unfounded charge.
If he had either ridiculed the resources, or thwarted any measures for
the general defence of the United States, it must have arisen from a
weak judgment, and not from any intention of doing so. But he was
certain nothing which had fallen from him could be so construed.
Mr. SEWALL acquitted the gentleman from New York of any intention of
lowering the appearances of the resources of this country; but he
appealed to the House whether he had not spoken of this fleet with a
degree of ridicule, when he represented it as governing the ocean. It
appeared so to him at least.
Mr. HARPER again insisted upon the impropriety of going into this
measure, from reasons similar to those which he had already given.
Mr. GALLATIN said, that the ground taken by the gentleman from South
Carolina (Mr. HARPER) would prevent any inquiry whatever; for he stated
that the House ought not to pass the present resolution, because certain
statements had not been received, and because to pass it would be to
imply a censure on our officers. So that on this ground no inquiry could
be gone into without statements, as the House could not obtain
statements without passing a resolution, that resolution would be
construed into a censure, and therefore ought not to be passed. This Mr.
G. thought a very improper doctrine. It would never be in the power of
the House to decide upon the propriety of statements by barely having
them laid upon the table.
MONDAY, January 15.
_Naval Expenditure._
Mr. GALLATIN stated the different estimates which had been made to the
House. In 1794, he said, they were told that $688,000 would be
sufficient to build six frigates. In 1796, they were informed there had
been a mistake in the matter, but that with $80,000 more three would be
finished. In January, 1797, the House was again called upon for
$172,000; in July, in the same year, for $200,000, and now for $150,000
more. Such calculations, he thought, wholly unaccountable.
Mr. NICHOLAS did not understand what the gentleman from Connecticut
meant by saying that this was wholly Executive business. He did not
believe, because the PRESIDENT had told the House that he was about to
hold a treaty, that the money must be granted, and that the House had no
choice whether they would appropriate it or not. From what had already
been said upon the subject, he doubted not there was a pretty general
disposition to grant the money; but it was not proper that the Message
should be sent to the Committee of Ways and Means, as if an
appropriation was a thing of course; to do this, would be to act at the
_command_ of the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES; whereas the House could
only act upon the full exercise of its discretion. He therefore moved
that the Message be referred to the Committee of the Whole, which had
already this subject under consideration.
Mr. GALLATIN believed the gentleman from Connecticut had not considered
this subject with his usual correctness. That gentleman had said that
the Message before them ought to go to the Committee of Ways and Means,
and that an appropriation should follow as a thing of course. It must be
known that this was contrary to the practice of that House, or of any
former Legislature of the United States. On the contrary, it was usual,
first to authorize an expense, and in the next place to appropriate; and
in no case had the business been reversed. If the Message were referred
to the Committee of Ways and Means, all they could do, would be to bring
it back to the House, and ask for an authority for the expense. He
believed the gentleman from Connecticut had been led into this mistake
by considering the Message announcing the intention of the PRESIDENT to
hold a treaty as a treaty made; and had that been the case, according to
that gentleman's known opinion, he would consider the House as bound to
make the necessary appropriation; but he desired him to recollect that
no treaty was yet made; and, therefore, that that doctrine could not
apply in the present case.
Mr. RUTLEDGE did not believe it was necessary or proper for that House
to authorize the PRESIDENT to hold a treaty; but if it were necessary
for him to hold a treaty, the concurrence of that House was necessary to
enable him to do it, as it could not be done without money. It was
requisite, therefore, to pass a bill, not to authorize the PRESIDENT to
hold a treaty, but to enable him to do it. It was best, therefore, for
the communication first to go to the Committee of the Whole, and
afterwards to the Committee of Ways and Means, in order for them to say
where the money could be got. There was something in this case which
pointed out this mode as peculiarly proper, as there seemed to be a
disposition in the House, if the treaty should not succeed agreeably to
the wishes of the PRESIDENT, to afford temporary relief to the persons
now suffering from being driven from their land. The gentleman from
Connecticut had said, that the Committee of Ways and Means could report
an estimate of the probable expense which would be incurred in holding
the treaty; but if he attended to the Message of the PRESIDENT, he would
find that this estimate was to be laid before the House by the proper
department, so that there was no necessity of a reference to any
committee for that purpose.
The motion for a reference to the Committee of the Whole was carried,
without a division.
_William Alexander._
On motion of Mr. GREGG, the House went into a Committee of the Whole on
the report of the Committee of Claims on the petition of William
Alexander, surveyor of Army lands. After reading a number of papers
relative to the subject, the report, which went to authorize the
Treasury to settle the accounts of the petitioner, was agreed to, the
committee rose, the House concurred, and a bill was directed to be
brought in accordingly.
_General Kosciusko._
Mr. PINCKNEY, from the committee appointed to confer with the Senate on
the disagreement between the two Houses on the bill for the payment of
interest to General Kosciusko, reported, that finding the business could
be settled in a manner equally advantageous to the General, by agreeing
to the amendment of the Senate, as by the mode originally proposed, the
committee recommend it to the House to recede from their disagreement to
the Senate's amendment.
The recommendation was concurred in by the House.
_Civil Appropriation for 1798._
On motion of Mr. HARPER, the House resolved itself into a Committee of
the Whole on the report of the Committee of Ways and Means for providing
for the expenses of the civil department for the year 1798, and the
blanks being filled (except in a few cases, in which they were left in
blank) according to the estimate which had been laid before the House,
the committee rose, the House concurred, and the bill was ordered to be
reported accordingly.
THURSDAY, January 18.
The SPEAKER laid before the House a communication from the Secretary of
War, enclosing an estimate of the appropriations necessary for holding a
treaty with the Cherokee Indians, which was in substance as follows:
For three commissioners, ninety days, at
eight dollars per day $2,160
Incidental expenses of do. 360
Secretary, at four dollars per day 360
Rations of two thousand Indians 15,000
Presents to the Indians 5,000
Stores for the commissioners 2,000
Incidental expenses 1,200
------
25,880
======
This statement was referred to the Committee of the Whole to whom was
referred the former Message of the President on this subject.
_Persons Imprisoned for Debt._
The following Message, with the papers to which they refer, was received
from the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES:
_Gentlemen of the Senate, and Gentlemen of the House of
Representatives_:
A representation has been made to me, by the Judge of the
Pennsylvania district of the United States, of certain
inconveniences and disagreeable circumstances, which have
occurred in the execution of the law passed on the 28th day
of May, 1786, entitled "An act for the relief of persons
imprisoned for debt," as well as of certain doubts which
have been raised concerning its construction; this
representation, together with a report of the Attorney
General on the same subject, I now transmit to Congress,
for their consideration, that if any amendments or
explanations of that law may be thought advisable, they may
be adopted.