MATTHEW LYON.

_February 1, 1798._

The reading of the letter having been gone through, a member proposed

that it should lie on the table, when

Mr. MACON said, that as it was an acknowledgment of improper conduct, he

thought it ought to be entered upon the journals.

Mr. NICHOLAS moved that the letter be referred to the committee who have

this subject under consideration. Gentlemen would recollect, he said,

that, on a former occasion, when an offence of the same nature was

committed, a letter written by the offending member was not only

referred, but was also deemed a sufficient apology to the House. He did

not know that this would be the case in the present instance; but that

it might be, was evinced by the case to which he alluded. He hoped,

therefore, it would be referred. Agreed to.

FRIDAY, February 2.

_Breach of Privilege._

Mr. VENABLE from the Committee of Privileges, made the following report:

The Committee of Privileges, to whom was referred a

resolution on the 30th of January, charging Matthew Lyon

with disorderly behavior, with instructions to inquire into

the whole matter thereof, and to report the same, with

their opinion thereon, to the House, having examined

several witnesses on oath touching the subject, report:

That, during the sitting of the House of Representatives on

the 30th day of January, 1798, the tellers of the House

being engaged in counting the ballots for Managers of the

impeachment against William Blount, the Speaker had left

his chair, and many members their seats, as is usual on

such occasions; the Speaker was sitting in one of the

member's seats, next to the bar of the House, and several

members near him, of whom Mr. Griswold was one.

Mr. Lyon was standing without the bar of the House, leaning

on the same, and holding a conversation with the Speaker.

He spoke loud enough to be heard by all those who were near

him, as if he intended to be heard by them. The subject of

his conversation was, the conduct of the Representatives of

the State of Connecticut, (of whom Mr. Griswold was one.)

Mr. Lyon declared that they acted in opposition to the

interests and opinion of nine-tenths of their constituents;

that they were pursuing their own private views, without

regarding the interests of the people; that they were

seeking offices, which they were willing to accept, whether

yielding $9,000 or $1,000. He further observed that the

people of that State were blinded or deceived by those

Representatives; that they were permitted to see but one

side of the question in politics, being lulled asleep by

the opiates which the members from that State administered

to them; with other expressions equally tending to derogate

from the political integrity of the Representatives of

Connecticut.

On Mr. Lyon's observing, that if he should go into

Connecticut, and manage a press there six months, although

the people of that State were not fond of revolutionary

principles, he could effect a revolution, and turn out the

present Representatives--Mr. Griswold replied to these

remarks, and, amongst other things, said that, "If you go

into Connecticut, you had better wear your wooden sword,"

or words to that effect, alluding to Mr. Lyon's having been

cashiered in the army.

Mr. Lyon did not notice the allusion at this time, but

continued the conversation on the same subject. Mr.

Griswold then left his seat, and stood next to Mr. Lyon,

leaning on the bar, being outside the same.

On Mr. Lyon's saying he knew the people of Connecticut

well, having lived among them many years--that he had

frequent occasion to fight them in his own district, and

that he never failed to convince them--Mr. Griswold asked,

if he fought them with his wooden sword, on which Mr. Lyon

spat in his face.

The Committee having attentively considered the foregoing

state of facts, and having heard Mr. Lyon in his defence,

are of opinion that his conduct in this transaction was

highly indecorous, and unworthy of a member of this House.

They, therefore, recommend the adoption of the resolution

submitted to their consideration by the House, in the words

following, to wit:

"_Resolved_, That Matthew Lyon, a member of this House, for

a violent attack and gross indecency, committed upon the

person of Roger Griswold, another member, in the presence

of the House while sitting, be for this disorderly behavior

expelled therefrom."

The report having been read,

Mr. LYON said, he did not think the evidence was stated in its full

extent in this report. He wished, therefore, before the House proceeded

in the business, they would hear the evidence themselves.

Mr. HARPER inquired of the SPEAKER whether that was the usual mode of

proceeding?

The SPEAKER said, it was necessary first to take up the report for a

second reading.

Mr. MACON observed that this was a very delicate and a very serious

question, as it related to one of the members of that House, and as it

respected the dignity of the House itself. He hoped, therefore, the

report would be printed, that some time would be given to consider it,

and that the House would themselves hear the testimony. The punishment

which the report proposed was equal to death itself. He hoped,

therefore, it would not be acted upon hastily, but made the order of the

day for Monday.

Mr. HARPER did not wish to press the business in an improper manner, as

it was certainly of great importance to a member of that House, to the

House itself, and to the dignity of the country. It was usual to have

all reports of any consequence printed, and a day or two given for

consideration. He was not himself desirous of delay, as he was at

present ready to vote upon the question; but, if other members wished

it, he should not object to the motion proposed by the gentleman from

North Carolina.

Mr. NICHOLAS took it for granted, that, whenever this subject came up,

the House would think it necessary to go into an examination of the

witnesses themselves, and not rely upon the manner in which their

testimony had struck others. He thought it would be best, therefore,

whilst the report was printing, to go on in the examination of

witnesses.

The question for postponing till Monday was put and carried.

Mr. NICHOLAS said, he had no objection to wait for the printing of the

report, before the House proceeded to examine the witnesses, but he

should not waive the right of having them re-examined before the House.

MONDAY, February 5.

Mr. D. FOSTER reported a bill for the relief of Oliver Pollock, which

was committed for Wednesday.

_French Outrages._

The following Message was received from the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED

STATES:

_Gentlemen of the Senate, and Gentlemen of the House of

Representatives_:

I have received a letter from his Excellency Charles

Pinckney, Esq., Governor of the State of South Carolina,

dated the 22d October, 1797, enclosing a number of

depositions and witnesses to several captures and outrages

committed within and near the limits of the United States,

by a French privateer belonging to Cape Francois, or Monte

Christo, called the Vertitude or Fortitude, and commanded

by a person of the name of Jordon or Jourdain, and

particularly upon an English merchant ship named the

Oracabissa, which he first plundered and then burned, with

the rest of her cargo, of great value, within the territory

of the United States, in the harbor of Charleston, on the

17th of October last. Copies of which letter and

depositions, and also of several other depositions relative

to the same subject, received from the Collector of

Charleston, are herewith communicated.

Whenever the channel of diplomatical communication between

the United States and France shall be opened, I shall

demand satisfaction for the insult and reparation for the

injury.

I have transmitted these papers to Congress, not so much

for the purpose of communicating an account of so daring a

violation of the territory of the United States, as to show

the propriety and necessity of enabling the Executive

authority of Government to take measures for protecting the

citizens of the United States and such foreigners as have a

right to enjoy their peace, and the protection of their

laws, within their limits, in that as well as some other

harbors which are equally exposed.

Abridgment of the Debates of Congress, from 1789 to 1856, Vol. 2 (of 16) · 第 98 / 272 题