On motion of Mr. W. C. CLAIBORNE, the House resolved itself into a

Committee of the Whole on the report of the Secretary of War on the

petition of Stephen Cantrill; and the report and papers accompanying it

were read. The report was as follows:

"The Secretary of War, to whom was referred the petition of

Stephen Cantrill, respectfully reports: That the services

for which the petitioner prays compensation to himself and

a company which he commanded, were performed in the month

of September, 1794, on an expedition conducted by Major

James Orr, into the Lower Cherokee country, which issued in

the destruction of two considerable Indian towns, the

Running Water and Nickajack, the killing of a number of

Indians, and the taking about twenty prisoners.

"That the report of Major Orr to Governor Blount, dated at

Knoxville, the 24th September, 1794, shows, that this

expedition marched on the 7th of the same month, and was

ordered by General Robertson, of Mero district.

"That the orders of General Robertson for this purpose were

afterwards communicated by himself to Gov. Blount, in a

letter dated the 8th October, 1794, detailing his reasons

for the order.

"That letters from Governor Blount to the Secretary of War,

dated the 22d of September and 2d of October, 1794, as well

as the copy of an order, which he states to have been the

last given by him to General Robertson, previous to this

expedition, evince that the Governor did not sanction the

measure.

"That the Secretary of War, previous to Major Orr's

expedition, in a letter to Governor Blount, dated the 26th

July, 1794, strongly discouraged the idea of destroying the

lower towns of the Cherokees, in the following words, viz:

'With respect to destroying the lower towns, however

rigorous such a measure might be, or whatever good

consequences might result from it, I am instructed

specially by the President to say, that he does not

conceive himself authorized to direct any such measure,

more especially as the whole subject was before the last

session of Congress, who did not think proper to authorize

or direct offensive operations.' And that as soon as the

destruction of the Running Water and Nickajack was

communicated to him, the Secretary strongly disavowed any

participation in the business, by his letter to Governor

Blount, dated the 22d of December, 1794, in these words,

viz: 'The destruction of the lower Cherokee towns stands

upon its own footing; that it was not authorized is

certain.'

"That the President at all times, as well before as after

this expedition, endeavored to confine the protection of

the frontier of the South-western Territory to defensive

operations, and to restrain from those which were

offensive.

"That, on the whole, it appears, the services for which

compensation is prayed by the petition of Stephen Cantrill,

were performed on an expedition, offensive, unauthorized,

and in direct violation of the orders from the President to

Governor Blount, by whom also they were not sanctioned.

"The documents referred to, and others connected with the

subject, are herewith presented, numbered from No. 1 to 9,

inclusive.

"All which is respectfully submitted to the House of

Representatives.

"JAMES McHENRY.

"WAR OFFICE, _April, 1798_."

The reading being finished, Mr. W. C. CLAIBORNE said, that, in his

opinion, this claim was founded on the principles of justice; and he

trusted every member who had attended to the reading of the documents,

must accord with him in opinion, that the Nickajack expedition,

undertaken by Major James Orr, in 1794, into the Lower Cherokee country,

was authorized by General Robertson; and it remains now to be decided,

whether soldiers shall not be entitled to pay until they have previously

assured themselves of the legitimate authority of their commanding

officer. At the time when this expedition was set on foot, a war raged

between the United States and the Cherokee nation of Indians, the

horrors of which bore hard upon the district of Mero; the very existence

of the settlement was threatened; scarcely a day passed without some one

or other of the inhabitants, or of their acquaintance, being murdered.

Information was received that the Indians were embodied in order to

carry the war into the settlement. What was the General to do? Was he to

stand still without making any attempt to avert the danger? The safety

of the people required him to act, and he struck the first blow, which

was a defensive measure authorized by the usage of all nations. The

citizens on this expedition obeyed the command of their officer; they

did not think it necessary to inquire by what authority he acted; all

for them to be assured of was, that he was an officer of the United

States, and this they well knew, as this was not the first time they had

served under him. Without a discipline of this kind no military

operation could be carried on. General Robertson acted also under the

authority of Governor Blount, who acted under the orders of the

PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. Having then performed this duty--a duty,

too, which put an end to a war which might have cost the United States a

million of dollars--he trusted the petitioners would be compensated for

their services. The amount, he believed, would not be more than about

$4,000, as the party was out only twelve days. To effect this purpose,

he proposed the following resolution for the adoption of the committee:

"_Resolved_, That the proper officers be directed to settle

the accounts of the militia who served on the expedition

commanded by Major James Orr against the Cherokee Indians,

in the year 1794."

This resolution was agreed to without opposition. The committee rose,

and after some few observations, it was agreed to in the House, and a

committee appointed to report a bill accordingly.

TUESDAY, April 24.

Mr. W. C. C. CLAIBORNE, from the committee appointed, reported a bill

directing the payment of a detachment of militia, for services performed

in the year 1794, under Major James Orr, which was twice read and

committed.

_Provisional Army._

A bill from the Senate, authorizing the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

to raise a provisional army of 20,000 men, was read the first time; and

upon motion made to read it a second time,

Mr. NICHOLAS objected to the second reading of the bill, as he believed

it possessed a principle which could not be assented to. He did not

believe it was necessary to pass a bill of this sort under any possible

modification. The highest act of Legislative power was, by it, proposed

to be transferred to the Executive, viz: the power to raise an army,

which he was to exercise at his pleasure. If an army was necessary, the

Legislature ought to raise it; but he did not think it was necessary at

present. Indeed, when discussing the bill for providing a naval

armament, gentlemen had said that members had been willing to make

preparations for defence on the land, where there was no danger, but

were unwilling to do it at sea, where the greatest might be expected. He

did not believe there could be any necessity for going into a measure of

this kind at the present session. In case of predatory attack, the

militia would be equal to repelling them. Mr. N. said he lived in a part

of the country perhaps more defenceless than any other; but, so far as

he or his constituents were concerned, he did not wish for a force of

this kind. He was willing to confide for defence on the militia of the

country.

Mr. OTIS thought it very extraordinary that the gentleman from Virginia

should endeavor to surprise a part of this House into a decision upon

this bill in this stage of it. He hoped he would consent to its taking

the usual course. The gentleman had gone into the merits of the bill; he

could not follow him, because he had not heard it read; so far as he did

hear it, he was of opinion that the gentleman had anticipated objections

which did not lie against it. He seemed to suppose that this bill

declared that a standing army should be raised. It does no such thing;

it only declares that if existing circumstances shall make it necessary,

then the PRESIDENT shall raise an army not exceeding a certain number of

men. It may happen that the necessity may not exist; but the gentleman

from Virginia must be able to fathom the intentions of France further

than he could pretend to do, if he could say that no such necessity

would exist. If what was said by the agents of that Government to our

Envoys could be relied on, there was a direct threat to ravage our

coasts. He hoped, however, no invasion would take place; but, when he

said this, he calculated upon the French acting as reasonable beings,

but perhaps he calculated delusively. Indeed, they are now threatening

the invasion of a country, where one may suppose they would have as

little chance of succeeding as in this country; and was the idea, then,

to be so much scoffed at, as not to suffer a bill, intending to provide

against it, to be read a second time? If the arms of our citizens were

to be tied up, and our militia were many of them without arms, with what

should we oppose such an attempt, if it were made? What, said he, is to

prevent Victor Hugues sending over two or three frigates? It had been

said that he expected open war, and that he was ready for it. In short,

he thought it would be the most disgraceful conduct that ever was

attempted in that House, if the bill should be rejected without a second

reading. It would be in vain to talk of unanimity, if a bill from the

Senate was to be treated in this way. If the gentleman persisted in his

motion, he trusted he would find himself nearly alone.

Mr. GALLATIN wondered that the gentleman from Massachusetts should be so

greatly surprised at a motion of this kind, because if he had attended

to the rules of the House, he would have found that it was a course

expressly prescribed by them. It had been acted upon before during this

session. The principle, he said, was well understood. When a member

disapproves of the principle of a bill altogether, and does not wish to

go at all into a discussion of the detail, he moves to reject it before

it goes to a second reading.

This bill goes to authorize the PRESIDENT to raise an army. He did not

know what was meant by a provisional army. He did not find any thing

said in the Constitution of the United States relative to provisional

armies, or of giving the PRESIDENT power to raise armies. He found

mentioned there no other kind of defence than an army and militia. It

says Congress shall raise and support an army, not provide for the

raising of an army; but this bill is to enable the PRESIDENT OF THE

UNITED STATES to raise an army. The constitution has declared that the

raising of an army is placed in Congress, but this bill goes to declare

that this power shall be vested by law in the PRESIDENT. That is the

principle of the bill: and if Congress were once to admit the principle

that they have a right to vest in the PRESIDENT powers placed in their

hands by the constitution, that instrument would become a piece of blank

paper. If it were to be admitted in one case, it would be admitted in

another; and, if admitted in one department, it might be admitted in

another. The power to raise taxes, he said, is contained in the same

article of the constitution which says Congress shall raise armies. And

if they could delegate the power of raising an army to the PRESIDENT,

why not do the same with respect to the power of raising taxes? He

supposed the House would next hear of provisional taxes, to be raised if

the PRESIDENT shall think fit. Mr. G., therefore, thought the principle

inadmissible. If the circumstances of the Union required an army, let it

be raised; if not, he wished to give no power to raise it--especially,

as the PRESIDENT, if he saw necessity, could call Congress together, if

he should find that the circumstances of the country required it. Mr. G.

thought the House had already decided that no additional army was

necessary at present, in agreeing to an additional regiment of

artillery; as the select committee, when they brought in that bill, had

the report of the Secretary of War before them, which stated, besides

the regiment of artillery, that other additional force would be

necessary; and having reported no other, it was to be supposed they

thought no other necessary. But, if it was thought the House had not

gone far enough, he was willing to go farther, but not willing to

transfer their power to judge of the propriety of raising an army.

Mr. DANA hoped this bill would not be rejected on its first reading. It

required no labored arguments to prove that the motion might be made;

but more than had been adduced to show that it ought to be adopted. He

thought the gentleman from Massachusetts ought not to have been

surprised at this motion, because it was best calculated for exciting

alarm. It was said the Senate proceeded in a similar way on the bill

sent up from this House for a repeal of the stamp act; but that question

had already been agreed upon in the Senate on a distinct proposition,

and there was, therefore, no necessity for going again into it. The

gentleman from Pennsylvania had said that when the House agreed upon an

additional regiment of artillery, they negatively decided against any

other standing force. The gentleman might put what construction he

pleased upon that vote, he could assure him for himself that he had no

such idea when he voted.

This bill, Mr. D. said, provided for the raising of a regular force, in

case the PRESIDENT shall think the situation of the country requires it.

He is also authorized to accept of the services of the volunteer corps.

The bill could be amended in any manner which gentlemen thought proper.

But the gentleman from Pennsylvania does not know what a provisional

army means. He believed this was no new principle. He believed it was

acted upon when the three additional regiments were raised to the then

existing corps. It was in principle the same as when an army is directed

to be raised, but where the PRESIDENT has power given him to suspend the

raising of it, if he shall see it necessary.

Mr. SEWALL said that, though the present motion be not irregular in

point of form, yet it is a manner of proceeding very objectionable at

this time. His colleague had complained of this motion being a surprise

upon the House. He had good reason so to consider it. And the House will

consider whether it is expedient, without entering into a consideration

of the bill, without seeing whether any alteration could be made in it,

so as to render it more agreeable to gentlemen, thus to attempt to

destroy the bill. What was the motive of the gentleman from Virginia in

making the motion might easily be discovered. He had obtained leave of

absence, which might have a tendency to hurry him in his political

course. He wished to be heard on this subject, but this hurry of his to

return home ought not to hurry the House in its proceedings. Those

gentlemen who had determined to take this course had the advantage of

others who were unprepared for such a motion.

Mr. HARPER believed, notwithstanding what had been advanced by the

gentleman from Pennsylvania, (Mr. GALLATIN,) that this was a very

unprecedented measure; because however prepared the House may be on some

occasions, at the first blush of business, to decide upon the abstract

principle, yet it was perfectly novel in their proceedings to reject a

bill on its first reading, which contains such a variety of

propositions, and which is capable of such a variety of modifications as

the present. It was also as little consonant with the present situation

of the country as it was with their usual modes of proceeding. The

allusion to the decision on the bill for repealing the stamp act (as had

been shown) was no way applicable. He could see no other view in a

proposition of this kind but a determination to resist every measure for

the defence of the country. If the intention had not been to destroy the

bill, it would have been suffered to have taken its usual course, and

attempts would have been made to amend it. If a provisional army was not

liked, gentlemen might have had the army immediately raised; or, if

20,000 men were too many, fewer might have been proposed. If gentlemen

did not think the army immediately necessary, and did not choose to

leave it with the PRESIDENT to judge of that necessity, they might make

it to depend upon a declaration of war by France, on an invasion, or in

case Victor Hugues were to bring his troops, or send his threatened

frigates against us, or if an insurrection should be excited by our

enemy, then the PRESIDENT should be empowered to raise an army.

But gentlemen say this bill ought to be rejected, because it is

unconstitutional. Could gentlemen be serious in making this objection?

Were troops ever raised in a different manner? And if they had the power

to authorize the PRESIDENT to raise troops immediately, they could

certainly do it under such contingencies as they thought proper. Did not

Congress intrust the PRESIDENT with the discretionary power of borrowing

money, of, in some cases, fixing salaries, &c., which powers were

equally vested in them with the power of raising armies; and this must

be the case, except gentlemen insist that Congress should itself do all

the acts committed to it; and if so, they must always be in session.

But the gentleman from Pennsylvania says, that if this power be

delegated to the PRESIDENT, Congress may as well intrust the PRESIDENT

with the power of raising provisional taxes. He had no hesitation in

saying, that he believed this might be done; that the House might

determine upon a tax, and authorize the collecting of it, only in case

the PRESIDENT should find it necessary, or in case a certain event

should take place.

With respect, then, to the expediency of the measure--he did not speak

of the expediency of raising 20,000 men, because any other number might

be determined upon--but as to the thing itself. What is the internal and

external state of this country? Do we not know that the enemy has in

view a plan upon which they place great reliance--of gaining over to

their cause a certain class of men, who abound in the Southern part of

this country, and by whose means they intend to subjugate or destroy the

country? We do know this--gentlemen from the Southern States know it;

yet they say it is impossible to raise any regular force to repel the

enemy. He could not believe, that when we had to meet an enemy, who has

always fought by means of domestic insurrection, who is now subverting

the most ancient Governments in the world by these means, it would be

consistent with any maxim of common sense to be unprepared for the

worst.

What, said he, is our external situation? Do we not see the nation with

whom we are at variance find quarrels with every country who is not

strong enough to resist her? Does she not injure us on every side? Do we

not hear of depredatory threats, and the mischiefs she has the power of

doing us, urged as reasons why we should submit to her? And yet, after

being told of these designs, shall we sit with our arms folded, and make

no defence? For the measures already taken will be nothing without this.

Fortifications would be nothing except supported by a sufficient number

of infantry and cavalry.

What, he asked, is the situation of the West Indies? Were they not told

that Victor Hugues, with 5,000 of his best troops, is ready to make a

blow upon the Southern country, whenever the word of command shall be

given? They knew that these troops existed; they had been seen, and the

desperate character of their leader was also known. Yet, with this enemy

upon our threshold, within four or five days' sail of us, we still fold

our arms, and say we will make no defence.

When he reflected upon these things, he could not help deploring that

fatal blindness, that stubborn spirit of opposition, in certain

gentlemen, which could hide from their view the danger of our present

situation; that, at a period when the veil is rending from before the

eyes of the community; when those who have been the most blind

out-of-doors begin to see, that those gentlemen in this House, who, from

their ancient birth and fortunes, might be supposed to possess the true

American spirit, should still persist in their blind, their destructive

course, was greatly to be lamented. And though he could not doubt the

fate of this bill, yet that there should be a few men found supporting

measures which tend directly to the destruction of the country, he could

not help lamenting.

Mr. BALDWIN did not agree with the gentleman who had just sat down, that

the present motion was either unprecedented or improper. When it is

proposed to make a law on any subject, it presents itself to discussion

on two grounds, the principles of the law and the details. The proper

stages to debate the general principle on which the law is to be

founded, by the rules of this House, are, when it is proposed to

introduce the law, and at the third reading, when it is considered as

finished, and on its passage; the intermediate stages of the discussion

are all supposed to be employed to settle and adjust the detail. He had

often regretted that members, having been accustomed to different modes

of proceeding in their State Legislatures, were so apt to disturb and

keep unsettled their modes of proceeding in this House. He knew it was

sometimes a practice, after a bill had been read the second time, and

was referred to be shaped and formed by free discussion in Committee of

the Whole, a member would rise to amend the bill by striking out the

first section, declaring, at the same time, that he made the motion for

the purpose of destroying the bill--a mere law fiction, under color of

detail and amendment, to contest the original principle and destroy the

bill. Without doubt the commencement of the business is the regular

stage to contest the principle. If it originates in this House, it is on

a motion in Committee of the Whole, expressing in general terms the

expediency that such a law should be provided; if it comes from the

Senate, the same question presents itself after the first reading, in

the words of the present motion, which are the very words prescribed by

the stated rule of the House. If on this question the majority of the

House appear in favor of the principle of the bill, it goes on through

the stages of its detail and formation, and at the third reading the

general question occurs again, shall the principle, detailed as it now

appears, pass into a law? He was sure no member could object to the

fairness and propriety of the present motion.

As to the principle of the bill, he must say, it did not meet his

approbation. If the House is convinced it is necessary to raise an Army

of twenty thousand men, as the bill now proposes, they ought to say so

at once, and let it be done; if they are not convinced that it is

necessary, the law ought not to pass, the Army ought not to be raised

till they are convinced it is necessary. The constitution made the

Legislature the sole judge on this subject. The present bill says it is

not necessary to raise this Army now, but perhaps it may be before

Congress meets again, it therefore proposes to transfer the right of

judging on this subject to the Executive; he thought it a very improper

transfer of Legislative power. It has been said that all our troops are

raised thus provisionally. If attention is paid to those laws, it will

be seen that they did not pass till the Legislature was convinced that

circumstances then required the troops to be raised; a clause is added,

that if circumstances should alter so as to make the troops unnecessary,

the PRESIDENT might forbear to raise, or discharge them; it gives him

power to disband the Army, but not to raise one.

Mr. RUTLEDGE said, as the principal objection against this bill seemed

to arise from an idea that the militia would be found sufficient for

every purpose of defence for this country, he thought gentlemen had

better concur in letting the bill go to a second reading and be

committed, and before it again came under consideration, the militia

bill would probably have been determined upon. He was pleased to hear

gentlemen say that the country must be defended, and if an effective

militia could not be had, it must be done by a force of this kind. For

his own part, from the proceedings already had upon the militia bill, he

had not much to hope of its passing; and if not, gentlemen would

certainly see the necessity of some additional standing force. Mr. R.

could not conceive what objections could have been induced by the

gentleman from Pennsylvania (as he was not in the House when he spoke)

on a constitutional ground. Mr. R. adduced, as in point, the law

enabling the PRESIDENT to call out troops in consequence of the Western

insurrection, and that making provision for the effectual protection of

the frontiers of the United States. Mr. R. then mentioned his

expectation of despatches being received from our Ministers in Paris in

the course of twelve hours (a particular mention of which has already

been made) which might convince all of the propriety of going into this

measure; for he believed it was the wish of all to defend the country

with vigor and effect, and that they only differed as to the means of

doing it.

Mr. MCDOWELL was in favor of the motion for rejecting the bill, as it

contained two principles which he thought inadmissible; the first,

because it delegated Legislative power to the PRESIDENT; the other, as

it respects volunteer corps. The first, he believed, would be

unconstitutional, and the last would go to the destruction of the

militia of the United States. If our situation be such as it had been

figured to the committee by the gentleman from South Carolina, they

ought to turn their attention to it, and create an army themselves, and

not direct the PRESIDENT to do it if he shall judge proper. But if there

be no real appearance of danger, but it is merely conjectural, then it

is not necessary to act. Gentlemen have talked of members folding their

arms and doing nothing for the defence of the United States. It must be

recollected that we have gone considerable lengths in measures of

defence. We have voted large sums for the frigates, for fortifications,

for an additional regiment of artillery, and put in requisition 80,000

militia. If gentlemen can show that these measures, with our former

establishment, are not sufficient for our present situation, he was

ready to go further, but he was not willing to delegate any power lodged

with that House to another branch of the Government.

It was well known, Mr. McD. said, that it had been the wish of the late

PRESIDENT, that it was also the wish of the present PRESIDENT, of the

Heads of Departments, and many members of Congress, to increase our

Military Establishment, and to fix a standing army in this country. It

has heretofore, however, been opposed with success, except in time of

war. If we were to be involved in war, an army must be resorted to in

aid of the militia; but, in the first instance, the militia might be

depended upon as a sure and safe defence of this country. He was sure

they would be equal to any invasion, and if we were to engage in a

lengthy and formidable war, we must provide accordingly.

Mr. S. SMITH hoped this motion would be withdrawn. At a time like the

present, when the people of the United States are looking up to Congress

in expectation of their taking effectual measures of defence against

what they think not only a possible, but probable event, he wished

nothing to appear like indifference to that object. He agreed with the

gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. HARPER) that if gentlemen did not

like the bill, it might be amended; but to reject it altogether would

have too much the appearance of indifference to the defence of the

country. He did not know that this would be the best and most effectual

mode of defence; he thought a better might be established, but he had

not made up his mind upon it. He would, however, throw out an idea or

two for the consideration of the committee. Last session, eighty

thousand man were ordered to be held in requisition. He thought if the

PRESIDENT was to draw out twenty thousand of these for three months, and

when their time expired, to draw out twenty thousand more, and so on,

till the whole had been out, it might afford a sufficient protection,

and more speedily than any other, and it would have the good effect of

making eighty thousand soldiers. In addition to this, there might be a

provision authorizing the PRESIDENT to receive volunteer corps of

cavalry from the Southern States, to be commanded by their own officers,

to serve in a manner as shall be directed by law, the equipments for

which to be furnished by the United States, which would be more

effectual than a general law to raise three or four thousand cavalry.

Mr. MACON said, that some of the arguments used on this occasion were of

an extraordinary nature. The motion was first said to be contrary to

rule, and then unprecedented. It must certainly be allowed to be as

proper to debate a bill on its first reading, as to refuse to refer a

resolution. The fact was, that motions of this kind were made every

session. It was said to be a surprise upon gentlemen; this could not be

the case, if they had done their duty, as it had lain on their desks for

some time. One reason, with him, for wishing the bill to be rejected in

this stage was, that he was desirous of bringing the session to a close.

It was wonderful that gentlemen should persist in bringing standing

troops into the Southern States against their will. If members from that

quarter were of opinion that their militia was sufficient defence, why

will gentlemen be so over civil as to force troops upon them? It was a

little extraordinary that gentlemen most in favor of this bill are the

most opposed to the plan for newly organizing the militia. [Mr. DANA

doubted the fact.] It was said that, because gentlemen are opposed to

this bill, they are opposed to all measures of defence. The fact was

otherwise; they wished only to avoid unnecessary expense. If they were

to bring forward a proposition for raising one hundred thousand or two

hundred thousand men, and it was opposed, they might say the same thing.

He supposed every man wished to defend his country. He had only heard

one reason in favor of committing the bill, and that was, that it was

probable we might shortly hear from our Commissioners. If there was any

certainty in that, it might be ground for delaying a decision.

Mr. GALLATIN could not conceive why it should be insinuated that there

was any thing unfair in making opposition to this bill on its first

reading; for, if gentlemen were not ready to vote against the bill, they

would, of course, vote for committing it, so that the opposition would

have less chance of succeeding now than in the future stages of the

bill. In the meanwhile, he wished to take every opportunity of

endeavoring to destroy the bill. If a majority could be got against it

on the first reading, so much the better, as it would prevent a loss of

time in future discussion. He was not, however, afraid of discussion; he

believed, the more it was discussed, the more the committee would be

convinced of the impropriety of passing this bill. He did not believe,

as had been supposed, that it was capable of amendment in any of its

essential parts. It had been said, that a contingency might be

mentioned; or a time fixed, at the expiration of which, the army might

be raised. Such a bill would, however, be altogether different, as this

bill vested the power of judging of the proper time with the PRESIDENT;

nor could he see how it was susceptible of the amendments suggested by

the gentleman from Maryland. If he thought it was, he would certainly

agree to its being committed, as he perfectly concurred in the plan he

mentioned; but such a system would be so different from the present,

that it would be a much shorter and better course to reject this bill,

and originate a new one.

He thought a bill of this kind was sufficient to alarm the House, and

that it ought to be opposed in every stage, notwithstanding what was

said about the danger of the country; indeed that danger was what

strengthened his opposition to the bill; for, if our danger be, as it is

represented, likely to come from Victor Hugues and his troops, from an

insurrection of the negroes, from disaffected persons, from our enemy

being at the door, it is the duty of Congress to raise an army

themselves, and not to give the PRESIDENT the power of doing it; but if

it is not believed that this representation of danger rests upon any

specific ground, but that it is merely imaginary, then there is no

necessity for giving the PRESIDENT the power, as he can call Congress

together whenever he thinks proper.

If the danger of invasion was great, he should not hesitate to raise an

army, without waiting until the event took place. He thought, therefore,

the gentleman from South Carolina was not right to say that the

opposition to this bill arose from a determined opposition to every

thing like defensive measures. Mr. G. said it was true he did not

apprehend all the dangers which that gentleman had spoken of; but, if

they really did exist, he had a much greater reliance upon the militia

of the country for defence than that gentleman seemed to have. He knew

that though in some States they were not either well disciplined or well

armed, yet they were organized, and had their officers, and the States

being in possession of arms, they would be a much more effectual

defence, and sooner brought together than any other force. He did not

believe that giving the President the power to raise 20,000 men would be

so effectual as the calling out of 20,000 militia, as the one could be

raised immediately, and the raising of the other would be doubtful.

Besides, in proportion as the danger exists, it would be better to call

upon the people themselves to defend their country, than upon hired

troops. If any danger was to be apprehended from the negroes, they would

be best suppressed by the people in the States where they are. A militia

is every where; whereas a standing army may be very distant from any

attack which may take place. A standing army in Virginia, for instance,

would do little good against insurgents in South Carolina; and if an

insurrection of that kind was not immediately suppressed by the people,

the mischief would be incalculable.

Mr. RUTLEDGE thought it necessary, as the gentleman from Virginia had

withdrawn his opposition to the commitment of the bill from what had

fallen from him with respect to the probability of despatches being

shortly received from our Ministers, to state upon what ground he had

said this. [Mr. R. then mentioned the arrival of the _Pomona_ at

Baltimore.]

Mr. MCDOWELL did not think the information given by the gentleman from

South Carolina (Mr. RUTLEDGE) ought to put off the decision of the

question which had been under consideration.

WEDNESDAY, April 25.

_Provisional Army._

The SPEAKER having declared the question on the bill from the Senate for

the raising of a provisional army, viz: "Shall this bill be rejected?"

to be first in order before the House,

Mr. MCDOWELL said, upon further consideration, and conceiving that

gentlemen might wish to see the contents of the despatches of our

Ministers, which had been mentioned, before they gave their vote on this

occasion, he should withdraw his opposition to the second reading of the

bill.

The bill was then read a second time; and a motion being made to commit

it to the Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union,

Mr. LYON called for the yeas and nays; but only himself and another

member rising in support of the motion, it was not carried.

The bill was then referred.

_Department of the Navy._

Mr. HARPER called for the order of the day on the bill for establishing

an Executive department, to be denominated _The Department of the Navy_.

The House accordingly went into a Committee of the Whole on this bill,

and rose without making any amendment in the bill; but, upon the

question, in the House, of its passing to a third reading,

Mr. GALLATIN said, he had not proposed any amendment to this bill in the

Committee of the Whole, because, what he had to say upon it, would go

against the principle of the bill. He did not think it necessary to

establish a Navy Department. He did not suppose our Army and Navy were

at present so large as to require two separate departments. If the

business was so much increased as that the persons at present employed

could not do it, they might be increased. Nor did he believe, with some

gentlemen, that such an institution would produce economy; on the

contrary, he always found that the increase of officers was the increase

of expense. Some time ago, it was said that great economy would arise

from appointing a Purveyor of Supplies; but he had seen, from the time

of this establishment, a great and constant increase of expense, in

every thing which relates to supplies. Not seeing the necessity of it,

therefore, he should vote against it, except good reason should be given

for it; for he believed, the moment a department of this kind was

established, the head of it would wish to make it of as great importance

as possible, by endeavors to extend the object of his superintendence.

He called for the yeas and nays upon the question, which were agreed to

be taken.

Mr. J. WILLIAMS did not feel disposed to vote for this bill. It appeared

to him that the Secretary of War, with officers under him, would be

sufficient for the management of our naval concerns also. It was some

time after the constitution was framed before the War Department was

established. Whenever an office was established, something was always

found for it to do. Soon after the War Department was established we had

an Indian war; and after that Indian war ceased, another establishment

was made under the name of the Accountant's Office. If the business was

increased, new clerks might be employed, but he should be against any

new department. If we were engaged in hostilities, and our naval power

of course increased, such an establishment might be necessary; but at

present he did not think it necessary, nor did he think our revenue

equal to the support of a Navy which should require such an

establishment to take care of it. If this office was to superintend the

construction of vessels, persons acquainted with this business might be

employed under the Secretary of War. The present expense of the War

Department was $18,250 a year; and though there would not be much to do

in this new office, he supposed the expense would not be much less; and,

besides, Congress would be importuned, from session to session, to

increase our naval force. Mr. W. said he was desirous of making every

defence for our country, yet he wished to keep down our expenses as much

as possible. If circumstances called for going further into the business

of the Navy, he should not object to it.

Mr. SEWALL said, when the House was considering any subject relative to

the increase of the Navy, complaints were made of the enormous expenses

and of the little responsibility which attends the business; and when it

has been said that the greatness of the expense might have arisen from a

want of knowledge in the persons who had the care of the business, it

was said that defect ought to be remedied. This department is intended

to do that, and, by the expense of a few hundred dollars, he had no

doubt thousands would be saved. When talking about vessels, it was

complained that too great an expense was incurred on this object; now it

is said there is no object for the proposed officer to attend to. But

the gentleman from New York (Mr. WILLIAMS) was afraid, if this office

was established, it would be the means of increasing the Navy. This

certainly could not be done, contrary to the will of Congress.

He thought there were obvious reasons for the establishment of this

department. It was well known that an officer might be well acquainted

with the business of the army, without knowing any thing about a navy;

and a man employed at the head of such a department ought to have some

knowledge of the business committed to his care. Mr. S. said, however

well the present Secretary of War might be acquainted with army

concerns, he believed he was not conversant with naval matters. In

consequence of this, he had a number of agents employed under him.

Indeed, the War Department had so much business on its hands, as not to

be able to pay a sufficient attention to our naval establishment. He

therefore believed it was necessary to make this new establishment,

especially as the Navy Department was likely to be considerably

augmented.

Mr. S. SMITH believed, after all the struggles which had been made on

this subject, it would at length be found necessary for the United

States seriously to turn their attention to the establishment of an

efficient naval force; and the sooner gentlemen could bring their minds

to this, the better it would be for the general good. If this

proposition had been brought forward at the commencement of the session,

he should have thought it unnecessary; but, from the increase which had

been made during this session, he thought the establishment proper.

$950,000 had been appropriated for providing twelve vessels; a number of

galleys were also contemplated. A ship of war or schooner, it appears,

has been built on the lakes, and some galleys on the rivers. These, with

the frigates and cutters, form an establishment which will require a

naval man to superintend it. An expenditure of two millions of dollars,

he supposed, would be authorized this session; and a man knowing

something of naval architecture will be able to save more, in the course

of this year, to the United States, than will pay ten years of the

expenses of this office. A merchant going into the building of vessels

without a knowledge of the business will find the truth of this fact.

The great expenditure attending the building of the frigates, he

supposed had been chiefly owing to the want of such an establishment as

the present. The gentleman from New York had stated the expense of the

War Department at $18,250; but one-half of that expense was incurred in

the office of the Accountant of the War Department; and as there would

be no need of a new Accountant, the expense could not be doubled. The

duties of the War Department are greatly increased, and might be further

increased during the present session; and an expenditure of the kind

proposed might save the throwing away of thousands of dollars.

Mr. MACON said, the arguments in favor of this bill were derived from a

want of knowledge of naval affairs in the War Department. He thought

that might be supplied without the establishment of a new department;

but he believed the building of the frigates had mostly been carried on

under the direction of the captains who were to have the command of

them. More clerks had been added to the War Department, in consideration

of the business which the Navy had occasioned. He believed the more

officers were appointed, the more money would be expended.

Mr. OTIS said, the gentleman from New York had opposed this bill on

different grounds from the gentleman from Pennsylvania. He did not make

any reply to the gentleman from Pennsylvania, because he expected

opposition from him and some others, to every measure which had the

defence of the country for its object; and, as the session was drawing

to a close, he thought it best to have as little debate as possible,

and that the sooner the question was taken the better; but when he saw a

gentleman rise in opposition to it, upon whose support he calculated, he

was apprehensive lest it might have an effect upon other persons on

whose support he also relied. The gentleman from New York seemed to

apprehend some new and heavy expense was to be incurred, and that some

greater caution was now necessary than heretofore. What saving, then,

does he mean to make by opposing the establishment of this office? Since

he supposes the same clerks will be sufficient, it will only be the

salary of the chief officer, which, Mr. O. supposed, would be $3,500--a

greater saving than that which would be made by such a person in every

ship built or purchased. Taking the expense of our Naval Establishment

at one million dollars a year, it would only be an expense of one-third

per cent., which every one must allow was a mere trifle, to have the

money of the public well expended. The services of the War and Navy

Departments were, he said, perfectly distinct. The duties of the War

Department became every day more arduous, and whatever gentlemen may

think, they must become still more so. This opposition coming from a

friend, he could not suppose it arose from a bad motive, but merely from

a narrow conception of what is conceived to be the agricultural

interest. Agriculture and commerce, said Mr. O., are twin sisters, and

cannot live separate from each other; they must live together, or expire

at the same moment. It was the duty of gentlemen representing

agriculturists thus to speak to their constituents. It was an axiom

realized by every politician in the world. The fact was, that every

thing spent upon the Naval Department was so much saved, in which the

agricultural part of the country partake very largely.

Mr. T. CLAIBORNE never remembered to have heard such language as had

fallen from the gentleman last up. He laments, said Mr. C., that a

gentleman who usually voted with him should dare to think for himself.

Are gentlemen's opinions and language thus to be circumscribed? [Mr. O.

explained.] Mr. C. continued, the gentleman was willing that all

questions should now be taken without debate. Does this mean, said he,

that there are a majority of members in this House who must always be in

the right, and a minority always in the wrong? If this be the case, they

had better dismiss the minority, and do the business themselves. Were

not gentlemen any longer to express their difference of opinion? Would

this be the way to keep the Government together, or to preserve harmony

in the country? If this were to be the situation of things, he should

regret it with tears in his eyes. He had himself no mathematical

certainty that any opinion of his was right; nor did he think the

gentleman from Massachusetts ought to expect men to bow to his. Such an

assumption led to mischief of a serious kind. What! to say we have a

majority, and therefore we will have no debate. [The SPEAKER said no

such expression had been made use of; if it had, he should have checked

it.] Had it not been for an expression of this kind, he should not have

risen on this question. He wished to hear every man deliver his opinion

freely. Mr. C. did not believe the bill to be a proper one, and he

should therefore vote against it.

Mr. MCDOWELL said, he should be opposed to the bill, if he had no other

objection to it than that it went to countenance the idea, according to

the gentlemen from Maryland and Massachusetts, that this country must go

into the establishment of a large naval power. The great saving to be

derived from this office, he understood to be from savings in the

building of vessels; but, as the twelve vessels which were lately voted

are proposed to be purchased, ready built, he supposed this reason did

not apply at present. If there was no intention, therefore, (which he

trusted there was not,) of carrying our Naval Establishment to any

considerable extent, he could see no occasion for the creation of this

office. For, if this Secretary of the Navy was appointed, he would also

be obliged to rely upon others, in a great degree, for information.

Mr. HARPER said, the naval defence which this House thought necessary

for the service of the country having been voted, he could not agree

with those gentlemen who consider this as a question of defence. He

thought it a question of economy, and, in this view, he should reply to

some observations which had been made upon it.

He believed our naval defence would be much more efficaciously and

speedily provided by means of the proposed establishment than if the

bill was rejected. So far, indeed, it is a question of defence, but only

collaterally so. The point of view in which this bill should be

considered, is simply this: will it not effect with more speed and

economy the marine defence now existing, as well as that contemplated?

He himself had no doubt as to the fact. Indeed, he would ask the

gentleman from North Carolina, whether, if he were about to erect a

distillery on his place, he would employ his overseer to do it, who,

though he might understand the business of his farm very well, knew

nothing of building. He certainly would not; and if this would be bad

policy in an individual, it would be equally so in a nation. Besides,

the expense would be so trifling as only to amount (as had been stated)

to one-third per cent., though traders were in the habit of paying five

per cent. to have their business done.

But it was said, that if an office of this kind was established, it

would soon create business. But the business is already created. We

have, said he, already a marine of fifteen ships of war. This, he knew,

was comparatively a small force, but in the establishment of which we

shall yet expend two millions of dollars, and the support of which will

amount at least to $700,000 or $800,000 annually. When the War

Department was first established, the object of its care was not, he

believed, of equal magnitude.

Mr. R. WILLIAMS was ready to acknowledge he did not believe it could

ever be the interest of this country to go into the establishment of a

large naval power, and therefore he should not be in favor of the

present bill on that ground. Nor did he think there was any good reason

for dividing the military and naval business, except there was more than

could be attended to by the present establishment. But it was said the

business was of a different nature, and therefore it ought to be in

separate departments, as one man cannot be supposed to understand both

concerns. That objection would apply to any of the other departments;

and whenever this rule of dividing business shall be adopted, we shall

get men of inferior talents to do it. When the Government was

established, it was thought that a War Department would be equal to the

military and naval concerns of this country. But it was said a navy was

not then thought of; it was, however, doubtless thought of when the

frigates were ordered to be built, and it was not then gone into. It

was, however, said that much money had been lost for want of an officer

of this kind. This was mere assertion, and it was by no means clear that

the business would be done better with such an officer than without him.

But it was said, it was necessary to go into this measure for the sake

of appearances. To whom are these appearances to be made? Not to our own

people, but to European nations. The gentleman from Massachusetts says

we ought to adopt their opinion upon this subject. He viewed a policy of

this kind the most fatal of any other to this country. He believed that

the less we had to do with European politics, and their mode of

administration, the better. The only object in view, with that House,

ought to be the interest of their own country. What, said he, is the

situation of those countries which have gone into the establishment of

large navies? They are involved in debt which they never can, and never

will, pay.

Mr. J. WILLIAMS said, the only point in dispute was, whether a separate

office should be established for the business of the Navy, or whether it

should be put under the care of a superintendent in the War Department.

He wished the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. OTIS) had spared his

observations until he had heard those of the gentleman from Maryland,

(Mr. S. SMITH.) It had appeared to him that a superintendent in the War

Department would have been sufficient, and he yet thought so. He did not

think the business of the Navy was so great as to require a separate

establishment. There was more business in the War Department in 1794

than at present, and nothing was then heard of a new department. He

should not have opposed this measure if he had not been convinced that

every measure taken to increase the Navy beyond its present

establishment would have a bad effect on this country. It had been

proposed last winter to purchase all the live-oak timber in the Southern

States; afterwards a proposition was brought forward for the

establishment of navy yards. Those measures had been defeated, and they

were now called upon to establish a new department for this favorite

object. He was not willing to do it. The gentleman from Massachusetts

said there would only be a difference between making a new office, and

continuing to do the business in the War Department, of the salary of

the chief officer; but if he looked at the second clause of the bill, he

would find himself mistaken, as there was in that provision for a

principal clerk, and such other clerks as he shall judge necessary: so

that he may have a clerk for every port in the Union, if he pleases. If

he represented, as the gentleman from Massachusetts does, a commercial

interest, he might be as favorable to a Navy as him; but as that was not

the case, he was opposed to it. He gave his approbation to such

appropriations as he thought necessary; and if, in this instance, he

differed in opinion from the gentleman from Massachusetts, he should

stand excused. He believed with that gentleman, that the commercial and

agricultural interests were closely connected; they differed only as to

the extent to which it was proper to carry our naval defence. He did not

wish, however, at present, to reject the bill. He believed it might be

amended, and he had no objection to the question being postponed for

that purpose.

Mr. LIVINGSTON said, he was almost tempted to smile at the arrogant

pretensions of some gentlemen in this House, in their treatment of

others, at least their equals on this floor, whatever they might be out

of doors, being equally with them Representatives of the people. They

were told by the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. OTIS) that opposition

was expected, was looked for, from certain gentlemen; that no argument

was necessary on the occasion, because those members who were opposed to

all measures of defence, would oppose this measure also; but that those

who had originated the measure would carry it into effect. This simple

declaration of a strength of party was also attended with a very

handsome rebuke of one of his colleagues (Mr. J. WILLIAMS) for having

dared to doubt the propriety of the measure before the committee. He was

happy to find this rebuke had produced its effect, and that though his

colleague was at first very decidedly against the bill, he was now

disposed to doubt; and the effect of another rebuke, he supposed, would

obtain his vote in favor of the new establishment. For his own part,

neither the rebuke, nor the preliminary observations with which it was

accompanied, had produced any effect upon him. He did very much doubt

the propriety of the measure; for, although there was a great deal of

business in the War Office, and the same person could not be supposed to

be acquainted with military and naval affairs, if a ship-builder was to

have the appointment, he could not think such a person fit to be one of

the great council of the nation; and it must be recollected that the

person who holds this office will become one of the counsellors of the

President on all great concerns.

It was said that this establishment was necessary, in order to give an

appearance of defence to Europe, as if the establishment of a Department

of the Navy was to have the effect to do away all our past and to

prevent future injuries. But our appearance to Europe was not all; the

example of European countries was mentioned. All were said to have a

Marine Department. The practice of Europe, Mr. L. said, had proved

itself to be a bad one, as the navies of those countries had proved the

ruin of them.

The yeas and nays were taken upon this bill going to its third reading,

and decided in the affirmative--yeas 47, nays 41, as follows:

YEAS.--John Allen, Bailey Bartlett, James A. Bayard,

Christopher G. Champlin, John Chapman, James Cochran,

Joshua Coit, William Craik, Samuel W. Dana, John Dennis,

George Dent, Thomas Evans, Abiel Foster, Dwight Foster,

Jonathan Freeman, Henry Glenn, Chauncey Goodrich, Roger

Griswold, William Barry Grove, Robert Goodloe Harper,

William Hindman, Hezekiah L. Hosmer, James H. Imlay, Samuel

Lyman, James Machir, William Matthews, Daniel Morgan, Lewis

R. Morris, Harrison G. Otis, Josiah Parker, Thomas

Pinckney, John Read, John Rutledge, jun., James Schureman,

Samuel Sewall, William Shepard, Thomas Sinnickson, Thompson

J. Skinner, Nathaniel Smith, Samuel Smith, Peleg Sprague,

George Thatcher, Richard Thomas, Mark Thompson, Thomas

Tillinghast, John E. Van Allen, and Peleg Wadsworth.

NAYS.--Abraham Baldwin, David Bard, Lemuel Benton, Thomas

Blount, Richard Brent, Nathan Bryan, Stephen Bullock,

Thomas Claiborne, William Charles Cole Claiborne, Matthew

Clay, Thomas T. Davis, John Dawson, Lucas Elmendorph,

William Findlay, John Fowler, Albert Gallatin, James

Gillespie, Carter B. Harrison, Jonathan N. Havens, Joseph

Heister, David Holmes, Walter Jones, Edward Livingston,

Matthew Locke, Matthew Lyon, Nathaniel Macon, Blair

McClenachan, Joseph McDowell, John Milledge, Anthony New,

William Smith, Richard Sprigg, jun., Richard Stanford,

Thomas Sumter, Abram Trigg, John Trigg, Philip Van

Cortlandt, Joseph B. Varnum, Abraham Venable, John

Williams, and Robert Williams.[31]

THURSDAY, April 26.

The bill for establishing an Executive Department, to be denominated the

Department of the Navy, was read the third time and passed--42 to 27.

_Military Appropriations._

On motion, the House again resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole

on the bill appropriating for the Military Establishment for the year

1798; when, the question for filling the blank in the Quartermaster's

Department with $200,000 again recurring,

Mr. GALLATIN moved to fill the blank with $150,000, which was the sum he

had proposed on a former day, since which, he said, the House had

received a number of statements from the Secretary of War, in order to

induce a larger appropriation. As there seemed to be a general

concurrence of opinion to restrict the expenses of the War Department,

he wished some gentlemen, better able to do it than himself, would

compare the number of troops in service with the sums there required.

Mr. G. noticed a number of items which appeared to him unaccountably

extravagant, and contrasted the very great expense incurred on the

North-western frontier with that of the troops employed on the seaboard.

Mr. G. also took a view of the expenses under this head from the year

1789 to the present time, in order to show that $150,000 would be a

sufficient appropriation.

After commenting pretty freely and at large on the estimates from the

War Office, Mr. G. said, he believed there was some radical defect with

respect to the connection subsisting between the Accountant's

department, the Treasury and War Departments, which prevented a proper

investigation of accounts. So far as relates to the Treasury Department,

the accounts were always very clear, and there was no ground of

complaint; but, from the connection which subsists between the War

Department and the Accountant's department, there seemed to be a want of

responsibility.

In the details which had been laid before the House, Mr. G. said, he

found items under the head of contingencies, which he should never have

expected to have found there; one was for the pay of an inspector of the

troops and garrisons of the United States, at a salary of sixty dollars

a month. He could not say such an officer was not necessary; but if he

was, he would say he ought to have been provided for by law. The other

item was for a much larger sum, viz: the pay of an engineer of the

fortifications of the United States, at a salary of three thousand

dollars a year, which was a salary greater than that of the Secretary of

War. It appears that this engineer was engaged for three years; but,

after he had been some time in the service, two thousand dollars were

given him over and above his pay, to relinquish his contract.

After a few observations from Mr. DANA, in favor of the Secretary of

War,

Mr. SHEPARD rose, and went over the different items contained in the

statement read yesterday, particularly the boatmen, $13,000; the

pack-horsemen, $5,000; the wagoners, $7,000; the laborers, $3,000; the

armorers, $6,000; the artificers, $14,000; hire of expresses, $6,000;

and fuel, $8,000. He could not tell how so many boatmen, pack-horsemen,

and wagoners, could be employed (for it was not for boats, pack-horses,

and wagons, but for the men alone;) and what so many laborers could be

employed in he could not imagine. He did not see why the soldiers could

not do all the labor the Army had to do themselves. When he was in the

Army, he was at no expense like this. And how the repairing the arms for

three thousand men could cost $6,000 he could not tell; nor could he see

how $14,000 could be expended on artificers. If we were to be involved

in war, it would not do to expend money in this manner. It was easy to

write down thirty, fifty, or one hundred thousand dollars for this or

that, but when the taxes came to be laid, the money would not be so

easily raised. Mr. S. passed over a number of articles, till he came to

fuel. He thought $8,000 a year for fuel, in a country where the trees

were ready to fall upon them, was a very exorbitant charge. While he was

in the Army, it never cost him sixpence for fuel. The United States had

better purchase the land upon which the timber grows, at once; they

would be able to get it for a much less sum. If these expenses were to

be incurred for five thousand men, what would be the expense of an Army

of thirty thousand men? This estimate, he was sure, must be much too

large; and it became Congress to be careful how they gave encouragement

to such charges as these, for the country would scarcely be able to

support the expense of any considerable establishment if more economy

was not used.

The question on filling the blank with two hundred thousand dollars, was

put, and negatived without a division.

Mr. GALLATIN moved to fill the blank with $150,000. He said that, with

respect to the integrity of the Secretary of War, he did not doubt it in

the least; as to his talents he had no opportunity of forming a correct

judgment of them; he was, however, some judge of accounts, and he saw

enough of them to authorize the declaration which he had made as to the

improper connection of the different departments. He had spoken of facts

only.

The question for filling the blank with $150,000 was put, and carried

without a division.

After agreeing to several other items, amongst which was one for the

vessels on the Lakes, the committee rose, the House agreed to the

amendment, and the bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading.

_Presents to Ministers._

The SPEAKER said he had received a letter this morning, signed Thomas

Pinckney, which he was desired to lay before the House. It was

accordingly read. It stated that when he (Mr. Pinckney) had concluded

the late treaty with the Spanish Government, the Spanish Minister, the

Prince of Peace, informed him the presents usually given in such cases

would be prepared for him; and that also when he took leave of the

British Court, the like information was given to him by the Minister

there. To both of which he replied, that the Constitution of the United

States forbade its Ministers from receiving any present from any foreign

Prince or State, without the consent of Congress; that in due time he

would ask that consent, and act accordingly. This letter asks for the

determination of Congress.

It was moved by Mr. RUTLEDGE to refer this letter to a select committee.

Mr. MACON wished it to go to a Committee of the whole House.

After some observations, the latter motion was negatived, and the former

carried.

FRIDAY, April 27.

On motion of Mr. W. C. CLAIBORNE, the House went into a Committee of the

Whole on the bill directing the payment of a detachment of militia, for

services performed in the year 1794, under the command of Major James

Orr. The bill was reported without amendment, and ordered to be

engrossed for a third reading to-morrow.

WEDNESDAY, May 2.

_Naturalization Law._

On motion of Mr. SEWALL, the House went into a Committee of the Whole on

the report made yesterday by the Committee for the Protection of

Commerce and the Defence of the Country, on the subject of

naturalization; and the report having been read, and the first

resolution for prolonging the term of residence before aliens shall be

admitted as citizens, being under consideration,

Mr. SEWALL said, the term of residence now required from foreigners

before they can become citizens, is five years. The committee think this

period too short; it is much shorter than the period adopted by the

French Government. The committee were of opinion that a residence of at

least ten years should be required; but this might be left a blank in

the bill, and afterwards filled.

Mr. HARPER believed that it was high time we should recover from the

mistake which this country fell into when it first began to form its

constitutions, of admitting foreigners to citizenship. This mistake, he

believed, had been productive of very great evils to this country, and,

unless corrected, he was apprehensive those evils would greatly

increase. He believed the time was now come when it would be proper to

declare, that nothing but birth should entitle a man to citizenship in

this country. He thought this was the proper season for making the

declaration. He believed the United States had experience enough to cure

them of the folly of believing that the strength and happiness of the

country would be promoted by admitting to the rights of citizenship all

the congregations of people who resort to these shores from every part

of the world. Under these impressions, which, as he supposed they would

have the same force upon others as upon himself, he should not detain

the committee by dilating upon, he proposed to amend the resolution by

adding to it the following words, viz: "that provision ought to be made

by law for preventing any person becoming entitled to the rights of a

citizen of the United States, except by birth."

The CHAIRMAN declared this amendment would be a substitute to the

resolution before the committee, and therefore not in order.

Mr. OTIS said, he would propose an amendment, which he believed would be

in order, which was as follows, namely, "and that no alien born, who is

not at present a citizen of the United States, shall hereafter be

capable of holding any office of honor, trust, or profit, under the

United States."

Mr. HARPER moved to amend this amendment, by adding the following words:

"or of voting at the election of any member of the Legislature of the

United States, or of any State."

Mr. H. said, he was for giving foreigners every facility for acquiring

property, of holding this property, of raising their families, and of

transferring their property to their families. He was willing they

should form citizens for us; but as to the rights of citizenship, he was

not willing they should be enjoyed, except by persons born in this

country. He did not think this even was desirable by the persons

themselves. Why, he asked, did foreigners seek a residence in this

country? He supposed it was either to better their condition, or to live

under a Government better and more free than that they had left. But was

it necessary these persons should at once become entitled to take a part

in the concerns of our Government? He believed it by no means necessary,

either to their happiness or prosperity, and he was sure it would not

tend to the happiness of this country. If the native citizens are not

indeed adequate to the performance of the duties of Government, it might

be expedient to invite legislators or voters from other countries to do

that business for which they themselves are not qualified. But if the

people of the country, who owe their birth to it, are adequate to all

the duties of Government, he could not see for what reason strangers

should be admitted; strangers who, however acceptable they may be in

other respects, could not have the same views and attachments with

native citizens. Under this view of the subject, he was convinced it was

an essential policy, which lay at the bottom of civil society, that none

but persons born in the country should be permitted to take a part in

the Government. There might have been, Mr. H. acknowledged, individual

exceptions, and there may be again, to this general rule; but it was

necessary to make regulations general, and he believed the danger

arising from admitting foreigners generally to citizenship would be

greater than the inconveniences arising from debarring from citizenship

the most deserving foreigners. He believed it would have been well for

this country if the principle contained in this amendment had been

adopted sooner; he hoped it would now be adopted.

Mr. S. SMITH believed it would be best first to decide upon the

resolution as reported; if it was negatived, the gentleman from South

Carolina might then introduce his amendment as a substitute. To adopt

the resolution as reported would be, he believed, to agree upon an _ex

post facto_ regulation. It could not be intended, he should suppose, to

prevent persons who had resided in this country two or three years,

under the expectation of becoming citizens at the end of five years,

from that privilege.

Mr. CHAMPLIN suggested whether, if this amendment was adopted, it would

not prevent foreigners, who are not at present citizens of the United

States, from becoming officers in the Military or Naval Departments of

the United States. If so, he believed it would be proper to insert the

word "civil" before "officers."

Mr. OTIS acknowledged that the objections of the gentleman from Maryland

(Mr. S. SMITH) were, in some degree, well founded; but there might be

regulations introduced into the bill to avoid them. The present law, he

believed, directs that persons shall give notice of their intention of

becoming citizens of the United States. Where this notice had been

given, he thought such persons should be excluded from the operation of

the law. These resolutions having only been laid upon the table this

morning, he wished, however, that the committee might rise, in order to

afford a little time for consideration. He wished to exclude all

foreigners, whom he could constitutionally exclude, from holding offices

in the United States; but not to entrap such as are in the way of

becoming citizens.

Mr. HARPER said, that, having had it suggested to him that the

constitution would not admit of restraining the States in their

admission of citizens, he should withdraw his amendment for the present,

until he had had an opportunity of examining the constitution in this

respect.

The motion being put for the committee to rise, it was carried, and the

committee rose accordingly.

THURSDAY, May 3.

_Naturalization Law._

Mr. SEWALL moved the House to go into a Committee of the Whole on the

state of the Union, in order to resume the consideration of the

resolution which had been reported on the subject of aliens.

Mr. OTIS wished to propose a resolution to the House, before it resolved

itself into a Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union, as a

substitute for the first resolution, reported by the Committee for the

Protection of Commerce and the Defence of the Country. It was to the

following effect:

"_Resolved_, That no alien born, who is not at present a

citizen of the United States, shall hereafter be capable of

holding any office of honor, trust, or profit, under the

United States."

Mr. VENABLE did not think the House were authorized to enact such a

principle into a law. If taken up at all, it ought to be considered as a

proposition for amending the constitution. If it was thought necessary

by gentlemen to amend the constitution in this way, he should not object

to going into the subject. After foreigners were admitted as citizens,

Congress had not the power of declaring what should be their rights; the

constitution has done this. Foreigners must, therefore, be refused the

privilege of becoming citizens altogether, or admitted to all the rights

of citizens.

Mr. OTIS had no idea that this proposition could be considered as a

proposition to amend the constitution. If the House had the power to

amend the naturalization law, and to extend the time of residence

necessary to entitle an alien to citizenship, they could certainly

extend it to the life of man. The idea of citizenship did not always

include the power of holding offices. In Great Britain no alien was ever

permitted to hold an office, he wished they might not be allowed to do

it here.

The SPEAKER said this was not the proper time to argue whether this

proposition ought to be considered as an amendment to the constitution.

The Committee of the Whole would report upon it as they thought proper.

Mr. VENABLE did not object to the resolution being referred, but thought

it ought to go rather to an ordinary Committee of the Whole than to that

on the state of the Union, as he did not believe Congress had the power

of saying, men who were entitled to hold offices by the constitution,

shall not hold them.

The motion for reference was put and carried, there being for it 45

votes.

The House then resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole on the

state of the Union, Mr. DENT in the chair; when

Mr. OTIS moved to postpone the consideration of the resolution formerly

under consideration, for extending the time of residence of aliens

before they should be entitled to citizenship, in order to take up the

resolution which he had proposed, and which had been referred to this

committee.

The question was put and negatived--51 to 26.

The question then returned upon the motion made by Mr. OTIS yesterday,

to amend the first resolution, by adding words of the same tenor with

those contained in the resolution referred this morning.

Mr. MACON said, whether it would be good or bad policy to adopt a

regulation of this kind, he would not inquire, because he believed the

PRESIDENT and Senate could always appoint such men as they thought

proper to office. If a man is a citizen, he is eligible to office

agreeably to the constitutional rule, and that could not be altered by

law. If the people chose to elect a foreigner as a member of the

Legislature, if he had been a citizen seven years, Congress could not

say he should not be eligible. They might, indeed, make the time of

residence, to entitle a foreigner to citizenship, so long, as to prevent

him in that way from holding a seat in the Legislature; but, after a man

is a citizen, he must be entitled to the rights of a citizen.

Mr. OTIS said, gentlemen could certainly read the constitution for

themselves, and draw their own conclusions from it. He himself had not

the smallest doubt as to the constitutionality of restricting aliens in

the way proposed. He believed that Congress, having the power to

establish an uniform rule of naturalization, could, if they thought

proper, make a residence of forty or fifty years necessary before an

alien should be entitled to citizenship, which would extend to the whole

life of a person, and prove an effectual exclusion. If Congress, then,

had a right to exclude foreigners altogether from citizenship, any

modification of that right was certainly within their power, and would

be an advantage to aliens, for which they ought to be grateful. There

would be nothing in this contrary to the constitution; for it was always

acknowledged that where an absolute power may be exercised, a

conditional power may also be exercised. What advantage, he asked, was

derived to this country from giving aliens eligibility to office? The

people of this country were certainly equal to the legislation and

administration of their own Government, comprising all the aliens who

are now become citizens. He had no doubt but many aliens would become

very valuable acquisitions to this country; but he had no idea of

admitting them into the Government. He did not wish to open the door to

the intrigues of other countries in this way; since we know there are

countries whose chief attention is paid to the obtaining of influence in

the internal concerns of the countries over which they wish to have

dominion. And he could see it possible that persons might be furnished

by such a country to come here and buy lands, and by that means, in

time, get into the Government. Great Britain, he said, was very careful

of the avenues which led to her liberty in this respect. Aliens were

there excluded from holding all places of honor, profit, or trust. The

situation of America heretofore was different from what it is at

present. It had not only been thought good policy, in times past, to

encourage foreigners to come to this country, but also to admit them

into the Legislature, and important offices. But now, said he, America

is growing into a nation of importance, and it would be an object with

foreign nations to gain an influence in our councils; and, before any

such attempt was made, it was proper to make provision against it; for

if the time ever should arrive when a number of persons of this

description had found their way into the Legislature, a motion of this

kind would of course be very odious. If, however, gentlemen were of a

different opinion and think the object would be better accomplished by

extending the residence of aliens, he should not object to that course

being taken, though he thought the one he proposed perfectly within the

power of the House.

Mr. SITGREAVES wished that, in attaining an object in which all seemed

to concur, they might avoid any constitutional embarrassment; and this

it was allowed might be done by extending the time of residence of

aliens so far, as to prevent them from ever becoming citizens, by which

means persons who could not be considered as having a common interest

with the citizens of the country, would be effectually excluded from

holding offices in the Government.

Mr. OTIS withdrew his amendment; and then all the three resolutions were

agreed to, without a dissenting voice.

The committee rose, and reported the resolutions. The two first were

concurred in; but, on the question being put on the third,

Mr. N. SMITH said, a foreign Government might do an act tantamount to

war, without declaring it, yet according to the wording of the

proposition, the citizens of that country could not be removed. He

therefore moved to amend the proposition by adding the words, "being

native citizens of any country the Government whereof shall be at war

with the United States."

Mr. SEWALL said, the only objection that he had to this amendment arose

from the consideration that Congress alone had the power of deciding on

the question of war, and he could not therefore see how it could be

determined that any nation was at war with us, until the declaration was

made by that nation, or by Congress.

Mr. OTIS wished his friend from Connecticut would admit of an amendment

which he held in his hand, in the place of that which he had offered. It

was in the following words: "or shall authorize hostilities against the

United States."

Mr. N. SMITH had no objection.

Mr. MCDOWELL thought this motion more objectionable than that of the

gentleman from Connecticut. It ought to be remembered, Mr. McD. said,

that inducements had been held out to foreigners to come to this

country, and many of them had come with a view of becoming citizens of

this country, and many, he believed, were as good as any amongst us. Out

of respect to these foreigners, he should not wish to place them in the

situation which this amendment went to place them in; because it might

be said, hostilities were authorized when no war was declared, and these

people might be treated as if the nation from which they came was at war

with us, when no war existed. It had been said our population was now

sufficient, and that the privileges heretofore allowed to foreigners

might now be withdrawn. In some parts of the country, this might, in

some degree, be the case; but he knew there were other parts which

wanted population. From this consideration, and as he did not wish

unnecessarily to distress the minds of foreigners who had taken up

their residence amongst us, he should vote against this amendment.

Mr. J. WILLIAMS was persuaded, that, if this proposition passed, no good

citizen need be afraid of being disturbed. He had no objection to this

resolution without the amendment, nor had he any particular objection to

the amendment.

Mr. RUTLEDGE was so far from believing that this amendment would check

the immigration of foreigners, that he believed it would encourage it.

Foreigners came here to live under a good Government, and the more

secure the Government was made, the greater would be their desire to

live under it; and he believed a greater security could not be given to

it, than was proposed to be given by this amendment. It was wished to

vest a power in the President to send out of the country persons who

were natives of a country with whom we are at war, or who may have

authorized hostilities against us. In fact, in the situation of things

in which we are now placed, the PRESIDENT should have the power of

removing such intriguing agents and spies as are now spread all over the

country. What, said Mr. R., would be the conduct of France, if in our

situation? In twenty-four hours every man of this description would

either be sent out of the country or put in jail, and such conduct was

wise. Was there nothing, Mr. R. asked, to admonish us to take a measure

of this kind? Yes, there was. A gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. DAVIS) had

said, that a person was in that State delivering commissions into the

hands of every man who was so abandoned as to receive them. Other means

were also taken to alienate the affection of our citizens; and are we

still, said he, to say we will not send these persons out of the country

until a declaration of war is made? If these persons are suffered to

remain, France will never declare war, as she will consider the

residence of these men amongst us as of greater consequence than the

lining of our seaboard with privateers, or covering our coasts with men.

Mr. VENABLE did not wish to show any particular encouragement to

foreigners; but, if persons thought they could live happier here than in

their own country, he should not object to their making the change. He

could not agree to the amendment. Suppose hostility was committed upon

the property of any of our citizens by France, such hostility might not

be sufficient cause for placing all our commercial citizens in a

situation of having their property seized. Many cases might be deemed

hostility by the PRESIDENT which ought not to go to cut off all

communication between the citizens of the two countries. In such a case,

if any of the citizens of France should be taken up here, it would

produce a similar conduct towards our citizens in that country, which

would be allowed to be a serious evil.

Mr. SEWALL again urged, as an objection to this amendment, the

constitutional power of Congress to declare war. Too many circumstances

of insult and aggression, he allowed, had been experienced by this

country from a foreign power, which might have been understood by other

nations as war, and might have been so considered by this country; yet,

as it is an act of Congress to declare war, we could not be considered

as at war until Congress declared us to be in such a state, except war

was declared against us. This provision was not intended for any

particular case, but as a general provision, which might at any time be

called forth by proclamation. It should, therefore, be as well guarded

and definite as possible. If the words proposed were introduced, the

proposition would be rendered too indefinite; and the PRESIDENT might

proceed to send aliens from this country, and of course cause our

citizens in a foreign country to be sent from thence, or to be

imprisoned, and their property confiscated, at a time when Congress

might not judge it expedient to go to war. France, said he, has now done

towards the United States what might be considered as hostility. Suppose

we pass a law which calls upon the PRESIDENT to act, what ought the

PRESIDENT to do? Was he to determine the point whether France has

authorized hostilities against the United States? If so, he would

doubtless say she had, and in consequence every Frenchman in this

country will be liable to be removed out of the country, and our

citizens who happen to be in France will be placed in the same

situation. Mr. S. said, though it might be proper for Congress to

declare this to be the state of the country, he thought it would be

improper to give the PRESIDENT this power. He wished the power of

sending persons out of the country to be confined to such cases as were

particularly dangerous, which were included in the resolution without

this amendment. As to foreigners guilty of crimes against the United

States, they ought to be apprehended and punished according to the

existing laws: the present regulation was not pointed at them.

Mr. OTIS said, as his colleague had chosen to call his amendment

indefinite, he must excuse him when he said he considered the resolution

without it, as trifling and ineffectual, and argued a timidity which

ought not at this time to be shown by this country; and had he not been

thoroughly acquainted with the uprightness of intention and the purity

of the motives of his colleague, he should really have doubted whether

he was sincerely desirous of exerting all the energies of the country in

her defence; but, being persuaded of these, he would suppose that he

himself was wrong in his conception on this occasion, and would make a

few observations as to the ground upon which he formed his opinion.

He believed it would not be proper to wait until predatory incursions

were made--until the enemy was landed in our country, or until what

shall be considered as threatening or actual invasion appeared--before

any steps were taken on the subject now under consideration. He was of

opinion that when an enemy authorized hostilities, that was the time to

take up that crowd of spies and inflammatory agents which overspread the

country like the locusts of Egypt, and who were continually attacking

our liberties. The provision would doubtless be exercised with

discretion. There might be Frenchmen in this city and others (and he

doubted not there were) who were peaceable, well-disposed persons, and

against whom it never could be thought necessary to exercise this power;

but there were other persons, not only in this city, but in others, who

have not only been extremely instrumental in fomenting hostilities

against this country, but also in alienating the affections of our own

citizens; and it was men of this description whom he wished to remove

from the country.

It is proposed by this resolution to give the PRESIDENT the power to

remove aliens, when the country from which they come shall _threaten_ an

invasion. Some believe that this country is at present threatened with

an invasion, and with a ravage of our coasts, yet others say that the

despatches from our Envoys only consist of unauthorized conversations

with X, Y, and Z, and therefore not to be relied upon. Mr. O. thought

this a more indefinite power than that which he proposed to vest in the

PRESIDENT. His opinion was, that something ought to be done which should

strike these people with terror; he did not wish to give them an

opportunity of executing any of their seditious and malignant purposes;

he did not desire, in this season of danger, to _boggle_ about slight

forms, nor to pay respect to treaties already abrogated, but to seize

these persons wherever they could be found carrying on their vile

purposes. Without this, every thing else which had been done in the way

of defence would amount to nothing.

Mr. MCDOWELL said, from the observations of the gentleman who had just

sat down, it would appear that hostilities had already commenced between

this country and France. If this is the case, and the House knew it, why

not say so, and make preparations accordingly? Why pass acts fitted for

a state of war, without declaring that that is the state of the country?

[Mr. OTIS said, if the gentleman from North Carolina would bring forward

a proposition of this kind, he should be ready to vote for it.] Mr. McD.

expected the gentleman was prepared for war, and, therefore, that he

would have brought forward a resolution to that effect himself.

The gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. RUTLEDGE) had not considered this

amendment with his usual accuracy, when he said that the adoption of it

would prove an encouragement to foreigners to come to this country. He

thought it could not be very flattering encouragement to foreigners, to

tell them, "if you come here, and your Government commits any act of

hostility against the citizens of this country, you will be liable to be

imprisoned, or sent out of the country."

But it was said the country swarmed with spies and seditious persons. If

this was the case, he should be glad if gentlemen would point them out;

if they could, he should be as glad as they to take measures against

them. A person in Kentucky had been alluded to. Under the authority of

_Genet_, he believed some commissions had been issued; but he did not

believe that any had been issued since. It was also known that there had

been another Minister of another country who had adopted a similar

practice. He still remained here, and might still be carrying on his

mischievous schemes.[32] [The SPEAKER said the resolution was general.]

It was said that hostilities having been committed on our commerce by

France, they would authorize a war with France, (though Great Britain

had conducted herself much in the same way, and nothing was said as to

her,) and that therefore the PRESIDENT ought to be empowered to send all

Frenchmen out of the country, however peaceably they might be residing

here, if he thought proper to do so. This he could not consent to. It

was too large a power. He should therefore vote against the amendment.

Mr. SITGREAVES considered this as one of the essential features of the

system of defence about which Congress had been employed during the

present session, in order to enable us to meet the dangers which

threaten us. He believed, that though it might be extremely wise and

prudent to enter into regulations for securing our peace at all future

periods, yet it was most particularly their duty to concert measures of

defence and protection in our present exigencies. He believed the

business of defence would be very imperfectly done, if they confined

their operations of defence to land and naval forces, and neglected to

destroy the cankerworm which is corroding in the heart of the country.

There could be no question on this subject. It is well understood by

every member of the community. There is no occasion for specific proof

that there are a great number of aliens in this country from that nation

with whom we have at present alarming differences; that there are

emissaries amongst us, who have not only fomented our differences with

that country, but who have endeavored to create divisions amongst our

own citizens. They are, said he, assiduously employed at this moment,

and it is much to be lamented that there exists no authority to

restrain the evil. It was therefore peculiarly incumbent on Congress to

add to their other measures of defence, such powers as will protect the

country against this evil. He believed this could not be effected

without the adoption of some such principle as that under consideration.

If the power was too limited, the enemy would not be met. There could be

no difficulty, Mr. S. said, in point of right. All understood the rights

to which aliens are entitled by the laws of nations. They are no more

than the rights of hospitality, and this right varies according to the

relation in which the country from which they come, and that in which

they reside, is peaceable, or otherwise.

We do not owe to the citizens of France residents in this country (since

France had been mentioned) the same hospitalities which we owe to those

foreigners who are alien friends; though he confessed there were rights

of hospitality which could not be done away in time of war, particularly

as it respects alien merchants, which were provided for in this

resolution. And except a person had an actual agency in designs which

would endanger the peace of the country, though he was ordered out of

the country, a free passage would be given to himself and effects; and

if actually engaged in designs against the country, there would be a

strong necessity for restraining the liberty of any such persons.

It had been well asked, whether we ought to wait till the enemy landed,

before any measures were taken to remove persons from the country, who

would be ready to join them by thousands, or take advantage of knowledge

we have of their hostile intentions towards us? He thought there could

be no doubt on the subject. He knew there were aliens in this country,

of valuable characters, whose acquaintance ought to be cherished and

cultivated. Such men would be in no danger from the proposed provision.

It was meant only to operate against factious and bad men, who abuse the

liberty allowed to them of residing in this country, and these all must

see the necessity of attending to. France, said he, will not admit an

alien of any description to reside in her country without a card of

hospitality, and shall Congress scruple to go the length of this

amendment? He hoped not.

Mr. ALLEN said, he would move an amendment which would supersede that

under consideration, by making the resolution extend to _all aliens_ in

this country. He wished to retain none of the restraints which are in

the present resolution. Nothing but his respect for the gentleman who

made this report (Mr. SEWALL) would have prevented him from suspecting

that there existed some latent and mischievous design in this business.

The proposition goes upon the supposition that none but the citizens of

a particular nation can be dangerous to this country; whereas he

believed that there are citizens of several other countries who are as

dangerous, who have dispositions equally hostile to this country with

the French--he believed more so. He believed the whole country was aware

of this. Mr. A. alluded to the vast number of naturalizations which

lately took place in this city to support a particular party in a

particular election. It did not appear to him necessary to have the

exercise of this power depend upon any contingency, such as a

threatening of invasion, or war, before it could be exercised. He wished

the PRESIDENT to have it at all times. He moved an amendment to this

effect, which went to enable the PRESIDENT to remove at any time the

citizen of any foreign country whatever, not a citizen, regarding the

treaties with such countries. If gentlemen took a view of the different

States of Europe which had been subdued by the French, Mr. A. said, they

would not think it either wise or prudent to wait for an invasion, or

threatened invasion, before this power was put in execution. Venice,

Switzerland and Rome, had been overcome by means of the agents of the

French nation, at a time when they were in a much less alarming

situation than we are at present; and the first disturbance in those

countries was made the pretext of open hostility. This has been the

effect of _diplomatic agency_; of emissaries within and without, who

have bred quarrels, for the purpose of forming pretexts for measures

which have led to the subjugation of those countries. He believed there

were citizens in this country who would be ready to join a foreign power

in assisting to subjugate their country. What passed before our eyes,

and every day offended our ears, were so many proofs of it. Not many

weeks ago open threats were made to disturb the peace of the country. He

hoped, therefore, with all these things before them, the amendment which

he had proposed would be agreed to.

Mr. SEWALL said, being one of the committee who made this report, he

supposed he fell in for a share of that censure which had been so

liberally cast upon it by his colleague, and the gentleman last up from

Connecticut. The gentleman from Connecticut had thought fit to condemn

the committee for not having considered cases which were not referred to

them. It was not referred to them to consider what France had done in

all other countries with whom she had had disputes, or what this country

should do against France; but what should be done with respect to aliens

in this country generally. Civil policy regarded aliens in two lights,

viz: alien friends and alien enemies. He did not contemplate the making

of this country a wall against all aliens whatever; or that no alien

should come here without being subject to an arbitrary authority, such

as is known only to the French Directory. If the existence of such a

power as shall be able to place every alien in the country in a dungeon,

was necessary to quiet the fears and apprehensions of the gentleman from

Connecticut, he should not be willing to grant it. Indeed, it appeared

to him that the fears and apprehensions of that gentleman arose from

some defect in his own organization, or disease of his body (which he

believed might be better cured by the physician, than by any thing else)

rather than from any real ground of alarm.

What, said Mr. S., is to be feared from the residence of aliens amongst

us? Any thing to ruin the country? He acknowledged many inconveniences

arose from this circumstance, but more from our own unnatural children,

who, in the bosom of their parent, conspired her destruction. But did

the gentleman wish to increase the evil, by saying that persons born in

foreign countries, however regular and orderly their conduct may be,

shall be liable to be imprisoned, or sent out of the country, but that

citizens of this country, however reprehensible their conduct, should

have nothing to fear? The committee were not called upon to report on

this point. He was himself of opinion that more ought to be done, and

that aliens from any country should be liable to be removed, in case of

misbehavior; but he did not wish to leave the business wholly with the

PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. The committee had reported only in part;

they had yet to consider what steps would be proper to be taken against

aliens, or citizens, guilty of criminal proceedings; but when gentlemen

saw the addresses which were pouring in from all parts of the country in

favor of the measures which had been pursued by Government, and

expressions of determination to support every measure in defence of

their country, was any thing to be feared from a handful of aliens? It

was a reproach to the country to suppose it. If aliens were found to be

guilty of seditious practices, let them be restricted; but not placed

under an arbitrary authority. He never wished to see the Government of

this country in such a situation. Our situation, said Mr. S., is not

like that of the Directory of France, whom all of the nation are

cursing; we have, therefore, no necessity for the strong measures

adopted by them. But if gentlemen were determined to arrest every alien

in the country, let them bring forward a resolution of that kind; but,

in making regulations against alien enemies, let us not subject every

foreigner who comes to this country, however well intended he may be, to

the fear of a dungeon or removal. If gentlemen wished to make the

resolution more general, and to provide for cases, in which war was

first declared by this country, though he had before said he did not

think it necessary, he had no objection to indulge them, by inserting

the words, "between which and the United States there shall exist a

declared state of war." But unless the United States were inclined to

assume the character of the Turks or Arabs, such a regulation as was

recommended by the gentleman from Connecticut could not be adopted.

Mr. ALLEN had no particular anxiety that the resolution should pass to

the extent which he had proposed. If gentlemen did not think it

necessary, he should not persist in it. He was sorry the gentleman from

Massachusetts should have discovered in him any disease of body which

was capable of giving rise to personal fear. He believed he possessed as

little as most men. As to the necessity of the measure which he had

proposed, he would mention two circumstances which led him to think it

necessary. A person in this city, who has too respectable a standing,

and who is doing too much business in it, has declared that he wishes to

see a French army land in this country, and that he would do all in his

power to further their landing. He had heard nearly the same thing from

another quarter. He thought, therefore, that there ought to exist a

power which should be able to send such persons out of the country. Not

that he was himself either afraid of being assassinated or having the

city burnt. But the chairman of the committee had said, that this

subject was yet before them. This he did not know, before the gentleman

said so; for, having made a report upon the subject, he supposed that

they had done all they intended to do upon it.

Mr. DANA was opposed to this amendment. He thought the provisions of

this resolution ought to be made definite, as it contemplated

regulations which Congress would be willing to have in existence at all

future times; and though the principle upon which the residence of

aliens was regulated is laid down in the law of nations, as it relates

to monarchical Governments, yet, in this country, where the sovereignty

of the country is vested by the constitution in Congress, these

regulations must be fixed by law. The danger of war with which the

country was threatened had forced the subject upon Congress at this

time, and this being the case, he was desirous of adopting some

regulations of a permanent nature respecting it. If any other

regulations were necessary with respect to our present situation with

France, he thought they ought to be made special and temporary.