1st. That the case of Thomas Nash, as stated to the President, was
completely within the twenty-seventh article of the treaty between the
United States and Great Britain.
2d. That this question was proper for Executive, and not for Judicial
decision; and,
3d. That in deciding it, the President is not chargeable with an
interference with judicial decisions.
After trespassing so long, Mr. MARSHALL said, on the patience of the
House, in arguing what had appeared to him to be the material points
growing out of the resolutions, he regretted the necessity of detaining
them still longer for the purpose of noticing an observation which
appeared not to be considered by the gentleman who made it as belonging
to the argument.
The subject introduced by this observation, however, was so calculated
to interest the public feelings, that he must be excused for stating his
opinion on it.
The gentleman from Pennsylvania had said that an impressed American
seaman, who should commit homicide for the purpose of liberating
himself from the vessel in which he was confined, ought not to be given
up as a murderer. In this, Mr. M. said, he concurred entirely with that
gentleman. He believed the opinion to be unquestionably correct, as were
the reasons that gentleman had given in support of it. He had never
heard any American avow a contrary sentiment, nor did he believe a
contrary sentiment could find a place in the bosom of an American. He
could not pretend, and did not pretend to know the opinion of the
Executive on this subject, because he had never heard the opinions of
that department; but he felt the most perfect conviction, founded on the
general conduct of the Government, that it could never surrender an
impressed American to the nation which, in making the impressment, had
committed a national injury.
This belief was in no degree shaken by the conduct of the Executive in
this particular case.
In his own mind, it was a sufficient defence of the President from an
imputation of this kind, that the fact of Thomas Nash being an impressed
American, was obviously not contemplated by him in the decision he made
on the principles of the case. Consequently, if a new circumstance
occurred, which would essentially change the case decided by the
President, the Judge ought not to have acted under that decision, but
the new circumstance ought to have been stated. Satisfactory as this
defence might appear, he should not resort to it, because to some it
might seem a subterfuge. He defended the conduct of the President on
other and still stronger ground.
The President had decided that a murder committed on board a British
frigate on the high seas, was within the jurisdiction of that nation,
and consequently within the twenty-seventh article of its treaty with
the United States. He therefore directed Thomas Nash to be delivered to
the British Minister, if satisfactory evidence of the murder should be
adduced. The sufficiency of the evidence was submitted entirely to the
Judge.
If Thomas Nash had committed a murder, the decision was that he should
be surrendered to the British Minister; but if he had not committed a
murder, he was not to be surrendered.
Had Thomas Nash been an impressed American, the homicide on board the
Hermione would, most certainly, not have been a murder.
The act of impressing an American, is an act of lawless violence. The
confinement on board a vessel, is a continuation of the violence, and an
additional outrage. Death committed within the United States, in
resisting such violence, would not have been murder, and the person
giving the wound could not have been treated as a murderer. Thomas Nash
was only to have been delivered up to justice on such evidence as, had
the fact been committed within the United States, would have been
sufficient to have induced his commitment and trial for murder. Of
consequence, the decision of the President was so expressed, as to
exclude the case of an impressed American liberating himself by
homicide. He concluded with observing, that he had already too long
availed himself of the indulgence of the House, to venture farther on
that indulgence by recapitulating or reinforcing the arguments which had
already been urged.
When Mr. MARSHALL had concluded, Mr. DANA rose and spoke against the
resolutions.
An adjournment was then called for and carried--yeas 50, nays 48.
SATURDAY, March 8.
_Case of Jonathan Robbins._
The House resumed the consideration of the report made on Thursday last,
by the Committee of the whole House, to whom was referred the Message of
the President of the United States, of the seventh ultimo, containing
their disagreement to the motion referred to them on the twentieth
ultimo; and the said motion being read, in the words following, to wit:
(See _ante_--Mr. LIVINGSTON'S resolution, February 20.)[53]
Mr. NICHOLAS spoke in answer to Mr. MARSHALL.
The question was then taken that the House do agree with the Committee
of the Whole in their disagreement to the same, and resolved in the
affirmative--yeas 61, nays 35, as follows:
YEAS.--Willis Alston, George Baer, Bailey Bartlett, James
A. Bayard, John Bird, John Brown, William Cooper, William
Craik, John Davenport, Franklin Davenport, Thomas T. Davis,
John Dennis, George Dent, Joseph Dickson, William Edmond,
Thomas Evans, Abiel Foster, Dwight Foster, Jonathan
Freeman, Henry Glenn, Samuel Goode, Chauncey Goodrich,
Elizur Goodrich, William Gordon, Edwin Gray, Roger
Griswold, William Barry Grove, Robert Goodloe Harper,
Archibald Henderson, William H. Hill, James H. Imlay, James
Jones, John Wilkes Kittera, Henry Lee, Silas Lee, Samuel
Lyman, James Linn, John Marshall, Abraham Nott, Harrison G.
Otis, Robert Page, Josiah Parker, Thomas Pinckney, Jonas
Platt, Leven Powell, John Read, John Rutledge, jr., Samuel
Sewall, James Sheafe, William Shepard, Richard Dobbs
Spaight, David Stone, Benjamin Taliaferro, George Thatcher,
John Chew Thomas, Richard Thomas, Joseph B. Varnum, Peleg
Wadsworth, Robert Waln, Lemuel Williams, and Henry Woods.
NAYS.--Theodorus Bailey, Phanuel Bishop, Robert Brown,
Samuel J. Cabell, Gabriel Christie, Matthew Clay, John
Condit, Joseph Eggleston, Lucas Elmendorph, John Fowler,
Albert Gallatin, Andrew Gregg, John A. Hanna, Joseph
Heister, David Holmes, George Jackson, Aaron Kitchell,
Michael Leib, Matthew Lyon, Edward Livingston, Nathaniel
Macon, Peter Muhlenberg, Anthony New, John Nicholas, Joseph
H. Nicholson, John Randolph, John Smilie, John Smith,
Samuel Smith, Thomas Sumter, John Thompson, Abram Trigg,
John Trigg, Philip Van Cortlandt, and Robert Williams.
A motion was made to adjourn. Mr. MACON hoped the House would sit and
decide the resolution proposed by the gentleman from Delaware, so as to
have done with the business, and not to enter on another week with it;
however, 54 rising for the adjournment, it was carried.
MONDAY, March 10.
_Case of Jonathan Robbins._
Mr. BAYARD moved that the Committee of the whole House, to whom was
referred the Message of the President, relative to Thomas Nash, alias
Jonathan Robbins, and a resolution submitted by himself to the House,
approbating the conduct of the President, and referred to that
committee, be discharged from the further consideration thereof.
A long debate arose upon this motion, in which Messrs. RANDOLPH, DAVIS,
JONES, NICHOLAS, LIVINGSTON, and EGGLESTON, spoke against it--and
Messrs. BAYARD, BIRD, OTIS, KITTERA, VARNUM, RUTLEDGE, EDMOND, SHEPARD,
and H. LEE, in favor of it; when the question was taken by yeas and
nays, and carried in the affirmative--yeas 62, nays 35.
MONDAY, March 17.
_Medal to Captain Truxton._
Mr. PARKER observed that information had been received of a very gallant
action having occurred between a frigate of the United States of 38
guns, commanded by Commodore Truxton, and a French vessel of 52 guns,
which was extremely bloody, but valiant on the part of the United States
commander. It was not usual to grant emoluments on account of any
particular gallant action, to our officers, but to give approbation was
common and consistent. In other countries, he said, monuments had been
erected to commemorate such splendid victories.
As a testimonial of the regard of Congress for the officers who so
bravely supported the flag of the United States, and to encourage
similar acts of bravery, he would propose the following resolution:
_Resolved, by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States in Congress assembled_, That a golden
medal, emblematical of the late action between the United
States frigate Constellation of 38 guns, and the French
ship-of-war La Vengeance of 52 guns, be purchased under the
Secretary of the Navy, and be presented to Captain Thomas
Truxton, in testimony of the high sense entertained by
Congress of his gallantry and good conduct in the above
engagement, wherein an example was exhibited by the
captain, officers, sailors, and marines, honorable to the
American name, and instructive to its rising Navy.
The resolution was ordered to lie on the table.
TUESDAY, March 18.
_Officers and Crew of the Constellation._
Mr. PARKER moved that the unfinished business be postponed for the
purpose of taking up the resolution which he yesterday laid on the
table, relative to the captain, officers, and crew of the Constellation;
when
Mr. NICHOLSON said he wished it might not be taken into consideration
until some official information was received upon the subject from the
Secretary of the Navy, upon which resolutions can be grounded. In his
opinion, the resolution of the gentleman did not go far enough. It had
been said, that a young officer had voluntarily lost his life, rather
than shrink from his duty, which he thought ought to be noticed. He was
in favor of giving his approbation of the conduct of the officers and
crew in more general terms than the resolution on the table
contemplated.
After some observations from Messrs. CHAMPLIN and HARPER, who were of
the same opinion,
Mr. PARKER said, he did not suppose a doubt could exist upon this
subject sufficient to require any further information than had been
received through the medium of the newspapers. He had seen a letter in
the possession of the Secretary of the Navy, from Captain Baker, of the
Delaware, who had every opportunity of knowing the situation of the
enemy's frigate, was in the same harbor, and, being a nautical man, was
of course able to give a correct opinion on her then situation, and the
evident marks of the bravery of her antagonist with whom she
contended--this was sufficient to satisfy his mind.
If, said Mr. P., gentlemen think the resolution does not go far enough,
there is no one who will more cheerfully concur in offering other
testimonies of approbation, than myself. With respect to the young
officer,[54] whose gallantry and good conduct had been so highly spoken
of, it was his intention to have brought forward a resolution for
setting up his bust in a niche of the Capitol of the city of Washington.
Mr. P. concluded with observing that he had no objection to call for
information from the Secretary of the Navy, and would therefore withdraw
his motion.
Mr. PARKER then moved that the House come to the following resolution,
viz:
_Resolved_, That the Secretary of the Navy be requested to
lay before this House any information he may possess,
respecting the engagement which lately took place in the
West Indies between the United States frigate Constellation
and a French ship-of-war; _and, also, respecting the
conduct of James Jarvis, a midshipman on board the said
frigate_.
Mr. SMITH moved to strike out the words in italics, which created
considerable debate; when
Mr. BIRD proposed to insert in lieu thereof, the following words: "And
also upon the conduct of any officer or other person on board said
frigate, who may have particularly signalized himself in the said
action;" which Mr. B. supposed would meet the intention of the mover,
and be less liable to objection than the words proposed to be stricken
out.
Mr. PARKER having consented to the modification, the resolution was
agreed to.
WEDNESDAY, March 19.
_Military Academy, &c._
Mr. OTIS, from the Committee of Defence, reported a bill for
establishing a Military Academy, and for better organizing the corps of
Engineers and Artillerists.
The bill was proceeding to be read, when Mr. OTIS suggested that as this
bill contained much the same in detail as a report on the subject made
by the Secretary of War, with which every gentleman was acquainted, he
supposed the reading would not be necessary.
Mr. MACON said he should have no objection to its being read a first
time, though he did not think it necessary; but he would give notice
that it was his intention to move that the bill be rejected. He
mentioned his reasons to be the expense of the measure generally, which
it was an improper time to incur.
The bill having been read, he made the motion.
Mr. OTIS and Mr. CHAMPLIN answered. Mr. VARNUM supported the motion,
which was at length negatived, 49 to 42; and the bill was referred to a
Committee of the whole House.
THURSDAY, March 20.
_Removal of Seat of Government._
Mr. OTIS observed that it appeared to be the general opinion that the
seat of Government would be removed to the Federal City, and that
Congress would commence their next session at that place; and as some
preliminary measures were necessary to be made previous thereto; and as
it would be reposing too much power in the Commissioners who now act
there to rely entirely on their reports; and as some measures must be
reported and adopted before the end of the present session, he laid on
the table the following resolution:
"_Resolved_, That a committee be appointed to consider what
measures are expedient for Congress to adopt, preparatory
to the removal of the seat of Government, with leave to
report by bill or otherwise."
_Amy Dardin's Case._
The House went into a committee on the report of the Committee of Claims
on the petition of Amy Dardin, which was that the prayer of the
petitioner ought not to be granted. Being taken up in the House, the
propriety and impropriety of granting it was again contended, when there
appeared in favor of the report 42, against it 42. The SPEAKER decided
in the affirmative, so that the claim was not admitted.
FRIDAY, March 21.
_Action of the Frigate Constellation._
The SPEAKER laid before the House a report from the Secretary of the
Navy, in compliance with the instructions of the House, respecting the
engagement which occurred between the frigate Constellation and a French
ship-of-war. The report enclosed a letter from Captain Truxton,
detailing the action, and also extracts of letters from the American
Consul at Curaçoa, and one from the American agent at St. Kitts,
respecting the disabled state of the French ship La Vengeur. As to any
particular specimen of valor, the Secretary received no information; but
that all the officers and men had acted with the most unexampled bravery
and decorum was attested by the captain, whose good management was
evinced by the singular success of the action. The Secretary mentions
the singular bravery of James Jarvis, a Midshipman, who preferred death
to quitting his post.
On motion of Mr. H. LEE, this report, together with a resolution
proposed some days since by Mr. PARKER, was referred to the Naval
Committee.
MONDAY, March 26.
_Medal to Captain Truxton._
Mr. PARKER, from the Naval Committee, reported the following
resolutions:
"_Resolved, by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States, in Congress assembled_, That the
President of the United States be requested to present to
Captain Thomas Truxton, a golden medal, emblematical of the
late action between the United States frigate
Constellation, of 38 guns, and the French ship-of-war La
Vengeur, of 54 guns, in testimony of the high sense
entertained by Congress of his gallantry and good conduct
in the above engagement, wherein an example was exhibited
by the captain, officers, sailors, and marines, honorable
to the American name, and instructive to its rising navy.
"_Resolved_, That the conduct of James Jarvis, a midshipman
in said frigate, who gloriously preferred certain death to
an abandonment of his post, is deserving of the highest
praise; and that the loss of so promising an officer is a
subject of national regret."
The House then proceeded to the consideration of these resolutions; the
first of which being under consideration,
Mr. RANDOLPH said, that inasmuch as he could not give his assent to
these resolutions, he felt impressed with the propriety of stating the
reasons which would govern his vote.
It was not with any intention to detract from the deserved reputation
which had been so nobly earned by the captain, officers, and crew of the
Constellation; still less to withhold the well-earned applause due to
that gallant youth who had sacrificed his life in the prosecution of his
duty. It was to the first of these resolutions, only, that he should
deny his concurrence. He should do this, unless the gentlemen of the
Naval Committee should show to him that it was the duty of the commander
of the Constellation to persist in the chase, and compel to action a
ship of such superior force. This conduct was, in his opinion, rash;
and, when the situation of the United States and France was taken into
consideration, it was peculiarly unadvisable. Our Commissioners were at
this time in the capital of that country negotiating peace. How did the
pursuit of this ship--the forcing her into an action, which ended in the
crippling of both vessels--comport with that protection which was to be
afforded to our commerce by the Constellation?
Mr. R. said that his duty obliged him to act upon his own opinion; and,
however singular it may appear, he should vote against the first
resolution, unless the gentleman who brought it forward would make it
appear that it was the duty of Captain Truxton to compel the Vengeance
to come to action, when he knew her to be of such superior force. The
second resolution met his most hearty approbation.
Mr. PARKER said, what the present state of things between the two
countries might be, in the opinion of his colleague, he could not say;
but Mr. P. conceived it was no other than it was at the time Congress
passed a bill which prescribed the conduct of our naval commanders. In
that bill they were authorized to take or destroy all French armed
vessels: under these orders Captain Truxton left this country, and, in
obedience to instructions to that effect, he pursued and engaged this
vessel, which, though of superior force, he had beaten. Had he not
attacked her, it is most probable she would have proceeded against our
commerce. The law having been passed by Congress, if the President of
the United States had not given orders conformably thereto, he would
have been subject to impeachment. He, therefore, presumed it to be his
duty; and, most certainly, such orders being given to the commanders,
they were bound to conform to them. Mr. P. thought that this and greater
approbation ought to be expressed by Congress for conduct so brave and
unprecedented. In some countries monuments had been raised, but this was
unnecessary, though merited. Our naval exertions were very recent and
confined, but an instance of extraordinary valor having occurred it
ought to be honorably and suitably noticed.
Mr. NICHOLAS said, however he might agree with his colleague (Mr.
RANDOLPH) in a desire that no conduct should be encouraged that would
tend to aggravate France in the present situation of things, he could
not agree with him in his present sentiments. While we were in a state
of actual, though not of declared war, Mr. N. thought it was naturally
to be expected that our commanders would act in their complete military
character, when our ships were arrayed for battle, and power given to
act up to the full rigor which the laws of honor and of war would
warrant. In the conduct of the captain, as well as the crew, Mr. N.
said, he saw nothing but what was extremely laudable, and highly
meriting approbation.
Mr. LYON said he rose to request the division of the question on the
resolutions. He was disposed to vote for the latter resolution, and not
for the former.
The SPEAKER declared they would be divided, and that the question before
the House was on the agreeing to the first resolution.
Mr. LYON observed that he had voted for the equipment of the three
frigates under an impression that they would be employed solely for the
protection of the commerce of this country: but now he found himself
called upon to give thanks or praise to the commander of one of those
frigates, and for what? for going out of the station assigned to him, as
the most proper for the protection of the trading vessels of this
country, in chase of a ship-of-war of much superior force; and for
reducing the ship under his command, as well as that of his opponent, to
a mere wreck. Mr. L. said he had seen nothing in the orders which had
been published directing him to do this, nor did he think policy or
prudence dictated the measure. Let all our naval commanders be excited
to follow this example; let them play or fight each of them their vessel
against a French vessel-of-war of superior force in the same way, and
our naval force is crippled, while the French will scarcely feel their
loss; then our commerce would be wholly at their mercy. Besides these
considerations, what is there to defend that commerce, on the station
left destitute by the Constellation, while she is refitting. For his
part he was as glad and proud as any gentleman that our officers, and
our sailors, and our marines, had behaved gallantly and done themselves
and their country honor, in the late action, but he did not feel himself
bound, under existing circumstances, to give distinguished praise to the
conduct which produced it; he should therefore vote against the
resolution.
Mr. J. BROWN would vote for this resolution for the very reason which
some gentlemen urged for voting against it. He thought the very fact of
chasing a ship of superior force, and forcing her to an action which had
been attended with success, was a commendable act. This to him would be
the only inducement for paying so high a mark of national respect. If it
had been an attack upon a vessel of inferior force, he should not think
it worth notice. The objection was partly on account of the French ship
being of superior force; surely this would rather be a reason why we
should have vessels of greater force than we have now; therefore he
hoped the worthy member would suffer that brave officer to go to sea
next time with a 74-gun ship under his command, when he would doubtless
bring the enemy to a good account.
The yeas and nays were called on this resolution and carried--yeas 87,
nays 4, as follows:
YEAS.--Willis Alston, George Baer, Bailey Bartlett, John
Bird, Phanuel Bishop, Jonathan Brace, John Brown, Robert
Brown, Samuel J. Cabell, Christopher G. Champlin, William
C. C. Claiborne, John Condit, William Cooper, Samuel W.
Dana, John Davenport, Thomas T. Davis, John Dawson, John
Dennis, George Dent, Joseph Dickson, William Edmond, Joseph
Eggleston, Lucas Elmendorph, Thomas Evans, Abiel Foster,
Dwight Foster, John Fowler, Jonathan Freeman, Albert
Gallatin, Henry Glenn, Samuel Goode, Chauncey Goodrich,
Elizur Goodrich, William Gordon, Edwin Gray, Roger
Griswold, John A. Hanna, Robert Goodloe Harper, Thomas
Hartley, Archibald Henderson, William H. Hill, David
Holmes, Benjamin Huger, James H. Imlay, James Jones, Aaron
Kitchell, John Wilkes Kittera, Henry Lee, Silas Lee,
Michael Leib, Samuel Lyman, James Linn, Nathaniel Macon,
John Marshall, Peter Muhlenberg, Anthony New, John
Nicholas, Joseph H. Nicholson, Abraham Nott, Harrison G.
Otis, Josiah Parker, Thomas Pinckney, Jonas Platt, Leven
Powell, John Read, John Rutledge, jr., Samuel Sewall, James
Sheafe, William Shepard, John Smilie, John Smith, Samuel
Smith, Richard Stanford, David Stone, Benjamin Taliaferro,
George Thatcher, John Chew Thomas, John Thompson, Abram
Trigg, John Trigg, Philip Van Cortlandt, Joseph B. Varnum,
Peleg Wadsworth, Robert Waln, Robert Williams, Lemuel
Williams, and Henry Woods.
NAYS.--George Jackson, Matthew Lyon, John Randolph, and
Thomas Sumter.
The other resolution was adopted _unanimously_.
MONDAY, March 31.
_Lake Superior Copper Mines._
The House, according to the order of the day, again resolved itself into
a Committee of the whole House on the report of the committee appointed,
on the 5th instant, to inquire into the expediency of authorizing the
PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES to appoint an agent to purchase of the
Indians a tract of land on the south side of Lake Superior, which shall
include the great copper bed; and, after some time spent therein, the
committee rose and reported a resolution thereupon; which was twice
read, and agreed to by the House, as follows:
_Resolved, by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled_, That
the President of the United States be authorized to employ
an agent, who shall be instructed to collect all material
information relative to the copper mines on the south side
of Lake Superior, and to ascertain whether the Indian title
to such lands as might be required for the use of the
United States, in case they should deem it expedient to
work the said mines, be yet subsisting; and, if so, the
terms on which the same can be extinguished: And that the
said agent be instructed to make report to the President,
in such time as the information he may collect may be laid
before Congress at their next session.
_Ordered_, That the Clerk of this House do carry the said resolution to
the Senate, and desire their concurrence.
WEDNESDAY, April 2.
_Removal of the Seat of Government._
The House then resolved itself into a committee on the bill to make
further progress for the removal and accommodation of the Government of
the United States.
A motion was then made to fill a blank for the accommodation of the
household of the President, about which considerable conversation
occurred; when Mr. RUTLEDGE moved that the committee rise, in order that
time may be given for learning the amount of money wanting for this
object, and because he supposed the Chairman of the committee, who was
absent, might be able to give that information. The motion was
afterwards withdrawn, but renewed by the SPEAKER, and at length carried.
THURSDAY, April 3.
_Lands given in satisfaction of Judgments._
Mr. HARPER observed that in some of the States lands were received in
satisfaction of judgments, which also was the case in such places where
the United States were plaintiffs. To remedy what he conceived an evil,
he laid on the table the following resolution:
"_Resolved_, That a committee be appointed to inquire and
report, by bill or otherwise, whether any, and what,
further provisions are necessary to be made relative to the
sales of real estate delivered to the United States in
satisfaction of judgments against persons indebted
thereto."
Three members were appointed.
FRIDAY, April 4.
_Removal of the Seat of Government._
The House then went into Committee of the Whole on the bill for the
removal and accommodation of the Government of the United States.
Mr. HARPER proposed to amend the act so as that the sum to accommodate
the household of the President of the United States with furniture, in
addition to what was now in possession of the President, should not
operate until after the third of March next. This he did, he said, in
consequence of some constitutional doubts which he had expressed. The
constitution declaring that the salary of the President should receive
no addition nor diminution during his being in office. This was
concurred in.
The question then was, what sum should be allowed for that purpose;
$20,000, $15,000, and $10,000, were severally named.
Mr. RANDOLPH, considering the principle itself unconstitutional, moved,
in order to defeat the section altogether, (it having been amended and
being out of order to move its being stricken out,) to insert the sum of
$500. These different sums called forth a lengthy debate. The sum of
$20,000 was negatived--45 to 39. That of $15,000 was carried--yeas 44,
nays 42.
The bill being gone through, was ordered to be engrossed for a third
reading on Monday.
FRIDAY, April 18.
_Disputed Elections of President, &c._
Mr. NICHOLSON called for the order of the day on the bill prescribing
the mode of deciding disputed elections of President and Vice President
of the United States.
Mr. HARPER moved that it be postponed till Monday.
Mr. NICHOLSON, after expressing his abhorrence of the principles
contained in the bill, then moved that it be postponed till the first
Monday in December next.
Messrs. HARPER, DANA, RUTLEDGE, and MARSHALL, opposed this motion; and
Messrs. S. SMITH, GALLATIN, RANDOLPH, NICHOLSON, and NICHOLAS, supported
it.
The question was taken by yeas and nays, and decided in the
negative--yeas 48, nays 52.
Mr. HARPER'S motion for postponement till Monday, was then agreed
to--ayes 54.
MONDAY, April 21.
_Admirals in the Navy._
Mr. PARKER, from the Naval Committee, reported a bill for the
appointment of admirals for the navy.
[This bill provides for the appointment of one Vice Admiral and four
Rear Admirals, and arranges the fleet into squadrons.]
It was read a first time, and on the question for the second reading, it
was carried--37 to 31. Having been read a second time, Mr. GALLATIN
moved its postponement till the first Monday in December next.
The SPEAKER said the question was, whether it should be committed or
not? The question for commitment was carried, 37 to 32. The question was
then to make it the order of the day for the first Monday in December
next.
Mr. EGGLESTON hoped it would be postponed. He said it would be agreed
upon to suspend the building of the 74's for the present year; in
addition to this our difference with France would most probably be soon
adjusted. Another reason was, it would incur an addition of expense,
which it would be improper to go into, having recently agreed to borrow
$3,500,000. He was really surprised to hear such a bill proposed; he
scarcely could think his colleague sincere.
Mr. PARKER said that the building of the 74's was not suspended, but it
was thought advisable not to hurry their building. He stated a number of
conveniences that would attend the new arrangement; that the whole
expense would not be more than $10,000, but owing to the advantages, he
believed it would be a real saving. He did not think there could be any
certainty of a peace, from the revolutionary disposition of France; but
even if it was certain that peace would be made with that nation, it was
not certain that the combined powers would not renew their hostilities.
He wished this measure to be adopted, even if it was at the expense of
the army. The return of peace would render the army nugatory, except
just enough for the garrisons; the whole of the army expenses, he said,
was upwards of four millions, but the whole sum expended on the navy
(really a more efficient defence and advantage) was little more than two
millions. He wished our naval defence to be nurtured and rendered
respectable, for which the squadron arrangements and appointments of
suitable commanders were necessary.
Mr. CHAMPLIN also spoke in favor of the bill, and in favor of its
commitment for an earlier day.
Mr. CLAIBORNE could not think the gentleman (Mr. PARKER) sincere in his
professions that the army was not necessary, when he perceived that
every motion to reduce the army, which by other gentlemen was thought
absolutely necessary, had as uniformly been opposed by that gentleman.
Mr. C. said he did not look forward to a period when the navy as well as
the army would be unnecessary. This appointment might take place at any
time when there should be necessity of it; and, therefore, as it was not
pretended the 74's could be built before the next session, it would then
be time enough to think of voting these officers.
The SPEAKER said that it was unknown in the Parliamentary proceedings of
any country that the merits of a bill were discussed on a motion for
postponement; he must therefore say that any discussion on the bill was
out of order, and that gentlemen must confine themselves merely on the
question of the day this bill should be made the order for.
Mr. HARPER stated some of the inconveniences that must attend gentlemen
who brought in, or would wish to support a bill being presented,
recommending its provision by a motion to postpone; he conceived the
bill a valuable one, and wished for an opportunity of endeavoring to
convince the House of that fact, but he was precluded by the decision of
the Chair, he must therefore beg leave to appeal from the decision.
The question was put, "Is the decision of the Chair right?" and
carried--yeas 65.
Mr. SMITH said he should vote for this bill being the order for December
next, but if the 74's were then ordered to proceed, he should vote for
this bill, if then proposed.
The yeas and nays were taken on the question, "Shall this bill be
postponed till the first Monday in December next?" and decided in the
negative--yeas 44, nays 45, as follows:
YEAS.--Willis Alston, Theodorus Bailey, Phanuel Bishop,
Robert Brown, Samuel J. Cabell, Matthew Clay, William C. C.
Claiborne, John Condit, Thomas T. Davis, John Dawson,
Joseph Eggleston, Lucas Elmendorph, John Fowler, Albert
Gallatin, Andrew Gregg, William Barry Grove, John A. Hanna,
Joseph Heister, David Holmes, George Jackson, James Jones,
Michael Leib, Matthew Lyon, James Linn, Nathaniel Macon,
Peter Muhlenberg, Anthony New, John Nicholas, Joseph H.
Nicholson, Abraham Nott, John Randolph, John Smilie, John
Smith, Samuel Smith, Richard Dobbs Spaight, Richard
Stanford, David Stone, Thomas Sumter, Benjamin Taliaferro,
John Thompson, Abram Trigg, John Trigg, Joseph B. Varnum,
and Robert Williams.
NAYS.--George Baer, Bailey Bartlett, James A. Bayard,
Jonathan Brace, John Brown, Christopher G. Champlin,
William Cooper, Samuel W. Dana, John Davenport, Franklin
Davenport, John Dennis, George Dent, Joseph Dickson,
William Edmond, Thomas Evans, Abiel Foster, Dwight Foster,
Jonathan Freeman, Henry Glenn, Chauncey Goodrich, Elizur
Goodrich, Roger Griswold, Robert Goodloe Harper, Benjamin
Huger, James H. Imlay, Henry Lee, Silas Lee, Samuel Lyman,
Lewis R. Morris, Robert Page, Josiah Parker, Thomas
Pinckney, Jonas Platt, Leven Powell, John Read, John
Rutledge, jun., Samuel Sewall, James Sheafe, William
Shepard, George Thatcher, John Chew Thomas, Richard Thomas,
Robert Waln, Lemuel Williams, and Henry Woods.
The bill was then made the order for to-morrow.
FRIDAY, April 25.
_Congress Library._
Mr. DENNIS said that by the act passed the present session, further to
provide for the removal and accommodation of the Government of the
United States, a sum not exceeding $5,000 was appropriated for the
purpose of procuring a Library. In order to carry that provision into
execution, he would move the following resolution:
"_Resolved_, That ---- be a committee, jointly with such
committee as may be appointed on the part of the Senate,
for the purpose of making out a catalogue of books, and
adopting the best mode of procuring a Library, at the city
of Washington; and for adopting a system of rules and
regulations relative thereto."
This motion was agreed to, and Messrs. WALN, EVANS, and POWELL,
appointed.
SATURDAY, April 26.
_Slave Trade._
The House resolved itself into a committee on the bill from the Senate,
in addition to the act, entitled "An act prohibiting the carrying on the
slave trade from the United States to any foreign place or country."
Mr. J. BROWN said, when the motion was first laid on the table, he
thought it improper to prevent the citizens of the United States
enjoying the benefits of a trade enjoyed by all the European nations. He
really was in hopes that the good sense of the select committee would
have permitted them to have seen the policy of realizing the act in
question. Many members of the House, he observed, knew how the former
act was passed; they knew that Congress was drilled into it by certain
persons who would not take _no_ for an answer. It was well known that
the Abolition Society, otherwise the Society of Friends, as they were
called, were very troublesome until they got that act passed. It was
also well known that those people did not do much to support the
Government, but that they did as much as they could to stop the measures
of the Government, and particularly our defensive system, on which our
national security depended.
Mr. NICHOLAS asked whether it was in order to abuse any class of
citizens in this manner, and particularly since no motion was before the
committee?
The CHAIRMAN said he conceived the gentleman to be in order, since he
supposed he was about to make a motion affecting the principle of the
bill.
Mr. BROWN resumed. He was only speaking, agreeably to his information,
how this bill came originally into existence. He was certain that this
nation having an act against the slave trade, did not prevent the
exportation of a slave from Africa. He believed we might as well,
therefore, enjoy that trade, as to leave it wholly to others. It was the
law of that country to export those whom they held in slavery--who were
as much slaves there as those who were slaves in this country--and with
as much right. The very idea of making a law against this trade, which
all other nations enjoyed, and which was allowed to be very profitable,
was ill policy. He would further say that it was wrong, when considered
in a moral point of view, since, by the operation of the trade, the very
people themselves much bettered their condition. It ought to be a matter
of national policy, since it would bring in a good revenue to our
Treasury. It was not pleasing to him, Mr. B. said, to pay an interest of
8 per cent. for our loan: rather than borrow money, he would wish to be
paying off some of our old standing debt, which could be done by
increasing our commerce, or rendering it free. He wished it to be free
as the wind that blew--from one end of the world to the other. As he
observed before, he believed not one more slave would be exported from
Africa, while our merchants and our revenue would enjoy the benefit.
Mr. B. said, our distilleries and manufactories were all lying idle for
want of an extended commerce. He had been well informed that on those
coasts New England rum was much preferred to the best Jamaica spirits,
and would fetch a better price. Why should it not be sent there, and a
profitable return be made? Why should a heavy fine and imprisonment be
made the penalty for carrying on a trade so advantageous?
But, he observed, if it was thought advisable that the old act should
continue, he would wish it could be made to meet the purpose altogether,
and prevent the system of slavery entirely, so that equal advantages
might be given to all the inhabitants of the Union; without this, it
would, as it ever had been, remain a great disadvantage. He therefore
moved that the committee rise, in order to postpone the bill. He
believed the House would be better prepared to meet it in a few days.
Mr. NICHOLAS seconded the motion, not but that he was prepared to decide
on it, but that there might be opportunity given to express an opinion.
He really could not understand the gentleman, when he said that our
people being employed in that trade would not add nor diminish the
number exported. This was certainly a wrong calculation. These people
were enslaved for their masters, or to supply some foreign market.
Certainly if the number of purchasers were increased, the number of
slaves would be increased. Surely the gentleman would not wish them
brought into the United States when he talked of their condition being
improved; this was a fact, to be sure, but would it be policy so to do?
But another and an important point was touched upon--that he would wish
the law to be made to meet another object, if it was determined to
prohibit the trade in this country. As a Southern man, Mr. N. said, he
would observe that he was placed in a most unfortunate situation,
indeed, in being obliged, in common with other people of those States,
to keep men in a state of slavery: but he had the consolation to inform
the House, that he believed the people of the Southern States were
wiping off the stain entailed upon them by their predecessors, in
endeavoring to ameliorate the situation of that race of people as much
as possible. This appeared to be an increasing disposition. He hoped the
gentleman would have an opportunity to produce all his arguments on this
subject, in his endeavors either to get the law repealed or to
strengthen it, agreeably to his wish, in order that he might be
satisfied that he would not find an advocate in the House.
Mr. D. FOSTER spoke against the committee rising.
Several sections of the bill were then gone through with, when the
committee rose, and obtained leave to sit again.
MONDAY, April 28.
_The Slave Trade._
Mr. RUTLEDGE moved that the Committee of the Whole, to whom were
referred the bill for preventing the carrying on the slave trade, &c.,
be discharged from further consideration thereof. He conceived it to be
one of the most defective bills that ever was before Congress, because
the object intended was in nowise provided for, or utterly
impracticable.
Mr. BAYARD was of the same opinion. He had taken some pains to examine
the bill, but was obliged to conclude it extremely imperfect. The
objects of the former bill, and which was intended to be improved, were,
to prevent the citizens of the United States having any right in vessels
so employed; and also to prevent the citizens of the United States being
employed on board any such vessels. He trusted that a great majority of
the members of the House would be in favor of those principles, and
effectually promote them. It would indeed be extremely dishonorable in a
country like this, to affirm such a trade, so contrary to all those
principles held dear in the United States, and which ought to be
promoted. His desire was, that a bill should be constructed upon the
true principles of the intent of Congress: so far he thought they might
go, but no farther. To be sure, as the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr.
J. BROWN) observed, the Government could derive revenue from the
encouragement of this trade, but he thought a more dishonorable item of
revenue could not be established.
The committee was discharged.
Mr. BAYARD then moved that the bill should be referred to a select
committee.
Mr. RUTLEDGE hoped this would not be agreed to; he was not disposed at
this late day of the session to take up any new business that was not of
urgency. He thought it was perfectly unnecessary to make a new act upon
the subject; he believed the former act did every thing that was
necessary or practicable to be done. What more could be wanted than that
persons engaged in this traffic should forfeit their ships and pay a
fine, besides, in many instances, imprisonment of the person offending?
Surely that was all the occasion required. The different States which
had heretofore imported those people into the United States had
established the policy not to import any more; but in addition to this
willing restriction, the Federal Government thought proper to prevent
the trade being carried on, by our ships, to those countries which did
suffer their importation. This was going very far indeed, but so far it
was thought proper to go, to furnish a peace-offering to those
philanthropists whose urgency was great to accomplish the general
destruction of the trade. However, the activity of the people of the
four New England States first engaged them in this profitable traffic;
their produce would bring a good price on the African coast, and why
they might not enjoy the profit of it as well as the English he could
not conceive. He believed it to be impossible effectually to prevent it.
Some gentlemen, indeed, had talked of authorizing our cruisers to seize
vessels of this kind, but, suppose they were confiscated, what was to be
done with their cargoes? They could not be brought into the United
States. Where could they be carried? It was not consistent with the
policy of the West India Islands to suffer them to land there, since it
was their practice to keep these people in bondage, and they did not
want, nor could they suffer free men to inundate those colonies. He knew
of no place where they could be landed but St. Domingo, and as these
people would not have been of those who had procured the freedom of
slaves there--were not of those who had spread devastation and murder
throughout that island, it was probable they would spurn them from their
shores. What then was to be done with them? Surely no gentleman would
wish them to be drowned, and it would be as absurd to think of sending
them back to Sierra Leone! These difficulties he thought insuperable.
Mr. WALN hoped the bill would be committed, and that the provisions of
it would be made effectual to its object. As for the people of
Pennsylvania, he believed he could say they were unanimously in favor of
the trade being put an end to most completely; which was in nowise done
by the law now in force, nor by the bill now proposed. He said it was
well known, that great grievances did exist for want of the due
execution of the law, and much greater than were generally known, and
hence it was that no more was heard of it from the people on this
subject. He had been well informed that great evasions had taken place,
and that this unlawful trade was becoming more and more in use. In the
last year he believed that near forty vessels entered the West Indies
with this illicit species of commerce. In some parts of the United
States, he had been well informed, it was become so popular, that if a
vessel was seized and sold, it was impossible to get any person to bid
for her, and therefore the owner was enabled to repurchase her at a very
low price indeed. It would be much better to repeal the old law, and
open the trade, than to suffer the law to continue when nearly a
nullity. But this he believed was not the disposition of the House; he
believed the House could carry the principle into effect, and he was
sure that a very great majority of the American people would wish them
to do it.
The motion for recommitment was carried by a very large majority, and
three members appointed.
_Military Academy, &c._
Mr. EGGLESTON said, since he found the House so much disposed to prepare
for the close of the session by postponing unnecessary business, he
would move that the bill for establishing a Military Academy, and for
the better organization of the corps of Artillerists and Engineers, be
postponed till the first Monday in December next.
After some observations against the motion, by Messrs. PARKER, CHAMPLIN,
and H. LEE, and in favor of it by Messrs. EGGLESTON and SHEPARD, it was
carried--yeas 64, nays 23.
_Treaty with Great Britain._
The House went into a committee on the bill for the execution of the
27th article of the Treaty with Great Britain.
A motion of Mr. NICHOLAS was under consideration, that no person whose
case was cognizable in any of our courts should be delivered up. This
caused a lengthy debate; it was advocated by Messrs. S. SMITH,
NICHOLSON, and GALLATIN, and opposed by Messrs. BAYARD, DANA, and
DENNIS. It was negatived 45 to 42. After which the committee rose,
obtained leave to sit again, and the House adjourned.
TUESDAY, April 29.
An engrossed bill to promote the manufacture of sheet copper within the
United States, by incorporating a company for carrying on the same, was
read the third time, and passed.
THURSDAY, May 1.
_Appropriation for holding Indian Treaties._
The House resolved itself into a Committee of the whole House on the
report of the committee to whom was referred, on the seventh of March
last, the petition of William Hill and others, and, after some time
spent therein, the committee rose and reported two resolutions
thereupon; which were severally twice read, and agreed to by the House,
as follows:
_Resolved_, That the sum of ---- dollars ought to be appropriated by law
to defray the expenses of such treaty or treaties as the PRESIDENT OF
THE UNITED STATES may deem it expedient to hold with any nation or
nations of Indians south-west of the river Ohio.
_Resolved_, That provision ought to be made by law, authorizing and
enabling all persons who, under the laws of North Carolina, and in
conformity to the regulations and provisions thereof, have entered,
surveyed, located, or obtained, grants of any of the lands ceded by the
said State to the United States, in such manner as would have vested a
good title under the said State of North Carolina, if such cession had
not been made, to enter upon, occupy, and possess, the same, or to
remove thereto their location from such lands, the titles whereto shall
not be extinguished, whenever, and as soon as the Indian title or claim
to a sufficient portion of the said land shall be extinguished, under
the authority of the United States; and to possess and enjoy the same in
as full and ample manner as if the same had been derived from, or under,
the United States.
_Ordered_, That a bill or bills be brought in, pursuant to the first
resolution; and that Mr. PINCKNEY, Mr. CHAUNCEY GOODRICH, Mr. HENDERSON,
Mr. NICHOLAS, and Mr. THATCHER, do prepare and bring in the same.
SATURDAY, May 3.
_Slave Trade._
The House went into committee on the bill to prohibit carrying on the
slave trade to any foreign country. The committee rose and reported the
bill. On the question, when it should be read a third time, it was
carried for to-day. On the question for its passing, a long and warm
debate ensued.
Several attempts were made to postpone its passing, but to no effect. At
length the question was taken--yeas 67, nays 5, as follows:
YEAS.--Willis Alston, George Baer, Theodorus Bailey, Bailey
Bartlett, James A. Bayard, Phanuel Bishop, Jonathan Brace,
Robert Brown, Samuel J. Cabell, Matthew Clay, William C. C.
Claiborne, John Condit, William Cooper, Samuel W. Dana,
John Davenport, Franklin Davenport, John Dennis, William
Edmond, Joseph Eggleston, Thomas Evans, Abiel Foster,
Dwight Foster, Albert Gallatin, Henry Glenn, Chauncey
Goodrich, Elizur Goodrich, Edwin Gray, Andrew Gregg, Roger
Griswold, William Barry Grove, John A. Hanna, Robert
Goodloe Harper, Thomas Hartley, Joseph Heister, William H.
Hill, David Holmes, James H. Imlay, Aaron Kitchell, Silas
Lee, Michael Leib, Samuel Lyman, Nathaniel Macon, Lewis R.
Morris, Peter Muhlenberg, John Nicholas, Abraham Nott,
Robert Page, Thomas Pinckney, Jonas Platt, Leven Powell,
John Read, Samuel Sewall, William Shepard, John Smilie,
John Smith, David Stone, Thomas Sumter, George Thatcher,
John Chew Thomas, John Thompson, Abram Trigg, John Trigg,
Joseph B. Varnum, Peleg Wadsworth, Robert Waln, and Robert
Williams.
NAYS.--John Brown, George Dent, Joseph Dickson, Benjamin
Huger, and John Rutledge, jr.
And the House adjourned.
TUESDAY, May 6.
_Additional Revenue._
The House resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole on the further
report of the Committee of Ways and Means, on the subject of the
revenue; when the first resolution, laying an additional duty of twenty
per centum on wines, after being amended, on motion of Mr. GRISWOLD, to
read as follows, was adopted:
"_Resolved_, That it is expedient to lay an additional duty
of twenty per centum on the amount of the present duty upon
wines imported into the United States, and to vary the
scale of duties in such manner as to comport with the plan
of the Secretary of the Treasury."
The second resolution was agreed to without debate as follows:
"_Resolved_, That it is expedient to lay an additional duty
of two and a half per centum ad valorem on such goods,
wares, and merchandise, imported into the United States, as
are now subject to a duty of ten per centum ad valorem."
The third resolution was opposed by Messrs. HARPER and S. SMITH, and
supported by Mr. GRISWOLD; after which the committee rose, and obtained
leave to sit again.
WEDNESDAY, May 7.
A message from the Senate informed the House, that they have concurred
in the amendments of this House, to the bill relative to the slave trade
with several amendments, to which they desire the concurrence of the
House; also, that the Senate insist on some of their amendments
disagreed to by this House, to the bill supplementary to an act for an
amicable settlement of limits within the State of Georgia, and for
establishing a government in the Mississippi Territory.
_Additional Army._
Mr. HARPER said, that by the terms of enlistment of the additional army,
they were engaged to serve for three years, or until an amicable
adjustment of the differences existing between the United States and
France; from which circumstance, the President was precluded, even if he
knew the preliminaries of peace to be adjusted, from disbanding it until
a treaty should be actually concluded and ratified by the two
Governments--whereby the troops would be kept for perhaps six months in
service unnecessarily. The Navy and other parts of our defensive system,
were upon a different footing. He wished the Army to be placed on a
similar one, and therefore moved the following resolution:
"_Resolved_, That it is expedient to authorize the
President of the United States to discharge the additional
army thereof, as soon as the state of things between the
United States and the French Republic will warrant the
measure."
The resolution was agreed to, and referred to the Committee of the whole
House, to whom was committed the bill from the Senate, to suspend part
of the act entitled "An act to augment the Army of the United States."
_Additional Revenue._
The House again resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole on the
further report of the Committee of Ways and Means on the subject of
revenue; and the tax on drawbacks being under consideration, Mr.
GRISWOLD and Mr. HARPER again spoke for and against the motion. Mr.
NICHOLAS, Mr. HUGER, and Mr. RANDOLPH, also spoke against the motion;
after which the question was taken and negatived, only 23 votes being in
favor of it.
The third resolution, to lay an additional duty of one half per cent.
per pound on brown sugar and coffee imported into the United States was
opposed by Mr. GRISWOLD, who doubted much the propriety of laying an
additional duty on coffee, and therefore moved to strike out that
article. The motion was opposed by Mr. HARPER, and advocated by Mr.
SEWALL, who was of opinion that this article was frequently smuggled,
and was apprehensive it would be more so, if an additional duty were
laid, and therefore would injure the revenue.
The motion was carried--yeas 38, nays 21.
The question on the resolution as amended, was, after some debate, put
and carried--yeas 45, nays 28.
The fourth resolution reported, to retain two and a half per centum on
all drawbacks allowed for goods re-exported from the United States, in
addition to the sums heretofore directed to be retained by law, and also
on the whole of the additional duty on goods imported in foreign ships
or vessels, was agreed to without debate. The committee then rose, and,
upon the question, Will the House concur with the committee in their
agreement to the resolution laying an additional duty on sugar? the yeas
and nays were called for, and taken--54 to 28.
The other resolutions, as amended, were also agreed to, and the
Committee of Ways and Means directed to bring in a bill or bills
conformable thereto.
THURSDAY, May 8.
_Memory of Washington._
Mr. H. LEE, from the select committee appointed to consider what
measures it would be proper for Congress to adopt for paying suitable
respect to the memory of the man first in peace, first in war, and first
in the hearts of his countrymen--the deceased General WASHINGTON--made a
report, recommending the adoption of the following resolutions:
"_Resolved_, That the resolution of Congress passed in the
year 1783, respecting an equestrian statue of General
WASHINGTON, be carried into immediate execution, and that
the statue be placed in the centre of an area to be formed
in front of the Capitol.
"_Resolved_, That a marble monument be erected by the
United States in the Capitol at the city of Washington, in
honor of General WASHINGTON, to commemorate his services,
and to express the regrets of the American people for their
irreparable loss.
"_Resolved_, That the President of the United States be
requested to give such directions as may appear to him
proper, to carry the preceding resolutions into effect; and
that for the present, the sum of $100,000 be appropriated
for these purposes."
The resolutions were referred to a Committee of the whole House, and
immediately taken into consideration; when
Mr. HARPER moved to amend the first resolution, by inserting that a
mausoleum be erected for General WASHINGTON, in the city of Washington,
instead of the statue proposed, which was carried; the other resolutions
were negatived, of course.
The committee then rose, and the resolution, as amended by Mr. HARPER,
was agreed to by the House, and a bill ordered to be brought in pursuant
thereto.
FRIDAY, May 9.
_The Treasury Department._
The House went into a committee on the act supplementary to the act
entitled "An act to establish the Treasury Department."
The committee rose and reported the bill--which provided that the
Secretary of the Treasury should lay before Congress, at the
commencement of every session, a report on the subject of finance
together with such plans for improving the revenue as may occur to him.
Mr. GALLATIN and Mr. NICHOLAS opposed the passing of the bill, on
constitutional principles. They observed, that as all money bills were
to originate in the House of Representatives, the Senate had no right to
propose any bill by which that provision was changed; nor could the
Secretary of the Treasury, upon the same ground, propose any thing that
should originate any money bill. Heretofore, it had been usual, when
information was wanting by the House, to call for it from that
department, and the same could be done again.
It was contended by Mr. GRISWOLD and Mr. HARPER, that it was not a power
to report a bill, but merely the state of our finances, which, for want
of due notice, had heretofore been delayed, so as to throw all the most
important business upon the close of the session, whereas, by a
leisurely and mature examination, the Secretary of the Treasury would be
enabled to make a timely and complete report.
The bill passed to its third reading--43 to 39.
_Memory of Washington._
Mr. EVANS, from the committee appointed for that purpose, reported a
bill for erecting a mausoleum for GEORGE WASHINGTON, in the city of
Washington.
The bill provided that it should be one hundred feet square at the base,
and of a proportionate height.
Mr. EGGLESTON wished to hear the estimated price.
Mr. HARPER said he had an estimate from Mr. Latrobe, of Philadelphia,
who was the architect employed on the Pennsylvania Bank, the estimate of
which had rather been over the actual expense; the estimate was that a
pyramid of one hundred feet at the bottom, with nineteen steps, having a
chamber thirty feet square, made of granite, to be taken from the
Potomac, with a marble sarcophagus in the centre, and four marble
pillars on the outside, besides other proportionate ornaments, would
amount to $62,500. He hoped no objection would be made to the price,
since it could not occur on any future occasion, as _another_ WASHINGTON
_would never die_.
Mr. NICHOLAS thought every sense of respect would be as well signified
by a building of less dimensions, and it would be considerable less
expense; he moved to strike out one hundred and insert sixty. After some
debate, this was negatived.
The bill was then ordered to be engrossed for its third reading.
_Meeting of Congress._
A bill was received from the Senate appointing the time and directing
the place of the next meeting of Congress, which provided that the two
Houses should meet at the city of Washington on the third Monday in
November next.
The House went into committee thereupon, which was reported. On the
question for its third reading, it was carried--yeas 32, nays 32. The
SPEAKER voted in the affirmative, and it was ordered to a third reading
to-morrow.
SATURDAY, May 10.
_Memory of Washington._
The bill for erecting a mausoleum for GEORGE WASHINGTON, in the city of
Washington, was read a third time; and upon the question, shall the bill
pass?
Mr. KITCHELL called the yeas and nays upon it, and proceeded to give his
reasons why he would vote against the bill. He was followed by Mr.
HARPER in favor of it, and Mr. RANDOLPH against it; when the question
was taken, and the bill passed--yeas 54, nays 19, as follows:
YEAS.--Willis Alston, Bailey Bartlett, James A. Bayard,
Jonathan Brace, John Brown, Gabriel Christie, William C. C.
Claiborne, William Craik, Samuel W. Dana, Franklin
Davenport, Thomas T. Davis, John Dawson, George Dent,
Joseph Dickson, Thomas Evans, Abiel Foster, Albert
Gallatin, Henry Glenn, Chauncey Goodrich, Elizur Goodrich,
Edwin Gray, Roger Griswold, John A. Hanna, Robert Goodloe
Harper, David Holmes, Benjamin Huger, James H. Imlay, James
Jones, John Wilkes Kittera, Henry Lee, Silas Lee, Edward
Livingston, Lewis R. Morris, Peter Muhlenberg, Abraham
Nott, Robert Page, Jonas Platt, Leven Powell, John Read,
John Rutledge, jun., Samuel Sewall, James Sheafe, John
Smith, Samuel Smith, Richard Dobbs Spaight, George
Thatcher, John C. Thomas, Richard Thomas, Abram Trigg,
Philip Van Cortlandt, Peleg Wadsworth, Robert Waln, Lemuel
Williams, and Henry Woods.
NAYS.--Theodorus Bailey, Robert Brown, Matthew Clay, John
Condit, John Davenport, George Jackson, Aaron Kitchell,
Michael Leib, James Linn, Nathaniel Macon, Anthony New,
John Nicholas, John Randolph, William Shepard, John Smilie,
Thomas Sumter, John Thompson, John Trigg, and Joseph B.
Varnum.
_Next Meeting of Congress._
The bill from the Senate appointing the time and directing the place of
the next meeting of Congress, was read a third time; when
Mr. BAYARD moved that it be recommitted to a Committee of the whole
House, for the purpose of altering the time of commencing the session.
After some debate, the motion was negatived.
The question was then put, shall the bill pass? and resolved in the
affirmative--yeas 41, nays 35. The next meeting of Congress will of
course take place on the third Monday in November next.
_Imprisonment for Debt._
The bill making further provision for the relief of persons imprisoned
for debts due the United States, was taken up in committee, agreed to,
and upon the question shall the bill be engrossed for a third reading,
it passed in the affirmative--yeas 36, nays 25. The bill was
subsequently read the third time and passed--yeas 39, nays 27.
[By this bill no person indebted to the United States can be discharged
from prison, unless he shall have suffered two years imprisonment.]
_Elections of President._
A message was received from the Senate informing the House that the
Senate adhere to their disagreement to the amendments to the bill
prescribing the mode of deciding disputed elections of President and
Vice President of the United States, made by this House, and
subsequently insisted on, Whereupon,
Mr. HARPER moved that this House do also adhere to their disagreement to
recede; which was carried, and the bill, consequently, is lost.
MONDAY, May 12.
On motion of Mr. NICHOLAS, the House rescinded a resolution to adjourn
the two Houses this day, and a resolution was adopted that the President
of the Senate and the Speaker of the House should adjourn both Houses
to-morrow. The Senate amended it by proposing Wednesday. On the question
of concurrence, it was carried, 40 to 24.
A message from the Senate, informed the House that the Senate agree to
the resolution for postponing the time of adjournment of the two
Houses, with an amendment; to which they desire the concurrence of this
House.
The House proceeded to consider the amendment proposed by the Senate to
the resolution for postponing the time of adjournment: Whereupon,
_Resolved_, that this House doth agree to the said amendment.
WEDNESDAY, May 14.
_Canadian Refugees._
A message from the Senate informed the House that the Senate have passed
a bill regulating the grants of land to the Canada and Nova Scotia
refugees, with amendments.
The amendments were taken into consideration, and opposed by Mr.
GALLATIN, who said the object of the Senate was to give the refugees
land worth ten cents an acre, instead of good land worth one dollar per
acre, as proposed by this House; rather than do this, he would give them
nothing.
Mr. LIVINGSTON was of the same opinion, and hoped the House would not
concur. These people had waited eighteen years, and he thought it
extremely hard they should now be put off in this manner.
The amendments were unanimously rejected.
A message from the Senate informed the House that they adhered to the
amendment; whereupon,
Mr. GALLATIN moved that the further consideration of the bill be
postponed till the third Monday in November next, which was carried.
After receiving several messages from the PRESIDENT, notifying the
signing of various bills, there appearing no further business before the
House, on motion of Mr. C. GOODRICH a resolution for the appointment of
a joint committee to wait on the PRESIDENT, and inform him of the
proposed recess, was adopted, and was concurred in by the Senate.
Mr. C. GOODRICH, from the Joint Committee, reported that they had
performed that service, and that the PRESIDENT informed them he had no
other communication to make, except his good wishes for their health and
happiness, and that he wished them a pleasant journey to their
respective homes.
A message having been sent to the Senate to inform them this House was
ready to adjourn, after a few minutes a motion was made for that
purpose, and carried; when
The SPEAKER, after taking an affectionate farewell of the members, and
expressing his wish for their safe return and happiness, during the
recess, adjourned the House till the third Monday in November next, to
meet in the city of Washington, in the District of Columbia.