The Messages and papers therein referred to were read, and ordered that
they severally lie for consideration.
MONDAY, January 17.
Mr. BROWN, from the State of Kentucky, attended.
WEDNESDAY, January 19.
AARON BURR, Vice President of the United States, and President of the
Senate, attended.
THURSDAY, January 20.
The VICE PRESIDENT laid before the Senate a certificate of the election
of SAMUEL M'CLAY, Esq. of Northumberland county, and State of
Pennsylvania, to be a Senator of the United States from the fourth day
of March next, inclusive; and it was read and ordered to lie on file.
MONDAY, January 24.
The VICE PRESIDENT communicated a letter from the Clerk of the House of
Representatives of the State of Delaware, enclosing the credentials of
SAMUEL WHITE, Esq., elected a Senator of the United States for the term
of six years, commencing on the 4th day of March next; and they were
read.
_Ordered_, That they lie on file.
WEDNESDAY, January 26.
JAMES ROSS, from Pennsylvania, attended.
THURSDAY, January 27.
Mr. Ross presented the several representations and memorials of Richard
Basset, Egbert Benson, Benjamin Bourne, William Griffith, Samuel
Hitchcock, B. P. Key, C. Magill, Jeremiah Smith, G. K. Taylor, William
Tilghman, and Oliver Wolcott, judges of the circuit courts under the
late act, entitled "An act to provide for the more convenient
organization of the Courts of the United States;" stating that, since
the repeal of the said act, no law had been made for assigning to them
the execution of any Judicial functions, nor has any provision been made
for the payment of their stipulated compensations; and most respectfully
requesting Congress to review the existing laws with respect to the
officers in question; and the memorials were read.
_Ordered_, That they be referred to Messrs. MORRIS, ROSS, and DAYTON, to
consider and report thereon, and that the memorials be printed for the
use of the Senate. The memorial is as follows
_To the Honorable the Senate and House of Representatives
in Congress assembled_:
The undersigned most respectfully submit the following
resolution and memorial.
By an act of Congress passed on the thirteenth day of
February, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight
hundred and one, entitled "An act to provide for the more
convenient organization of the courts of the United
States," certain judicial offices were created, and courts
established, called circuit courts of the United States.
In virtue of appointments made under the Constitution of
the United States, the undersigned became vested with the
offices so created, and received commissions authorizing
them to hold the same, with the emoluments thereunto
appertaining, during their good behavior.
During the last session an act of Congress passed, by which
the above-mentioned law was declared to be repealed; since
which no law has been made for assigning to your
memorialists the execution of any judicial functions, nor
has any provision been made for the payment of their
stipulated compensations.
Under these circumstances, and finding it expressly
declared in the Constitution of the United States, that
"The judges both of the supreme and inferior courts shall
hold their offices during good behavior, and shall, at
stated times, receive for their services a compensation
which shall not be diminished during their continuance in
office," the undersigned, after the most deliberate
consideration, are compelled to represent it as their
opinion, that the rights secured to them by the
constitution, as members of the Judicial Department, have
been impaired.
With this sincere conviction, and influenced by a sense of
public duty, they most respectfully request of Congress to
review the existing laws which respect the offices in
question, and to define the duties to be performed by the
undersigned, by such provisions as shall be consistent with
the constitution, and the convenient administration of
justice.
The right of the undersigned to their compensations, they
sincerely believe to be secured by the constitution,
notwithstanding any modification of the Judicial
Department, which, in the opinion of Congress, public
convenience may recommend. This right, however, involving a
personal interest, will be cheerfully submitted to Judicial
examination and decision, in such manner as the wisdom and
impartiality of Congress may prescribe.
That judges should not be deprived of their offices or
compensations without misbehavior appears to the
undersigned to be among the first and best established
principles of the American constitutions; and in the
various reforms they have undergone, it has been preserved
and guarded with increased solicitude.
On this basis the Constitution of the United States has
laid the foundation of the Judicial Department, and
expressed its meaning in terms equally plain and
peremptory.
This being the deliberate and solemn opinion of the
undersigned, the duty of their stations requires that they
should declare it to the Legislative body. They regret the
necessity which compels them to make the representation,
and they confide that it will be attributed to a conviction
that they ought not voluntarily to surrender rights and
authorities intrusted to their protection, not for their
personal advantage, but for the benefit of the community.
THURSDAY, February 3.
_Memorial of Judges._
Agreeably to the order of the day, the Senate took into consideration
the report of the committee on the several memorials of the judges,
under the late act to provide for the more convenient organization of
the courts of the United States. The committee report as follows:
That the petitioners were judges of certain courts,
inferior to the Supreme Court, constituted by an act of the
13th of February, 1801, and duly commissioned to hold their
offices during good behavior.
That, while holding and exercising their offices, an act
was passed on the 8th of March last, to repeal the said act
of the 13th of February, 1801, and transfer the duties of
the said judges from them to others.
That a question has arisen whether, by reason of the
premises, the said petitioners be deprived of their
offices.
That this question, depending on the construction of the
laws and Constitution of the United States, is not properly
cognizable by the Senate.
The committee, therefore, conceive it improper either to
give reasons or express opinions; but they consider it as a
question of high and serious import, and believe that a
speedy investigation and final decision is of great moment
to the commonwealth.
Wherefore, they submit the following resolution.
_Resolved_, That the President of the United States be
requested to cause an information, in the nature of a _quo
warranto_, to be filed by the Attorney General against
Richard Basset, one of the said petitioners, for the
purpose of deciding judicially on their claims.
Mr. MORRIS said, I rise, Mr. PRESIDENT, as chairman of the committee
whose report you have just had the goodness to read, for the purpose of
explaining their reasons. If this were a common or an ordinary occasion,
if no heats had been excited, if there were no unpleasant, no tormenting
recollections, a measure so plain, so easy, so simple, would require
neither argument nor persuasion. It would be adopted for its own
interior evidence, and from the general sense of propriety. Unhappily,
sir, this is not the case. Serious differences of opinion have existed,
and still exist on the subject with which it is connected. From these
have arisen disputes, divisions, bickerings. There is not, I fear, in
the minds of men, that calm impartiality which is needful to fair
investigation. There remains much of prejudice, of irritability.
Your committee have pursued the course which appeared to be proper, not
only in itself, but according to the existent circumstances. Gentlemen
will easily see that they might have made an elaborate report,
containing a long detail of reasons to establish a favorite conclusion;
and a slight knowledge of the forms of business will show, that they
might have placed that report at length on your journals. But would this
have been right? Would it have tended to conciliate? Would it have been
a proper return for the unanimity with which your committee was chosen?
Surely it would not; and is it not the duty of every good citizen to
heal, as far as possible, the wounds of society? To calm those
irritations which disturb its repose? To remove all things which may
alarm, torment, or exacerbate?
Mr. President, your committee have no intention, no wish to revive a
discussion of points already settled. While the act of last session was
in agitation, we opposed it steadily, pertinaciously. But that act has
become a law, and to the authority of the law we bow submissively. While
in suspense, we thought it our duty, as Senators, to oppose it. But
since it has been adopted, according to the forms of the constitution,
we know that as citizens we are bound to obey. With these deep
impressions, then, of what is due to the supreme law of our land, I
shall proceed to the report of your committee, and endeavor to explain
its several parts.
Gentlemen will perceive that the question which the memorialists have
submitted to our investigation is, whether the law of last session has
deprived them of their office of judge. Your committee consider this
question as not being cognizable by the Senate. It is not for the
Senate, nor the Representatives, nor both combined, to interpret their
own acts. We are a part of the Legislature. A part of the Executive
power is also delegated to us. If the Judiciary be added, it will
constitute a tyranny. It is, indeed, the very definition of tyranny
which has been given by those best acquainted with the subject. This
Senate can have no wish to arrogate power. It is too just, too wise. If
a sense of propriety did not prevent, prudence alone would forbid the
attempt. This body is too feeble for the exercise of so much authority.
Its form, its constitution, the mode and manner of its creation and
existence, the strength and structure of its members, render it
incapable of sustaining a greater weight of power.
Your committee, sir, have ventured to express their belief, that the
question should be speedily settled. I learned in early youth, from the
volumes of professional science, that it is expedient for the
Commonwealth that a speedy end should be put to litigation; and if it be
important that litigation should cease between man and man, how much
more important that a litigated point of public right, which interests
and agitates the whole community, should be laid at rest? And if this be
important in the general course of things, is it not, under present
circumstances, indispensable? And how is it to be effected? By an
exertion of Legislative might; by force. Remember, force will excite
resistance. Such is the nature of the human heart. Free citizens revolt
with disdain at the exercise of force. But judgment commands their
prompt, their willing obedience. When the law is known, when it is
declared by the proper tribunals, all will bow to its authority. You,
then, may expect a full, and quiet, and general submission. But while it
is litigated and uncertain what the law is, differences will exist, and
discord will prevail.
It is under these impressions, sir, that your committee have presumed to
offer the resolutions on your table; and as some of the technical terms
may not be familiar to every gentleman, it may be proper to state the
kind of proceeding which is recommended.
The attorney general, or, as he is denominated in French idiom, the
public accuser, will institute, before the proper tribunal, an inquiry
by what authority these men claim to hold and exercise the office of
judge. It will then be incumbent upon them, either to disclaim the
office, and then there is an end of the question; or else (claiming it)
to establish their right. And to do this, they must prove two things;
first, that the office exists, and secondly, that of right it belongs to
them. Failing of either, their claim is gone.
Now, sir, it may be well to consider the decisions which may be made,
and their probable effect. I take it for granted, that these gentlemen,
who have asked a Judicial decision, will not disclaim, and that whatever
judgment may be given in the first instance, the cause will be brought
up to the Supreme Court. If the judgment, in the last resort, should be
(as it probably would be) against the claim, all complaint will be
quieted, and all opposition will cease. Some then, indeed, might
triumph. For my own part, I should find in it great consolation--the
consolation of knowing that, however wrong may have been my own
opinions, the Supreme Legislature of my country have done right. The
pride of opinion might, indeed, be wounded; but God forbid, that from
motives of pride, or from any other motive, I should hear, without deep
concern, that the Legislature of my country have violated that sacred
charter from which they derive their authority!
But suppose an opinion different, contrarient, or the very reverse (for
that also is possible.) Will the judges rudely declare that you have
violated the constitution, unmindful of your duty, and regardless of
your oath? No. With that decency which becomes the Judicial character;
that decency which upholds national dignity and impresses obedience on
the public will; that decency, the handmaid of the graces, which more
adorns a magistrate than ermine, aye, than royal robes; with that
decency which so peculiarly befits their state and condition, they will
declare what the Legislature meant. They will never presume to believe,
much less to declare, that you meant to violate the constitution. There
will be no dangerous and hateful clashing of public authorities. They
will never question the exercise of that high discretion with which you
are invested. They will not deny your full supremacy. They will not
examine into your motives, nor assign improper views. They will respect
you so long as they preserve a due respect for themselves. They will
declare, that in assigning duties to one officer, and taking them from
another, you have to consult only your own convictions of what the
interest or convenience or the people may require. They will modestly
conclude, that you did not mean to abolish the offices which the
constitution had forbidden you to abolish; and, therefore, finding that
it was not your intention to abolish, they will declare that the offices
still exist. Such, sir, would be the language of your supreme Judiciary,
from the high sense they entertain of their duty. And, if it were
decent to suggest in this Senate, that they were lost to a sense of
duty, can it be believed, that a few feeble judges will dare oppose
themselves to the power of the Legislature?
The VICE PRESIDENT rose, and said he must call the attention of the
Senate to the point in discussion, which was, whether the Senate would
request the President to cause a process to be instituted for the
purpose of ascertaining whether the petitioners still hold the office of
judge. On this question, it could not be in order to go back to a law
passed at the last session, and to discuss the merits of that law.
Mr. JACKSON said, it appeared by the memorial that the petitioners
considered themselves as being still judges, notwithstanding the law of
last session. He thought, therefore, it could not be out of order to
show that that act deprived them of their offices.
Mr. WRIGHT premised, that he would endeavor to confine his remarks to
the point before the Senate. He felt no disposition to travel again over
the ground which had been traversed at the last session.
The petition was addressed to both Houses, and prayed for two things;
first, that Congress, in their Legislative capacity, would assign to the
petitioners some Judicial duties; and secondly, that they would
authorize a Judicial investigation of their claim to compensation. The
committee, therefore, ought to have confined their inquiries to these
points, and to have reported accordingly. Instead of that, they had
reported a resolution, which, if adopted, would be neither a grant nor a
denial of the prayer of the petition. In doing this, the committee had
exceeded their powers, and proposed a measure which the Senate itself
was not authorized to adopt.
Mr. W. took a review of the constitutional powers of the Senate, in its
Legislative and Executive capacities, and inquired, Have we any
constitutional authority to make such a request of the President? In
what part of the constitution is such power delegated to this House? Are
we to make the request as private gentlemen, or as a constitutional
organ of the Government. If as private gentlemen, the act would clearly
be a nullity; the President would still be at liberty to comply with the
request, or not, as he might think proper. If as a constitutional organ
of the Government, where is the power given to the Senate? And what
would be the remedy if he should refuse to comply? The Senate is the
constitutional adviser of the President in the formation of treaties,
and in the appointment of officers, &c. The constitution expressly
declares that the President shall exercise these powers by and with the
advice and consent of the Senate. Here, then, it is their right and
their duty to advise him. But the constitution further says: "He shall
take care that the laws be faithfully executed." Have the Senate any
authority to advise him as to the faithful execution of the laws? They
can go no further than they are expressly commissioned by the
constitution. The specification of particular Executive powers, by the
constitution, is a denial of all others. _Admissio unius est exclusio
alterius_; and, as the constitution has given no power to this effect,
it follows that no such power can be exercised by the Senate. If the
courts have power to try the validity of laws of Congress, they can
exercise that power as well without the authority of this resolution as
with it. If they have not the power, neither this House nor the
Legislature can give it them. The duties and the powers of the Supreme
Court are defined by the constitution. Should the Senate, then, adopt
the resolution, the Supreme Court would have no power to act under it,
unless that power is given by the constitution. Let us, then, examine
the authority of this court. The constitution says: "In all cases
affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers, and Consuls, and those in
which a State shall be a party, the Supreme Court shall have original
jurisdiction." Will the gentlemen say that these judges are ambassadors,
other public ministers or consuls, or that they are a state? If not, the
Supreme Court can have no jurisdiction of the case, and the committee
have imposed upon the Senate a resolution which they had no authority to
submit. As to the law of the last session, by which these judges had
been deprived of their offices, Mr. W. had no fear that the Supreme
Court, or any body else would attempt to set it aside. The whole nation
has approved the measure, as many of those who opposed it have fatally
experienced.
The question on agreeing to the resolution was now taken, and determined
in the negative--yeas 13, nays 15, as follows:
YEAS.--Messrs. Dayton, Dwight, Foster, Hillhouse, Howard,
J. Mason, Morris, Ogden, Olcott, Plumer, Ross, Tracy,
Wells, and White.
NAYS.--Messrs. Anderson, Baldwin, Bradley, Breckenridge,
Brown, Clinton, Cocke, Ellery, T. Foster, Jackson, Logan,
Nicholas, Stone, Sumter, and Wright.
_Ordered_, That the memorialists have leave to withdraw their memorial.
MONDAY, February 14.
_The Mississippi Question._
After the Senate had finished its deliberations upon the Legislative
business before it--
Mr. Ross rose and said, that although he came from a part of the country
where the late events upon the Mississippi had excited great alarm and
solicitude, he had hitherto forborne the expression of his sentiments,
or to bring forward any measure relative to the unjustifiable,
oppressive conduct of the officers of the Spanish Government at New
Orleans. He had waited thus long in the hope that some person, more
likely than himself to conciliate and unite the opinions of a majority
of the Senate, would have offered efficacious measures for their
consideration; but, seeing the session now drawing to a close, without
any such proposition, he could not reconcile a longer silence either to
his own sense of propriety or to the duty he owed to his constituents.
He would not consent to go home without making one effort, however
feeble or unsuccessful, to avert the calamity which threatened the
Western country. Present appearances, he confessed, but little justified
the hope that any thing he might propose would be adopted, yet it would
at least afford him some consolation, hereafter, that he had done his
duty, when the storm was approaching, by warning those who had power in
their hands of the means which ought to be employed to resist it.
He was fully aware that the Executive of the United States had acted;
that he had sent an Envoy Extraordinary to Europe. This was the peculiar
province, and perhaps the duty of the President. He would not say that
it was unwise in this state of our affairs to prepare for remonstrance
and negotiation, much less was he then about to propose any measure that
would thwart negotiation, or embarrass the President. On the other hand,
he was convinced that more than negotiation was absolutely necessary,
that more power and more means ought to be given to the President, in
order to render his negotiations efficacious. Could the President
proceed further, even if he thought more vigorous measures proper and
expedient? Was it in his power to repel and punish the indignity put
upon the nation? Could he use the public force to redress our wrongs?
Certainly not. This must be the act of Congress. They are now to judge
of ulterior measures; they must give the power, and vote the means to
vindicate, in a becoming manner, the wounded honor and the best
interests of the country.
Mr. R. said, he held in his hands certain resolutions for that purpose,
and, before he offered them to the Senate, he would fully explain his
reasons for bringing them forward and pressing them with earnestness, as
the best system the United States could now pursue.
It was certainly unnecessary to waste the time of that body in stating
that we had a solemn explicit treaty with Spain; that this treaty had
been wantonly and unprovokedly violated, not only in what related to the
Mississippi, but by the most flagrant, destructive spoliations of our
commerce, on every part of the ocean, where Spanish armed vessels met
the American flag. These spoliations were of immense magnitude, and
demanded the most serious notice of our Government. They had been
followed by an indignity and a direct infraction of our treaty relative
to the Mississippi, which bore an aspect not to be dissembled or
mistaken.
To the free navigation of that river we had an undoubted right from
nature, and from the position of our Western country. This right, and
the right of deposit in the island of New Orleans, had been solemnly
acknowledged and fixed by treaty in 1795. That treaty had been in
actual operation and execution for many years; and now, without any
pretence of abuse or violation on our part, the officers of the Spanish
Government deny the right, refuse the place of deposit, and add the most
offensive of all insults, by forbidding us from landing on any part of
their territory, and shutting us out as a common nuisance.
By whom has this outrage been offered? By those who have constantly
acknowledged our right, and now tell us that they are no longer owners
of the country! They have given it away, and, because they have no
longer a right themselves, therefore, they turn us out, who have an
undoubted right! Such an insult, such unprovoked malignity of conduct,
no nation but this would affect to mistake. And yet we not only hesitate
as to the course which interest and honor call us to pursue, but we bear
it with patience, tameness, and apparent unconcern.
Sir, said Mr. R., whom does this infraction of the treaty and the
natural rights of this country most intimately affect? If the wound
inflicted on national honor be not sensibly felt by the whole nation, is
there not a large portion of your citizens exposed to immediate ruin by
a continuance of this state of things? The calamity lights upon all
those who live upon the Western waters. More than half a million of your
citizens are by this cut off from a market. What would be the language,
what would be the feelings of gentlemen in this House, were such an
indignity offered on the Atlantic coast? What would they say if the
Chesapeake, the Delaware, or the Bay of New York were shut up, and all
egress prohibited by a foreign power? And yet none of these waters
embrace the interests of so many as the Mississippi. The numbers and the
property affected by shutting this river, are greater than any thing
that could follow by the blockade of a river on the Atlantic coast.
Every part of the Union was equally entitled to protection, and no good
reason could be offered why one part should be less attended to than
another.
Fortunately for this country, there could be no doubt in the present
case; our national right had been acknowledged, and solemnly secured by
treaty. The treaty had been long in a state of execution. It was
violated and denied without provocation or apology. The treaty then was
no security. This evident right was one, the security of which ought not
to be precarious: it was indispensable that the enjoyment of it should
be placed beyond all doubt. He declared it therefore to be his firm and
mature opinion, that so important a right would never be secure, while
the mouth of the Mississippi was exclusively in the hands of the
Spaniards. Caprice and enmity occasion constant interruption. From the
very position of our country, from its geographical shape, from motives
of complete independence, the command of the navigation of the river
ought to be in our hands.
We are now wantonly provoked to take it. Hostility in its most offensive
shape has been offered by those who disclaim all right to the soil and
the sovereignty of that country--a hostility fatal to the happiness of
the Western world. Why not seize then what is so essential to us as a
nation? Why not expel the wrongdoers?--wrongdoers by their own
confession, to whom by a seizure we are doing no injury. Paper
contracts, or treaties, have proved too feeble. Plant yourselves on the
river, fortify the banks, invite those who have an interest at stake to
defend it: do justice to yourselves when your adversaries deny it; and
leave the event to Him who controls the fate of nations.
Why submit to a tardy, uncertain negotiation, as the only means of
regaining what you have lost: a negotiation with those who have wronged
you; with those who declare they have no right, at the moment they
deprive you of yours? When in possession, you will negotiate with more
advantage. You will then be in the condition to keep others out. You
will be in the actual exercise of jurisdiction over all your claims;
your people will have the benefits of a lawful commerce. When your
determination is known, you will make an easy and an honorable
accommodation with any other claimant. The present possessors have no
pretence to complain, for they have no right to the country by their own
confession. The Western people will discover that you are making every
effort they could desire for their protection. They will ardently
support you in the contest, if a contest becomes necessary. Their all
will be at stake, and neither their zeal nor their courage need be
doubted.
Suppose that this course be not now pursued. Let me warn gentlemen how
they trifle with the feelings, the hopes, and the fears of such a body
of men, who inhabit the Western waters. Let every honorable man put the
question to himself; how would half a million round him be affected by
such a calamity, and no prompt measures taken by the Government to
redress it? These men have arms in their hands; the same arms with which
they proved victorious over their savage neighbors. They have a daring
spirit; they have ample means of subsistence; and they have men disposed
to lead them on to revenge their wrongs. Are you certain that they will
wait the end of negotiation? When they hear that nothing has been done
for their immediate relief, they will probably take their resolution and
act. Indeed, from all we have heard, there is great reason to believe
that they will, or that they may have already taken that resolution.
They know the nature of the obstruction, they know the weakness of the
country; they are sure of present success, and they have a bold river to
bear them forward to the place of action. They only want a leader to
conduct them, and it would be strange, if with such means and such a
spirit, a leader should not soon present himself.
Suppose they do go, and do chase away the present oppressors, and that
in the end they are overpowered and defeated by a stronger foe than the
present feeble possessors. They will never return to you, for you cannot
protect them. They will make the best compromise they can with the power
commanding the mouth of the river, who, in effect, has thereby the
command of their fortunes. Will such a bargain be of light or trivial
moment to the Atlantic States. Buonaparte will then say to you, my
French West India colonies, and those of my allies, can be supplied from
my colony of Louisiana, with flour, pork, beef, lumber, and any other
necessary. These articles can be carried by my own ships, navigated by
my own sailors. If you, on the Atlantic coast, wish to trade with my
colonies in those articles, you must pay fifteen or twenty per cent, of
an impost. We want no further supplies from you, and revenue to France
must be the condition of all future intercourse. What will you say to
this? It will be vain to address your Western brethren, and complain
your commerce is ruined, your revenue dwindles, and your condition is
desperate. They will reply that you came not to their assistance in the
only moment you could have saved them; that you balanced between
national honor and sordid interest, and suffered them to be borne down
and subdued, at a time when for a trifle you could have secured the
Mississippi; that now their interest must be consulted, and it forbade
any assistance to you, when following in the same train of ruin which
overwhelmed them. If the evil does not immediately proceed the full
length of disunion, yet the strength, the unity of exertion, the union
of interest will be gone. We are no longer one people, and
representatives from that part of the country in our public councils,
will partake of the spirit and breathe the sentiments of a distinct
nation; they will rob you of your public lands; they will not submit to
taxes; they will form a girdle round the Southern States, which may be
denominated a foreign yoke, and render the situation of that country
very precarious as to its peace and past connections. Indeed, every
aspect of such a state of things is gloomy and alarming to men who take
the trouble of reflecting upon it.
Where is the nation, ancient or modern, that has borne such treatment
without resentment of resistance? Where is the nation that will respect
another that is passive under such humiliating degradation and disgrace?
Your outlet to market closed, next they will trample you under foot upon
your own territory which borders upon theirs! Yet you will not stir, you
will not arm a single man; you will negotiate! Negotiation alone, under
such circumstances, must be hopeless. No. Go forward, remove the
aggressors, clear away the obstructions, restore your possession with
your own hand, and use your sword if resistance be offered. Call upon
those who are most injured, to redress themselves; you have only to give
the call, you have men enough near to the scene, without sending a man
from this side the mountains; force sufficient, and more than
sufficient, for a prompt execution of your orders. If money be an
object, one half of the money which would be consumed and lost by delay
and negotiation, would put you in possession; then you may negotiate
whether you shall abandon it and go out again.
I say, also, let us go and redress ourselves; you will have the whole
nation with you. On no question since the Declaration of Independence,
has the nation been so unanimous as upon this. We have at different
times suffered great indignity and outrages from different European
Powers; but none so palpable, so inexcusable, so provoking, or of such
magnitude in their consequences, as this. Upon none has public opinion
united so generally as this. It is true we have a lamentable division of
political opinion among us, which has produced much mischief, and may
produce much greater than any we have yet felt. On this question, party
spirit ought to sink and disappear. My opinions are well known, and are
not likely to change; but I candidly, and with all possible sincerity,
declare my conviction to be clear, that there will not be a dissenting
voice in the Western country if this course be taken; that so far as my
own abilities go, they shall be exerted to the utmost to support it; and
I know that my friends on this floor with whom I have long thought and
acted, have too high a regard for the national honor, and the best
interests of their country, to hesitate a moment giving the same pledge
of their honest determination to support and render these measures
effectual, if taken: call them ours, if you please, we take the
responsibility, and leave the execution of them with you. For, as to
myself or my friends, no agency is wished, except that of uniting with
you in rousing the spirit, and calling out the resources of the country,
to protect itself against serious aggression, and the total subjection
and loss of the Western country.
Mr. R. then read his resolutions, which are as follows:
"_Resolved_, That the United States have an indisputable
right to the free navigation of the river Mississippi, and
to a convenient place of deposit for their produce and
merchandise in the island of New Orleans.
"That the late infraction of such their unquestionable
right, is an aggression hostile to their honor and
interest.
"That it does not consist with the dignity or safety of
this Union to hold a right so important by a tenure so
uncertain.
"That it materially concerns such of the American citizens
as dwell on the Western waters, and is essential to the
union, strength, and prosperity of these States, that they
obtain complete security for the full and peaceable
enjoyment of such their absolute right.
"That the President be authorized to take immediate
possession of such place or places, in the said island, or
the adjacent territories, as he may deem fit and
convenient for the purposes aforesaid; and to adopt such
other measures for obtaining that complete security as to
him in his wisdom shall seem meet.
"That he be authorized to call into actual service any
number of the militia of the States of South Carolina,
Georgia, Ohio, Kentucky, Tennessee, or of the Mississippi
Territory, which he may think proper, not exceeding fifty
thousand, and to employ them, together with the military
and naval forces of the Union, for effecting the objects
above mentioned.
"That the sum of five millions of dollars be appropriated
to the carrying into effect the foregoing resolutions, and
that the whole or any part of that sum be paid or applied,
on warrants drawn in pursuance of such directions as the
President may, from time to time, think proper to give to
the Secretary of the Treasury."[69]
MONDAY, February 21.
The VICE PRESIDENT communicated the credentials of THEODORUS BAILEY,
appointed a Senator by the State of New York, to take his seat after the
third day of March next; which were read, and ordered to lie on file.
TUESDAY, February 22.
_Purchase of Louisiana._
In Executive session, the bill, entitled "An act making further
provision for the expenses attending the intercourse between the United
States and foreign nations," was read the third time.
On the question, Shall this bill pass? it was determined in the
affirmative--yeas 14, nays 12, as follows:
YEAS.--Messrs. Anderson, Baldwin, Bradley, Breckenridge,
Clinton, Cocke, Ellery, T. Foster, Jackson, Logan, S. T.
Mason, Nicholas, Sumter, and Wright.
NAYS.--Messrs. Dayton, D. Foster, Hillhouse, Howard, J.
Mason, Morris, Olcott, Plumer, Ross, Stone, Wells and
White.