The PRESIDENT laid before the Senate a letter from Mr. Smith of
Maryland, stating that being appointed by the Executive of that State
a Senator in conformity with the constitution, until the next meeting
of the Legislature, which will take place on the 5th day of June next,
he submits to the determination of the Senate the question, whether an
appointment under the Executive of Maryland, to represent that State in
the Senate of the United States, will or will not cease on the first
day of the meeting of the Legislature thereof? and the letter was read;
and, after debate, it was agreed that the further consideration thereof
be postponed until to-morrow.
WEDNESDAY, May 31.
STEPHEN R. BRADLEY, from the State of Vermont, attended.
_Batture at New Orleans._
Mr. GILES presented the memorial of Edward Livingston, of New Orleans,
stating that, for a long time prior to the 25th January, 1804, he was
in peaceable possession of a parcel of land called the Batture, in
front of the suburb of St. Mary's, in the city of New Orleans. That,
on the 25th of January, he was forcibly removed by the Marshal of the
district, under the orders of the President of the United States,
notwithstanding an injunction had been granted by the superior court
against the execution of the warrant; and praying that the possession
may be restored to him, and that such measures may be pursued as the
wisdom of Congress may devise, for providing a legal decision on the
title of the United States, if it shall be supposed they have any, to
the property in question; and the memorial was read, and referred to
Messrs. GILES, ANDERSON, HILLHOUSE, WHITE, and WHITESIDE, to consider
and report thereon.
THURSDAY, June 1.
_Non-Intercourse Act--Extended to all public
armed Vessels._
Mr. GILES offered the following amendment to the first section, to be
inserted after the word "assembled:"
"That the provisions of the two first sections of the act,
entitled 'An act to interdict the commercial intercourse
between the United States and Great Britain and France, and
their dependencies, and for other purposes, shall extend to all
public armed ships and vessels of all foreign nations, and the
same shall be, and are hereby, continued and made permanent,
subject, nevertheless, to any modifications and regulations
which may hereafter be made by treaty."
Mr. G. said he felt himself constrained to move this amendment at
this time, because he found it impossible to avoid a consideration of
the subject involved in it, although he had heretofore hoped that it
would not necessarily pass in review during the present session. He
said this necessity arose from the limitation of these sections of the
act at the last session. The connection of these sections with the
commercial non-intercourse system, was contrary to his opinion at that
time; he then wished the subject to be taken up and acted upon in a
separate bill, and made the permanent law of the land. His opinion then
gave way to the respect he felt for the opinion of others. This will
appear from the resolution he then moved, "to extend the interdiction
to the public armed ships and vessels of all foreign nations." In
consequence of connecting that subject with the general commercial
non-intercourse, and limiting its duration with that act, it was now
rendered a very delicate question. His proposition, however, was, to do
now, what it was right to have done at the last session. He said that
the proposition was founded upon the principle, that the United States
had as absolute and unqualified a right to exclusive jurisdiction over
the marine leagues usually attached to independent nations, as to their
territorial jurisdiction, and as a consequence from that principle,
foreign nations had no more right to send armed ships within our
acknowledged marine jurisdiction, than they had to send an army within
our territorial jurisdiction. This proposition is, therefore, merely
municipal, formed upon an unquestionable right, and it is dictated by
the same spirit of impartiality as that which dictated the original
non-intercourse law. Indeed, it appeared to him the only impartial
course now left us, as it respects the belligerents. It ought to
preserve the most perfect impartiality, which, Mr. Canning so justly
tells us, "is the essence of neutrality."
Mr. G. said it could not escape observation, that, in the overtures
made by the British Cabinet for the revocation of the Orders in Council
of the 7th of January and the 11th of November, the obligation to
protect our neutral rights against France, heretofore offered on the
part of our Government, in case of her perseverance in her hostile
edicts, had been entirely overlooked, or unconditionally dispensed
with. He said he derived much satisfaction from this liberal conduct on
the part of the British Government, because it manifested a confidence
in the honor and firmness of our Government, which must be peculiarly
gratifying to every American; but it rather increased than lessened
the obligation to persevere in protecting our neutral rights against
French aggressions, if they should be persevered in, contrary to his
expectation.
The motive or ground of resisting the aggressions of France cannot,
under this overture, be mistaken. In the former case, it might have
seemed as if the resistance was dictated by a stipulated obligation
to Great Britain to make it in this; it can only be dictated by a
just sense of our own honor, character, and interests, which is
left perfectly uncontrolled by the British overture. As this latter
motive is the more honorable, it ought to be the more scrupulously
adhered to and enforced. He had no hesitation in saying he had
uniformly been influenced by this motive alone, entirely disconnected
with any stipulated obligation to Great Britain; and under this
influence, alone, he would be found at all times as ready to resist
the aggressions of France, as he had at any time been those of Great
Britain, if they should, unfortunately, be persevered in; but, at the
same time, he wished to take away every pretext for such perseverance,
by persevering in a conduct of the strictest and most scrupulous
impartiality toward all the belligerents.
At the last session he had supposed, under the general interdiction
of all foreign armed vessels, some regulations and modifications, as
exceptions from the general rule, might be made by law, but further
reflection had satisfied him that the preferable mode was by treaty.
He would state two or three reasons for this preference:
1. It will tend to avoid collisions with all foreign nations.
Regulations made by law might not suit the views of foreign nations,
whereas their consent would be necessary in treaties.
2. It will give us the aid of a stipulated obligation on the part of
the foreign nation making the treaty, to enforce the arrangement. In
the case of Great Britain this consideration is of great importance.
Its importance results from the strength of her navy, compared with the
weakness of ours.
3. By treaty we may obtain what the lawyers call a _quid pro quo_. We
may want, at some future time, the use of some British ports, which she
would readily give for the use of ours. He said he would act liberally
with her in this respect; and, he believed, considering Great Britain
now at war, and the United States at peace, it would rather accelerate
than retard the expected negotiation. He said he was as much opposed to
throwing any impediment in the way of the expected negotiation as any
gentleman in the United States.
Great Britain cannot, and will not complain. The municipal right now
proposed to be carried into effect, is admitted by Great Britain in its
broadest extent, and will not be disputed by Mr. Canning at the present
moment. This will appear from Mr. Canning's declarations in the debates
of the last session of Parliament. He said he did not know whether it
was correct to read newspapers in evidence, to ascertain the opinions
and expressions of the speaker, but if the Senate would be content with
this species of evidence, contained in a Ministerial paper, he would
read it for their information. Mr. G. then read the following extract
of Mr. Canning's speech, taken from a British Ministerial paper:
_Extract from Mr. Canning's speech in Parliament._
"At the time the application for a compromise had been made by
the American Government, there was an order in force excluding
British ships of war from the American ports, while French
ships of war were admitted into them; and, consequently, if
the terms offered by America had been accepted, our commerce
would have been permitted to America without a ship of war to
protect it, while the French commerce would be excluded, at
the same time that French ships of war would be admitted if
they could succeed in getting there. The ports of America would
become nests for French privateers against British commerce.
As to the tendency of the measures in agitation in America, he
could afford the right honorable gentleman some consolation, by
assuring him that they would not have all the ill consequences
he seemed to apprehend. A circumstance appeared by the report
of the committee of Congress, though clothed in hostile
language, which, if made known to His Majesty's Government in
amicable terms, might have led to the acceptance of the terms
proposed. The circumstance he alluded to was the resolution
for excluding from American ports the ships of war not of
Great Britain, but of the belligerents. The Americans, in
their character of neutrals, had unquestionably a right to
exclude the ships of war of both belligerents from their
ports, but could not confine them exclusively to those of one
of the belligerents without a violation of that impartiality
which is the essence of the neutral character. Yet, when that
proposition should be disposed of, the whole of the difficulty
would not be surmounted, as much would still remain to be
accommodated. Another point, in which fault had been charged
upon his conduct with respect to America, was his having stated
that the system would not be given up while the smallest link
of the confederation against Great Britain existed."
It will be observed that two important conclusions may be deduced from
these observations: 1. That the exercise of this municipal right is
unquestionable. 2. That Mr. Canning's objection to its former exercise
by proclamation was to its limitation, not its extension.
His objection is to its exercise against Great Britain exclusively and
not against her enemies. At the time of making his speech, Mr. Canning
thought the interdiction was extended to all the belligerents; in which
case, so far from complaining of its exercise, he says it would furnish
an inducement to an accommodation, and his instructions to Mr. Erskine
were, no doubt, given under this expectation. This was the ground
taken by the report of the committee of the House of Representatives,
in the last session, and the Senate went further, by extending the
interdiction to the public armed ships of all foreign nations; those
of peace as well as those of war. This gave the transaction more
strongly the character of a mere municipal regulation. This principle
was narrowed down, in this bill, to apply merely to Great Britain
and France, and left out altogether the other belligerent powers.
Mr. Canning will probably be much surprised at this limitation; and
conceive hostility more pointed than he had anticipated; some of the
points may, however, be a little blunted by including France, the most
operating and unmanageable of her enemies. He said he did not wish to
go one atom beyond Mr. Canning's opinion upon this occasion. He took
great pleasure in concurring with Mr. Canning upon this point. It
was the first instance in which he had concurred in opinion with the
gentleman; but he hoped it would not be the last, especially when the
opinion favored the rights and promoted the interest of the United
States.
Mr. Canning must have acted under this impression when he agreed to
make the honorable reparation he had done for the unauthorized attack
upon the Chesapeake, without requiring a previous revocation of the
interdiction of British ships. As this revocation was not demanded nor
promised, the arrangement now ought to be made on general principles of
justice. He said, without feeling or expressing any regret at any thing
he had said or proposed at the last session, he was now as willing
as any gentleman to reciprocate the temper lately manifested by the
British Government, so opposite in its character and tendency from that
manifested by the Cabinet for several years preceding. He said that no
gentleman had yet manifested an intention of removing the interdiction
upon British armed ships, until she had actually executed her promise
of reparation; and, if the execution of the promise were to precede
the revocation of the interdiction, the mode of revocation by treaty,
as pointed out by his proposition, would be nearly contemporaneous
with that proposed by gentlemen, if now enacted into a law, and it
would have an evident advantage, as it respected the feelings of Great
Britain. The mode recommended by gentlemen is founded upon a want of
confidence in the promise of Great Britain, and an ungracious demand
for its execution, as preliminary to the revocation, while the mode
pointed out by treaty, is founded upon a confidence in the promise;
and, without requiring its execution, will insure our own safety by
the mere exercise of municipal right; a right which is unquestionable;
vouched to be so by Mr. Canning, and the exercise of which is impartial
toward all nations, by extending its provisions equally to all. He
said that almost all the injuries and insults sustained by the United
States from public armed ships of the belligerents within our waters,
were attributable to an inattention to the exercise of this right, and,
relax the interdiction when you may, without a stipulated obligation
on the part of the belligerents, to respect your neutrality, and your
marine jurisdiction, they will be renewed and continued.
The principle contended for is not new. It has been before the Senate
several times, and was adopted at the last session in its broadest
extent, as will appear from the following resolution, which he then
had the honor of moving. It does not appear from the Journals of the
Senate, that there was any opposition to the following resolution,
which was adopted on the 15th of February last:
"The Senate resumed the consideration of the motion made on
the 8th instant, that provision ought to be made by law for
interdicting all foreign armed ships from the waters of the
United States; and having agreed thereto, ordered that it be
referred to Mr. Giles, Mr. Smith of Maryland, Mr. Crawford," &c.
He said he was extremely happy to find the spirit of harmony and
conciliation which had hitherto characterized the Senate, and he should
endeavor to preserve and continue it; and, while he was strongly
impressed with the propriety and policy of the amendment, yet he
was willing to listen to any other which might be more agreeable
to gentlemen, provided it was founded upon a principle of strict
impartiality toward the belligerents, which he could not be induced to
depart from under any circumstances.
When Mr. G. had concluded, the further consideration of the subject was
postponed until to-morrow.
FRIDAY, June 2.
PHILIP REED, from the State of Maryland, attended.
STANLEY GRISWOLD, appointed a Senator by the Executive of the State
of Ohio, to fill the vacancy occasioned by the resignation of Edward
Tiffin, was qualified, and took his seat.
JOHN SMITH, from the State of New York, attended.
MONDAY, June 5.
_Death of Senator Malbone._
Mr. MATHEWSON announced the death of his colleague, FRANCIS MALBONE,
who deceased yesterday morning.
On motion of Mr. LLOYD,
_Resolved_, That the Senate will attend the funeral of
FRANCIS MALBONE, this afternoon, at five o'clock, from his
late residence; that notice thereof be given to the House
of Representatives, and that a committee be appointed for
superintending the funeral.
_Ordered_, That Messrs. LLOYD, GILMAN, and WHITE, be the committee.
On motion, by Mr. LLOYD,
_Resolved, unanimously_, That the members of the Senate, from
a sincere desire of showing their respect to the memory of
FRANCIS MALBONE, deceased, late a member thereof, will go
into mourning for him one month, by the usual mode of wearing
a crape round the left arm; and that a sum not exceeding one
hundred and fifty dollars be applied out of the contingent
fund for placing a neat slab or monument, with a suitable
inscription, over his tomb.
On motion of Mr. LLOYD,
_Resolved_, That, as an additional mark of respect to the
memory of FRANCIS MALBONE, the Senate now adjourn.
And the Senate adjourned.
TUESDAY, June 6.
_Senator Smith's pro tem. Appointment._
Mr. GILES submitted a resolution, which was amended, and is as follows:
_Resolved_, That the Honorable SAMUEL SMITH, a Senator
appointed by the Executive of the State of Maryland to fill
the vacancy which happened in the office of Senator for that
State, is entitled to hold his seat in the Senate of the United
States during the session of the Legislature of Maryland,
which, by the proclamation of the Governor of said State, was
to commence on the 5th day of the present month of June; unless
said Legislature shall fill such vacancy by the appointment of
a Senator, and this Senate be officially informed thereof.
On motion, by Mr. ANDERSON, to amend the motion, by striking out all
after the word "Resolved," and inserting:
"That any Senator of this body, who holds a seat under an
Executive appointment, cannot, according to the provisions of
the Constitution of the United States, be entitled to continue
to hold his seat as a member of this body, after the meeting of
the Legislature of the State from which such Senator may be a
member."
And a division of the motion for amendment was called for, and the
question having been taken, on striking out, it passed in the negative;
and the motion for amendment having been lost, the original motion was
agreed to--yeas 19, nays 6, as follows:
YEAS.--Messrs. Anderson, Brent, Franklin, Gaillard, German,
Giles, Gilman, Goodrich, Griswold, Hillhouse, Lambert,
Mathewson, Meigs, Pope, Robinson, Smith of New York, Thruston,
White, and Whiteside.
NAYS.--Messrs. Bradley, Leib, Lloyd, Parker, Pickering, and
Turner.
WEDNESDAY, June 7.
JAMES A. BAYARD, from the State of Delaware, attended.
THURSDAY, June 8.
WILLIAM H. CRAWFORD, from the State of Georgia, attended.
MONDAY, June 12.
_Exiled Cubans, with their Slaves._
On motion, by Mr. GILES,
_Resolved_, That a committee be appointed to inquire whether it
be expedient and proper, at this time, to make any provision
by law for remitting the penalties and forfeitures incurred by
the violations of some of the provisions of the act, entitled
"An act to prohibit the importation of slaves into any port or
place within the jurisdiction of the United States, from and
after the first day of January, in the year of our Lord one
thousand eight hundred and eight," so far only as relates to
the introduction of slaves into certain ports of the United
States, who were lately forcibly expelled from the island
of Cuba with the French inhabitants thereof; and that the
committee have leave to report by bill or otherwise.
_Ordered_, That Messrs. GILES, BRADLEY, ANDERSON, CRAWFORD, and
FRANKLIN, be the committee.
MONDAY, June 19.
_Exiled Cubans._
On motion, by Mr. GILES,
_Resolved_, That the President of the United States be
requested to cause to be laid before the Senate such
information as he may deem proper to communicate respecting the
unfortunate exiles lately expelled from the Island of Cuba,
and who may have arrived, or are expected to arrive within the
jurisdiction of the United States; and, also, respecting any
propositions which may have been made to him by the Minister
Plenipotentiary of France, for the purpose of facilitating
the removal of any of the said exiles, with their slaves, and
other effects, from the United States, to any place within the
dominions of France.
FRIDAY, June 23.
_Foreign Armed Vessels._
Mr. LEIB, from the committee, appointed on the 20th instant, to inquire
into the expediency of providing by law for the exclusion of foreign
armed vessels from the ports and harbors of the United States, made
report; which was read, as follows:
"That, in the opinion of this committee, such an interdiction
is within the just and neutral rights of the United States,
and, under other circumstances, would be highly expedient and
proper. So long as a neutral nation shall confine itself to
strict measures of impartiality, allowing no benefit to one
belligerent, not stipulated by treaty, which it shall refuse
to another, no cause whatever is afforded for exception or
complaint. The right to admit an armed force into a neutral
territory belongs exclusively to the neutral; and when not
guarantied by treaty, as is oftentimes the case, such admission
compromises the neutrality of the nation, which permits to one
belligerent alone such an indulgence.
"As a measure of safety as well as peace, it is incumbent
upon the United States to carry into effect such a provision.
So long as we are without a competent force to protect our
jurisdiction from violation, and our citizens from outrage, and
our flag from insult, so long ought no asylum to be given, but
in distress, to the armed vessels of any nation. The committee
will not bring into view the many injuries and insults which
the United States have sustained from the hospitable grant
of their ports and harbors to belligerents; nor the facility
which has thereby been afforded to them to lay our commerce
under contribution. It is sufficient to remark, that great
injuries have been sustained, and that imperious duty requires
arrangements at our hands to guard our country in future from
similar aggressions.
"The United States are, at this moment, under no obligation to
withhold restraints, within their power, upon the admission
of foreign armed vessels into their ports; but the committee
are too strongly impressed with the propriety of avoiding
any legislative interference at this time, which, by any
possibility, might be construed into a desire to throw
difficulties in the way of promised and pending negotiations.
They are desirous that a fair experiment may be made to adjust
our differences with the two belligerent nations, and that
no provisions be interwoven in our laws which shall furnish
a pretext for delay, or a refusal to yield to our just and
honorable demands.
"Calculating that the overtures which have been made by Great
Britain will be executed in good faith, the committee are
willing to believe that the stipulated arrangements will be
of such a character as to guard our flag from insult, our
jurisdiction from aggression, our citizens from violation,
and our mercantile property from spoliation. Under these
impressions, which the committee have stated as briefly as
possible, they beg leave to submit to the consideration of the
Senate the following resolution, viz:
"_Resolved_, That the further consideration of the subject be
postponed until the next session of Congress."
SATURDAY, June 24.
The bill freeing from postage all letters and packets from Thomas
Jefferson, was read the second time, and considered as in Committee
of the Whole; and no amendment having been proposed, on the question,
Shall this bill be engrossed and read a third time? it was determined
in the affirmative.
MONDAY, June 26.
The VICE PRESIDENT being absent, the Senate proceeded to the election
of a President _pro tempore_, as the constitution provides; and the
honorable ANDREW GREGG was elected.
_Ordered_, That the Secretary wait on the President of the United
States, and acquaint him that the Senate have, in the absence of the
Vice President, elected the honorable ANDREW GREGG President of the
Senate _pro tempore_.
TUESDAY, June 27.
_Public Credit._
The bill, entitled "An act supplementary to the act, entitled 'An act
making further provision for the support of public credit, and for the
redemption of the public debt,'" was read the third time as amended.
On motion, by Mr. HILLHOUSE, to postpone the further consideration
thereof until the first Monday in November next, it was determined in
the negative--yeas 9, nays 15.
WEDNESDAY, June 28.
On the question, Shall this bill pass as amended? it was determined in
the affirmative--yeas 17, nays 9, as follows:
YEAS.--Messrs. Anderson, Brent, Condit, Franklin, Gaillard,
Giles, Gregg, Lambert, Leib, Mathewson, Meigs, Parker, Pope,
Robinson, Smith of New York, Turner, and Whiteside.
NAYS.--Messrs Bayard, Crawford, German, Gilman, Hillhouse,
Lloyd, Pickering, Reed, and White.
_Six o'clock in the Evening._
_Adjournment._
_Resolved_, That Messrs. POPE and BRENT be a committee on the part of
the Senate, with such as the House of Representatives may join, to wait
on the President of the United States, and notify him that, unless
he may have any further communications to make to the two Houses of
Congress, they are ready to adjourn.
_Ordered_, That the Secretary acquaint the House of Representatives
therewith, and request the appointment of a committee on their part.
A message from the House of Representatives informed the Senate that
the House have appointed a committee on their part, to wait on the
President of the United States, and notify him of the intended recess
of Congress.
Mr. POPE, from the committee, reported that they had waited on the
President of the United States, who informed them that he had no
further communications to make to the two Houses of Congress.
A message from the House of Representatives informed the Senate that
the House, having finished the business before them, are about to
adjourn.
_Ordered_, That the Secretary inform the House of Representatives that
the Senate, having finished the business before them, are about to
adjourn.
The Secretary having performed that duty, the PRESIDENT adjourned the
Senate, to meet on the fourth Monday of November.