Sidor som bilder
PDF
ePub
[merged small][merged small][ocr errors]

Cortlandt, jr., Laban Wheaton, Leonard White, William Widgery, and Robert Wright. Those who voted in the negative are– Willis Alston, jr., John Baker, David Bard, Burwell Bassett, William W. Bibb, William Blackledge, Thomas Blount, James Breckenridge, Robert Brown, William A. Burwell, William Butler, John C. Calhoun, Langdon Cheves, John Clopton, Lewis Condit, William Crawford, John Dawson, Joseph Desha, Elias Earle, Meshack Franklin, Thomas Gholson, Peterson Goodwyn, Edwin Gray, Felix Grundy, Aylett Hawes, Jacob Hufty, Richard M. Johnson, Joseph Kent, William R. King, Abner Lacock, Joseph Lefever, Joseph Lewis, junior., Peter Little, William Lowndes, Aaron Lyle, Nathaniel Macon, George C. Maxwell, Thomas Moore, Archibald McBryde, William McCoy, Samuel McKee, James Morgan, Jeremiah Morrow, Hugh Nelson, Thomas Newbold, Thomas Newton, Stephen Ormsby, Joseph Pearson, Israel Pickens, James Pleasants, jr., John Randolph, Samuel Ringgold, John Rhea, John Roane, Jonathan Roberts, John Smith, Richard Stanford, Philip Stuart, John Taliaferro, George M. Troup, Robert Whitehill, David R. Williams, Thomas Wilson, and Richard Winn. The other amendments of the Senate to the bill being governed by the first amendment, were, consequently, disagreed to. It was then ordered, on motion of Mr. RANDolph, that a conference be held with the Senate on the subject-matter of the said amendments; and Mr. RANDolph, Mr. LAcock, and Mr. ConDIT, were appointed managers at the said conference on the part of this House.

Faipay, December 6.

Mr. EMoTT presented a petition of Harrison and Lewis, of the city of New York, merchants, raying permission to import from the British o India islands, goods to the amount of debts owing to them by certain inhabitants in said islands.-Referred to the Committee of Commerce and Manufactures. Mr. SMILIE presented a memorial of the Presdent and Managers of the Union Canal Company of Pennsylvania, praying the aid and patromage of the General Government in accomplishing the extensive and useful works in which they are engaged; which was read, and referred to a select committee. Messrs. SMille, Ridgely, Ringgold, BAKER, and BLEEcKER, were appointed the committee. A message from the Senate informed the House that the Senate insist on their amendments, disagreed to by this House, to the bill “for the o of Representatives among the several States according to the third enumeration;" agree to the proposed conference, and have appointed managers on their part at the same.

FOREIGN RELATIONS."

The House resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union, to which Committee of the Whole was committed the report of the Committee on Foreign Relations, made some days ago.

The report having been read

Mr. Porter said that the House were probably expecting from the Committee of Foreign Relations some explanations of their views in reporting the resolutions now under consideration, in addition to the general exposition of them contained in the report itself. The committee themselves felt that such explanations were due, inasmuch as they had only reported in part, and had intimated their intention to follow up these resolutions, should they be adopted, by the recommendation of ulterior measures. The cort mittee, Mr. P. said, after examining the various documents accompanying the Presiident's Message, were satisfied, as he presumed every member of the House was, that als. of accommodating our differences with Great Britain by negotiation must be abandoned. When they looked at the correspondence between the two Governments; when they observed the miserable shifts and evasions (for they were entitled to no better appellation) to which Great Britain resorted to excuse the violations of our maritime rights, it was impossible not to perceive that her conduct towards us was not regulated even by her own sense of justice, but solely by a regard to the probable extent of our forbearance. The last six years had been marked by a series of progressive encroachments on our rights; and the principles by which she publicly upheld her aggressions, were as mutable as her conduct. We had seen her one year advancing doctrines, which the year before she had reprobated. ‘We had seen her one day capturing our vessels under pretexts, which on the preceding day she would have been ashamed or afraid to avow. Indeed, said Mr. P., she seems to have been constantly and carefully feeling, our pulse, to ascertain what potions we would bear; and if we go on submitting to one indignity after another, it will not be long before we shall see British subjects, not only taking our property in our harbors, but trampling on our persons in the streets of our cities. Having become convinced that all hopes from further negotiation were idle, the committee, Mr. P. said, were led to the consideration of another question, which was—whether the maritime rights which Great Britain is violating were such as we ought to support at the hazard and expense of a war 3. And he believed he was correct in stating that the committee was unanimously of the opinion that they were. The committee thought that the Orders in Council, so far as they go to interrupt our direct trade, that is, the carrying of the productions of this country to a market in the ports of friendly nations, and returning with the proceeds of them—ought to be resisted by war. How far we ought to go in support of what is commonly called the carrying trade, although the question was agitated in the committee, no definitive opinion was expressed. It was not deemed necessary, at this time, to express such an opinion, inasmuch as the injury we sustain by the inhibition of this trade is merged in the greater one to our direct trade. - The Orders in Council, Mr. P. said, of which

there seemed now to be no prospect of a speedy

[ocr errors]

repeal—certainly none during the continuance of the present war—authorized the capture of our vessels bound to and from ports where British commerce is not favorably received; and as that nation is at war with most of the civilized world, the effect was (as he understood from those who had much better information on the subject than he could pretend to) to cut up, at once, about three-fourths of our best and most profitable commerce. It was impossible that the mercantile or agricultural interests of the United States, which on the question of a right to the direct trade could never be separated, could submit to such impositions. It was his opinion, that going upon the round of a mere pecuniary calculation, a calcuÉ. of profits and loss, it would be for our interest to go to war to remove the Orders in Council, rather than submit to them, even during the term of their probable continuance. But there was another point of view in which the subject presented itself to the committee, and that was as regarded the character of the country. We were a young nation, and he hoped we cherished a little pride and spirit, as well as a great deal of justice and moderation. Our situation was not unlike that of a young man just entering into life, and who, if he ...; cool, deliberate, intentional indignity, might safely

calculate to be kicked and cuffed for the whole of

the remainder of his life; or, if he should afterwards undertake to retrieve his character, must do it at ten times the expense which it would have cost him at first to support it. We should clearly understand and define those rights which as a nation we ought to support, and we should support them at every hazard. If there be any such thing as rights between nations surely the people of the United States, occupying the half of a continent, have a right to navigate the seas, without being molested by the inhabitants of the little island of Great Britain. It was under these views of the subject that the committee did not hesitate to give it as their opinion that we ought to go to war in opposition to the Orders in Council. But as to the extent of the war and the time when it should be commenced, there would of course be some diversity of sentiment in the House, as there was, at first, in the committee. That we can contend with Great Britain openly and even handed on the element where she injures us, it would be folly to pretend. Were it even in our power to build a navy, which should be able to cope with her, no man who has any regard for the happiness of the people of this country would venture to advise such a measure. All the fame and glory which the British navy has acquired at sea, have been dearly paid for in the sufferings and misery of that ill-fated people at home—sufferings occasioned in a great measure by the expense of that stupendous establishment. But without such a navy the United States could make a serious impression upon Great Britain, even at sea. We could have, within six months after a declaration of war, hundreds of privateers in every part of the ocean. We

Foreign Relations.

y submitted to one'

December, 1811.

could harass, if not destroy, the vast and profitable commerce which she is constantly carrying on to, every part of this continent. e could destroy her fisheries to the north; we could depredate upon her commerce to the West India islands, which is passing by our doors; we could annoy her trade along the coast of South America; we could even carry the war to her own shores in Europe. But, Mr. P. said, there was another point where we could attack her, and where she would feel our power still more sensibly. We could deprive her of her extensive provinces lying along our borders to the north. - These provinces were not only immensely valuable in themselves, but almost indispensable to the existence of Great Britain, cut off as she now is in a great measure from the north of Europe. He had been credibly informed that the exports from Quebec alone amounted, during the last year, to near six millions of dollars, and most of these too in articles of the first necessity—in ship timber and in provisions for the support of her fleets and armies.

By carrying on such a war as he had described,

at the public expense, on land, and by individual enterprise at sea, we should be able in a short time to remunerate ourselves tenfold for all the spoliations she had committed on our commerce.

It was with a view to make preparations for such a war, that the committee had offered the resolutions on the table. Whether the means recommended were adequate to the object, or

‘whether they were best adapted to the end, it

would be for the House, when they came to discuss them separately, to determine. For himself, Mr. P. said, and he presumed such were the feelings of all the members of the committee, he

should have no objections to any modifications

of them which might be agreeable to the House, so that the great object was still retained. If these resolutions, or any other similar to them in object, should pass; it was then the intention of the committee, as soon as the forces contemplated to be raised should be in any tolerable state of preparation, to recommend the employment of them for the purposes for which they shall have been raised, unless Great Britain shall, in the mean time, have done us justice. In short, it was the determination of the committee to recommend open and decided war—a war as vigorous and effective as the resources of the country and the relative situation of ourselves and our enemy would enable us to prosecute. The committee, Mr. P. said, have not recommended this course of measures without a full sense of the high responsibility which they have taken upon themselves. They are aware that war, even in its best and fairest form, is an evil deeply to be deprecated. But it is sometimes, and on few occasions perhaps more than on this, a necessary evil. For myself, I confess I have approached the subject not only with diffidence, but with awe. But I will never shrink from my duty because it is arduous or unpleasant; and I can most religiously declare that I never acted under stronger or clearer convictions of duty than I do now in recommending these preparatory

[merged small][merged small][ocr errors]

measures; or, than I shall ultimately in recommending war, in case Great Britain shall not have rescinded her Orders in Council, and made some satisfactory arrangements in respect to the impressment of our seamen. If there should be any gentlemen in the House who were not satisfied that we ought to go to war for our maritime rights, Mr. P. earnestly entreated that they would not vote for the resolutions. Do not, said he, let us raise armies, unless we intend to employ them. If we do not mean to support the rights and honor of the country, let us not drain it of its resources.

Mr. P. said he was aware that there were many gentlemen in the House who were dissatisfied that the committee had not gone further, and recommended an immediate declaration of war, or the adoption of some measure which would have instantly precipitated us into it. But he confessed such was not his opinion. He had no idea of plunging ourselves headlong into a war with a powerful nation, or even a respectable province, when we had not three regiments of men to spare for that service. He hoped that we should not be influenced by the howlings of newspapers, nor by a fear that the spirit of the Twelfth Congress would be questioned, to abandon the plainest dictates of common sense and common

discretion. He was sensible that there were many ||

o men out of Congress, as well as many of his t friends in it, whose appetites were prepared for a war feast. He was not surprised at it, for he knew the provocatives had been sufficiently great. . But he hoped they would not insist on calling in the guests, at least, until the table should have been spread. When this was done, he pledged himself, in behalf of the Committee of Foreign Relations, that the gentlemen should not be disappointed of the entertainment for want of bidding; and he believed he might also pledge himself for many of the members of the committee, that they would not be among the last to partake personally, not only in the pleasures; if any there should be, but in all the dangers of the revelry. - 1, **

Mr. P. said that this was the time and occasion on which, above all others, within his experience, we should act in concert. If the ultimate object of the great body of this House and of this nation was the same, and so far as he had been able to ascertain the sentiments of both, it was there would be no difficulty in attaining it. But we must yield something to the opinions, and to the feelings of each other. Instead of indulging in party reflections and recriminations in this House, he hoped that the whole of the House and of the Union would form but one party and consider a foreign nation as the other. Mr. P. said he had risen merely for the purpose of explaining to the House the opinions and views of the committee in relation to the resolutions now to be discussed, and he should be satisfied if he had been so fortunate as to succeed. The question was then taken on the first resolution for filling the ranks of the present army, &c., and carried. 12th Cox. 1st Sess.-14

The second resolution for raising ten thousand regulars being under consideration— Mr. Little moved to strike out 'ten thousand and insert fifteen thousand. Mr. Fisk moved to insert thirty thousand. Mr. Alston wished to leave the number subject to the discretion, of the President, not exceeding fifty thousand, men. If the number was fixed, the President must appoint officers, whether the men were raised or not. The question was taken on striking out the number ten thousand, &c., and carried by a large majority. - he question now being on the number which was to be inserted in lieu of it— Mr. Porter was in favor of a practicable number of regulars, relying on volunteers for effective service as well as regulars. Mr. Little spoke in support of his motion. Mr. WRight spoke in favor of a large number of regulars. Mr. Fisk spoke in favor of thirty thousand;

..he was desirous that our measures should be

effectual. - *Mr. Little spoke in favor of the House fixing the number, in preference to leaving it discretionary with the Executive. Mr. Nelson spoke in favor of the number reported by the committee. Mr. SeyBERT spoke in favor of thirty thousand . He was desirous of acting efficiently if at all. Mr. Wright spoke in reply to Mr. Nelson, and in favor of regular troops in preference to volunteers. . . . . Mr. SMille thought ten thousand men would be a sufficient number, together with the volunteers, for any object they might be wanted for. Mr. Porter proposed that the number should remain blank, as it could be better fixed when the bill was brought in, in pursuance of the resolution. Mr. Nelson spoke in reply to some observations of Mr. Wright on the relative importance of regulars and volunteers; and Mr. right rejoined. On the suggestion of Mr. D. R. Williams, the motions to fill the blank created by striking out “ten thousand,” were withdrawn; and the resolution, thus varied, was agreed to. The 3d, 4th, and 5th resolutions, authorizing volunteers, militia, and equipment of our little navy, were agreed to by the Committee of the Whole. The sixth resolution, to permit our merchant vessels to arm in self-defence, against all unlawful proceedings against them, being under consideration— Mr. McKee spoke against it, conceiving it at variance with the system comprised in the other resolutions. He had no idea of merely resisting; if attacked, he would retaliate. Mr. SMille supported the resolution. If we were not now in war, he said he verily believed we soon should be. . . Mr. Wright took the same ground with Mr.

[ocr errors][merged small][merged small]
[blocks in formation]

The Committee rose and reported their agree

ment to the resolution. The House took up the report. The question was put on the first resolution— Mr. RANDolph, wishing time, moved that the report lie on the table.—Motion lost—65 to 50. The question was then taken on the first resolution, in the following words: “Resolved, That the Military Establishment, as authorized by the existing laws, ought to be immediately completed by filling up the ranks, and prolonging the enlistment of the troops; and that, to encourage enlistments, a bounty in lands ought to be given in addition to the pay and bounty now allowed by law.” The following are the yeas and nays on the question: - - YEAs—Willis. Alston, jr., William Anderson, Stevenson Archer, Daniel Avery, Ezekiel Bacon, John Baker, David Bard, Josiah Bartlett, Burwell Bassett, William W. Bibb, William Blackledge, Harmanus Bleecker, Thomas Blount, Adam Boyd, James Breckenridge, Robert Brown, William A. Burwell, William Butler, John C. Calhoun, Langdon Cheves, Martin Chittenden, John Clopton, Thomas B. Cooke, Lewis Condit, William Crawford, Roger Davis, John Dawson, Joseph Desha, Elias Earle, William Ely, James Emott, William Findley, James Fisk, Asa Fitch, Meshack Franklin, Thomas Gholson, Thomas R. Gold, Charles Goldsborough, Peterson Goodwyn, Edwin Gray, Isaiah L. Green, Felix. Grundy, Bolling Hall, Obed Hall, John A. Harper, Aylett Hawes, Jacob Hufty, John M. Hyneman, Richard M. Johnson, Joseph Kent, Philip B. Key, William R. King, Abner Lacock, Joseph Lefever, Joseph Lewis, jr., Peter Lit

tle, Robert Le Roy Livingston, William Lowndes,

Aaron Lyle, Nathaniel Macon, George C. Maxwell, Thomas Moore, Archibald McBryde, William McCoy, Samuel McKee, Alexander McKim, Arunah Metcalf, James Milnor, Samuel L. Mitchill, James Morgan, Jonathan O. Moseley, Hugh Nelson, Thomas Newbold, Thomas Newton, Stephen Ormsby, William Paulding, jr., Joseph Pearson, Israel Pickens, William Piper, Timothy Pitkin, jr., James Pleasants, jr., Benjamin Pond, Peter B. Porter, Josiah Quincy, William Reed, Henry M. Ridgely, Samuel Ringgold, John Rhea, John Roane, Jonathan Roberts, Ebenezer Sage, Thomas Sammons, Ebenezer Seaver, Adam Seybert, Sam

Philip Stuart, Silas Stow, William Strong, George Sullivan, Samuel Taggart, Benjamin Tallmadge, Peleg Tallman, John Taliaferro, Uri Tracy, George M. Troup, Charles Turner, jr., Pierre Van Cortlandt, jr., Leonard White, Robert Whitehill, David R. Williams, William Widgery, Thomas Wilson, Richard Winn, and Robert Wright—117.

NAxs—Abijah Bigelow, Elijah Brigham, Epaphroditas Champion, John Davenport, jr., Richard Jackson, jr., Lyman Law, Elisha R. Potter, John Randolph, Richard Stanford, Lewis B. Sturges, and Laban Wheaton—11. - -

Mr. Goldsborough, after expressing his readiness, should war be once determined and declared by the Administration, to go all lengths to support it, but wishing further time for reflection on so important a subject, made a motion to adjourn; which was carried, and the House adjourned. *

[ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small]

government of the said Territory.

Mr. RhEA o: a petition of sundry inhabitants of the Territory of Louisiana, praying that the second grade of Territorial government may be extended to the said Territory.-Referred to the Committee of the Whole on the bill providing for the government of the said Territory. Mr. LYLE presented a petition of the Synod of Pittsburg, in Pennsylvania, praying that the mails may not be carried, and that post offices may not be kept open on the Sabbath day.—Referred to the Posmaster General, to consider and report thereon to the House. On motion of Mr. TALLMADGE, the Postmaster General was directed to lay before the House an estimate, in detail, of the expense which would necessarily be incurred to repair the building which has been purchased by the Government for the accommodation of the General Post Office and Patent Office, that the objects for which said purchase was made may be carried into effect. - Mr. Jennings, from the committee appointed on the twenty-eighth ultimo, presented a bill to authorize the election of Sheriffs in the Indiana Territory, and for other purposes; which was read twice, and committed to a Committee of the Whole on Friday next.

[blocks in formation]

uel Shaw, John Smilie, George Smith, John Smith, slows:

December, 1811.

That the petitioners state, that Gustavus Upton, in October, 1807, purchased, in France, sundry articles of merchandise, which, in the month of February, 1808, were shipped in the Ceres, for New York, and the voyage commenced, but which was relanded in consequence of information received, that the British Government had issued orders for the capture of all American vessels bound to or from the ports of France. That no safe opportunity offering for the conveyance of the merchandise to the United States, in December, 1808, when one of the petitioners (Gustavus Upton) left France for Great Britain; having previously given instructions to Messrs. McCarthy and Brothers of Bordeaux to ship the merchandise to the United States directly, if a conveyance could be obtained; and, if not, to forward the same to England, whence, it was supposed, the merchandise might be shipped to the United States, with ease and safety. The petitioners further state, that, on the 12th of April, 1809, a conveyance was engaged for the said merchandise for London, in the ship Yaug Fran Agena Sophia, of Kniphausen. . On the merchandise arriving in the port of London, liberty to land the same, for sale, was refused, but granted to reship it for the United States; which was done in June, 1809, on board the Rhadius, Captain Farly, for New York, and reached that port on the 18th of October, 1809, in contravention of the act of Congress, entitled “An act to interdict the commercial intercourse between the United States and Great Britain and France, and their dependencies, and for other purposes,” passed the 1st of March, 1809. The petitioners further state, that, on the arrival of the said merchandise at New York, they gave notice. thereof to the collector, and that they had no intention of violating any law; that the merchandise, notwithstanding the fair and open procedure of the petitioners, was taken into the custody of the revenue officers, and that, on a petition to the Secretary of the Treasury, in conformity to the act, entitled “An act to provide for mitigating or remitting the forfeitures, penalties, and disabilities accruing in certain cases therein mentioned,” he decided that the said merchandise should be delivered to the petitioners, on their payment of costs, double duties on the articles imported contrary to law, and a sum equal to the extra duties imposed by this decision, for the use of the custom house officers at New York; with which decision the petitioners complied. They now pray the National Legislature that the sums of money which they have been made to pay, over and above the legal duties, may be refunded. The committee can see no great hardship in this case. The merchandise seized was prohibited, and the whole importation, had a prosecution been instituted, would have been condemned as an importation contravening the provisions 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,” passed the 1st day of March, 1809. The petitioners or shippers must have known that the merchandise was liable to seizure {. to the shipment of the same at London for the nited States, the shipment having taken place more than three months subsequent to the passage of the abovementioned act. So far from being liable to the charge of rigor in the application of law to the petitioners' case, the com. mittee are of opinion that the Secretary of the Treasury exercised the powers with which he is by law invested, with great moderation.

Foreign Relations.

. H. of R. " From this view of the subject, the committee beg leave to recommend the adoption of the following resolution: ...' Resolved, That the prayer of the petition is unreasonable, and ought not to be granted.

* FOREIGN RELATIONS.

The House resumed the consideration of the report of the Committee of Foreign Relations. The question being on the agreement to the second resolution, authorizing the raising an additional regular force— Mr. GRUNDY, as a member of the committee stated his impression that this was the vital part of the report; and although he had no desire to prosong *::::: invited those who were opposed to the report now to come forward and state their objections to it. r. RANDolph said, he was an old-fashioned politician. In the days of terror, we shrunk at

| standing armies; and what is the object now—

defence? Who? Freemen who would not defend themselves. He would ask, if seven millions of Americans were to be protected in their lives and liberties by ten thousand vagabonds who were. fit food for gunpowder? It would be necessary to know the ulterior views of the committee on this point. It would be proper, before a vote was taken on this resolution, to know for what purpose these additional troops were wanted. The House ought not to commit itself on a question of such magnitude without detailed information. He was as much opposed to raising standing armies now, as be had been in the reign of terror. He had seen too much of the corruptions attendant on these establishments, in the course of the investigation in which he was engaged, not to disclaim all share in the creation of them. The people of the United States could defend themselves, if necessary, and had no idea of resting their defence on mercenaries, picked up from brothels and tippling houses— pickpockets who have escaped from Newgate, &c., and sought refuge in this asylum of oppressed humanity. He contended that this resolution contained an unconstitutional proposition, and that the standing army now in the service of the United States was maintained in the very teeth of that

part of the Constitution which declares that no

money for the support of a standing army shouldbe appropriated for more than two years... He again called for information as to the object of the army now proposed to be raised; declaring, that, if the President should say they were necessary for the protection of New Orleans, to be employed against the Indians, or to repel incursions from Canada, (although this seemed not to be much -thought of) he should not refuse to grant them, He declared the report to be a negative position, which could not be combated except to disadvantage. He wished to know the Constitutional resources of the committee, and expressed a hope that the remarks he had made would draw out the talents of that body. Mr. GRUNdy.—I did not expect that the gentleman from Virginia would have made any inqui

ries into the motives or objects of that committee

--

« FöregåendeFortsätt »