H. OF R. Process in Federal Courts-Western Roads. NOVEMBER, 1811. THURSDAY, November 28. The House refused to proceed to the consideration of Mr. RHEA's resolution-yeas 44, nays 69. Two other members, to wit: WILLIAM PAULDMr. RHEA then moved the order of the day on ING, jun., from New York, and CHARLES GOLDSthe bill providing for the government of Louisi-BOROUGH. from Maryland, appeared. produced their ana; which the House also refused to take up. credentials, were qualified, and took their seats. PROCESS IN FEDERAL COURTS. The House resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole on the bill providing for the more convenient taking of affidavits to be used in civil cases in the courts of the United States, and to provide the mode of taking bail in certain cases. [The bill goes to authorize certain judicial officers in each State, such as the Chancellor and Judges of the Superior Courts, &c., to receive bail and take affidavits to be used in civil cases in the courts of the United States.] Considerable conversation took place between Messrs. GOLD, GHOLSON, McCOY, KING, FISK, CHEVES, MILNOR, CLAY, (Speaker,) KEY, and ELY, on the principle as well as on the details of the bill. It appeared, from what was said by different gentlemen, that there was no uniform rule prescribed in such cases by the laws of the United States; that whilst in New York and Pennsylvania, clients frequently had to travel three or four hundred miles to the district Judge, or to the office of the clerk of the court, to make affidavit or to enter bail; yet in Kentucky, Maryland, and Massachusetts, affidavits were made or bail entered before any authority commissioned to do the same as to the State courts. The bill was objected to, therefore, principally on two grounds; because it abridged the rights of the people of those States where the greatest latitude of indulgence already existed, and because the courts of the United States were authorized to make such rules and regulations in this case as they should think proper. There appearing, however, to be much difference of opinion on the subject among the legal characters of the House, the committee rose, and the bill was recommitted to the committee who reported it, to which on motion of Mr. GOLD, four other members were added, viz: Mr. CHEVES, Mr. KEY, Mr. ELY, and Mr. GHOL The annual report of the Secretary of the Treasury, respecting the regulation of the currency of foreign coins, was laid before the House by the SPEAKER, and ordered to lie on the table. Mayor and Aldermen of the city of New Orleans, Mr. MORROW presented the petition of the praying that Congress will invest the right to a certain lot of land lying in the city of New Orleans, in the corporation thereof, on which it is proposed, under an act of the said corporation, to erect steam engines, and the necessary buildings by which it is contemplated to supply the said City with water. Mr. BACON moved the following resolutions, which were agreed to: Resolved, That the Committee of Ways and Means uing in force, for a further time, an act, entitled "An be instructed to inquire into the expediency of continact continuing, for a limited time, the salaries of the officers of Government therein mentioned," and have leave to report by bill or otherwise. Resolved, That the Committee of Ways and Means be instructed to inquire into the expediency of continuing in force for a further time the first section of an act, entitled An act further to protect the commerce and seamen of the United States against the Barbary Powers," and that they have leave to report by bill or otherwise. Mr. MORROW moved the following resolution, predicating it on the late unfortunate occurrence on the Wabash: Resolved, That the President of the United States be authorized to loan to the State of Ohio —— stand of arms, with bayonets and cartouch boxes, and — pieces of field artillery, on the Legislature of that State making such provision by law as shall, in his opinion, the damage and loss incident to use and accident in afford security for their safe-keeping and return, save actual service. The resolution was referred to a Committee of the Whole. Mr. JENNINGS moved the following resolution, which was agreed to: Resolved, That a committee be instructed to inquire into the expediency of allowing the qualified voters in the several counties in the Indiana Territory to elect their sheriffs in their respective counties, and that the said committee inquire likewise into the expediency of allowing appeals in certain cases, from the Territorial courts to the courts of the United States, and what amendments, if any, are necessary to be made to an act entitled "an act to divide the Indiana Territory into two separate governments," with leave to report by bill, bills, or otherwise. Messrs. JENNINGS, SEVIER, NEW, ROBERTS, WILSON, MORGAN, and MAXWELL, were appointed the committee. WESTERN ROADS. Mr. MORROW made a report of the committee appointed on the 11th instant," to inquire into the expediency of laying out and making the roads contemplated by the Treaty of Brownstown," which was read and committed to a Committee of the Whole. The report is as follows: That the roads contemplated by the said treaty have for their object the opening a communication by land between the Territory of Michigan and the different settlements in the State of Ohio, and generally with the other parts of the United States. A view of the geographical position of the Territory of Michigan, situate as it is, bordering for a considerable extent on the British provinces of Upper Canada, bounded on the east, north, and west, by water, and on the south by an extensive tract of country to which the Indian title remains unextinguished, convinces the committee of the utility and necessity of the proposed roads. They would subserve to the convenience of the citizens in their ordinary intercourse; of the Government in the transportation of the public mail; and, especially in an emergency, would be necessary for military operations. The distance from the rapids of the Miama of the lakes to the Western boundary of the Connecticut Reserve is about thirty-five miles; and from the lower Sandusky, in a southwardly direction, to the old Indian boundary line, is about seventy miles; making proper allow ance for windings in the roads, so that they may be made on the best ground. The aggregate length of road proposed to be made may be estimated at one hundred and twenty miles; but, however great the advantage, and immediate the necessity of these roads, it is not probable that the object will be accomplished for many years to come, unless the United States provide the funds., The Territory of Michigan is destitute of the means, and the proposed roads are without the limits of her territorial jurisdiction; the State of Ohio, with limited public resources, and multiplied demands for extensive improvements on the roads within her settlements; it is not to be expected that either will afford the funds necessary to accomplish the proposed object. The committee are of opinion that provision ought to be made for laying out and making the said roads, and that they ought to be located of the width proposed by the said treaty. H. of R. That they have endeavored to give to the subject submitted to them that full and dispassionate consideration which is due to one so intimately connected with the interest, the peace, the safety, and the honor of their country. Your committee will not encumber your journals, and waste your patience with a detailed history of all the various matters growing out of our foreign relations. The cold recital of wrongs; of injuries and aggressions known and felt by every member of this Union, could have no other effect than to deaden the national sensibility, and render the public, mind callous to injuries with which it is already too familiar. Without recurring, then, to the multiplied wrongs of partial or temporary operation, of which we have so just cause of complaint against the two great belligerents, your committee will only call your attention, at this time, to the systematic aggression of those Powers, authorized by their edicts against neutral commerce-a system, which, as regarded its principles, was founded on pretensions that went to the subversion of our national independence; and which, although now abandoned by one Power, is, in its broad and destructive operation, as still enforced by the other, sapping the foundation of our prosperity. It is more than five years since England and France, in violation of those principles of justice and public law, held sacred by all civilized nations, commenced this unprecedented system by seizing the property of the citizens of the United States, peaceably pursuing their lawful commerce on the high seas. To shield themselves from the odium which such outrage must incur, each of the belligerents sought a pretext in the conduct of the other-each attempting to justify his system of rapine as a retaliation for similar acts on the part of his enemy. As if the law of nations, founded on the eternal rules of justice, ceuld sanction a principle, which, if ingrafted into our municipal code, would excuse the crime of one robber, upon the sole plea that the unfortunate object of his rapacity was also a victim to the injustice of another. The The House again resolved itself into a Com-fact of priority could be true as to one only of the parmittee of the Whole on the report of the Com- ties, and whether true or false, could furnish no ground mittee of Elections on the petition of John Tal- of justification. iaferro, contesting the election of JOHN P. HUN- GERFORD. Before any decision was had, the Committee rose, and the House adjourned. FRIDAY, November 29. The House took up the resolution submitted on the 26th, calling on the Executive for information respecting impressments, which was agreed to; and Mr. LITTLE and Mr. REED appointed a committee to present the same to the President. The United States thus unexpectedly and violently assailed by the two greatest Powers in Europe, withdrew their citizens and property from the ocean: and cherishing the blessing of peace, although the occasion would have fully justified war, sought redress in an appeal to the justice and magnanimity of the belligerents. When this appeal had failed of the success which was due to its moderation, other measures, founded on the same pacific policy, but applying to the interests instead of the justice of the belligerents, were resorted to. Such was the character of the non the return of both Powers to their former state of amicable relations, by offering commercial advantages to the one who should first revoke his hostile edicts, and imposing restrictions on the other. The House proceeded to consider the amend-intercourse and non-importation laws, which invited ments of the Senate to the bill "extending the time for opening the several land offices in the Territory of Orleans;" which were, together with the bill, committed to the Committee on Public Lands. FOREIGN RELATIONS. Mr. PORTER, from the Committee on Foreign Relations, made the following report, which was referred to a Committee of the Whole: The committee to whom was referred that part of the President's Message which relates to our foreign affairs, beg leave to report in part: France, at length, availing herself of the proffers made equally to her and her enemy, by the non-importation law of May, 1810, announced the repeal, on the first of the following November, of the decrees of Berlin and Milan. And it affords a subject of sincere congratulation, to be informed, through the official organs of the Government, that those decrees are, so far at least as our rights are concerned, really and practically at an end. H. or R. Foreign Relations. NOVEMBER, 1811. in the privation of protectors and parents, have, of late, been drowned in the louder clamors at the loss of property; yet is the practice of forcing our mariners into the British navy, in violation of the rights of our flag, carried on with unabated rigor and severity. If it be our duty to encourage the fair and legitimate commerce of this country by protecting the property of the merchant; then, indeed, by as much as life and liberty are more estimable than ships and goods, so much more impressive is the duty to shield the persons of our seamen, whose hard and honest services are employed equally with those of the merchants in advancing, under the mantle of its laws, the interests of their country. It was confidently expected, that this act on the part of France would have been immediately followed by a revocation on the part of Great Britain of her Orders in Council. If our reliance on her justice had been impaired by the wrongs she had inflicted, yet, when she had plighted her faith to the world that the sole motive of her aggression on neutral commerce was to be found in the Berlin and Milan decrees, we looked forward to the extinction of those decrees, as the period when the freedom of the seas would be again restored. In this reasonable expectation we have, however, been disappointed. A year has elapsed since the French decrees were rescinded, and yet Great Britain, instead of retracing pari passu that course of unjustifiable attack on neutral rights, in which she professed to be only the reluctant follower of France, has advanced with bolder and continually increasing strides. To the categorical demands lately made by our Government for the repeal of her Orders in Council, she has affected to deny the practical ex-purposes of transporting, in their own vessels, the tinction of the French decrees, and she has, moreover, advanced a new and unexpected demand, increasing in hostility the orders themselves. She has insisted, through her accredited Minister at this place, that the repeal of the Orders in Council must be preceded, not only by the practical abandonment of the decrees of Berlin and Milan, so far as they infringe the neutral rights of the United States; but by the renunciation on the part of France, of the whole of her system of commercial warfare against Great Britain, of which those decrees originally formed a part. To sum up, in a word, the great causes of complaint against Great Britain, your committee need only say, that the United States, as a sovereign and independent Power, claim the right to use the ocean, which is the common and acknowledged highway of nations, for the products of their own soil and the acquisitions of their own industry, to a market in the ports of friendly nations, and to bring home, in return, such articles as their necessities or convenience may require-always regarding the rights of belligerents, as defined by the established laws of nations. Great Britain, in defiance of this incontestable right, captures every American vessel bound to, or returning from, a port where her commerce is not favored; enslaves our seamen, and in spite of our remonstrances, perseveres in these aggres sions. To wrongs so daring in character, and so disgraceful in their execution, it is impossible that the people of the United States should remain indifferent. We must now tamely and quietly submit, or we must resist by those means which God has placed within our reach. This system is understood to consist in a course of measures adopted by France and the other Powers on the Continent subject to, or in alliance with her, calculated to prevent the introduction into their territories of the produce and manufactures of Great Britain and her colonies; and to annihilate her trade with them. However hostile these regulations may be on Your committee would not cast a shade over the the part of France towards Great Britain, or however American name by the expression of a doubt which sensibly the latter may feel their effects, they are, nev- branch of this alternative will be embraced. The ocertheless, to be regarded only as the expedients of one casion is now presented when the national character, enemy against another, for which the United States, misunderstood and traduced for a time by foreign and as a neutral Power, can, in no respect, be responsible; domestic enemies, should be vindicated. If we have they are, too, in exact conformity with those which not rushed to the field of battle like the nations who Great Britain has herself adopted and acted upon in are led by the mad ambition of a single chief, or the time of peace as well as war. And it is not to be pre-avarice of a corrupted court, it has not proceeded from sumed that France would yield to the unauthorized a fear of war, but from our love of justice and humandemand of America what she seems to have consid-ity. That proud spirit of liberty and independence' ered as one of the most powerful engines of the pres ent war. Such are the pretensions upon which Great Britain founds the violation of the maritime rights of the United States-pretensions not theoretical merely, but followed up by a desolating war upon our unprotected commerce. The ships of the United States, laden with the products of our own soil and labor, navigated by our own citizens, and peaceably pursuing a lawful trade, are scized on our own coasts, at the very mouths of our harbors, condemned and confiscated. Your committee are not, however, of that sect whose worship is at the shrine of a calculating avarice. And while we are laying before you the just complaints of our merchants against the plunder of their ships and cargoes, we cannot refrain from presenting to the justice and humanity of our country the unhappy case of our impressed seamen. Although the groans of these victims of barbarity for the loss of (what should be dearer to Americans than life) their liberty; although the cries of their wives and children which sustained our fathers in the successful assertion of their rights against foreign aggression is not yet sunk. The patriotic fire of the Revolution still burns in the American breast with a holy and unextinguishable flame, and will conduct this nation to those high destinies which are not less the reward of dignified moderation than of exalted valor. But we have borne with injury until forbearance has ceased to be a virtue. The sovereignty and independence of these States, purchased and sanctified by the blood of our fathers, from whom we received them, not for ourselves only, but as the inheritance of our posterity, are deliberately and systematically violated. And the period has arrived, when, in the opinion of your committee, it is the sacred duty of Congress to call forth the patriotism and resources of the country. By the aid of these, and with the blessing of God, we confidently trust we shall be enabled to procure that redress which has been sought for by justice, by remonstrance, and forbearance, in vain. Your committee, reserving for a future report those ulterior measures, which, in their opinion, ought to be pursued, would, at this time, earnestly recommend, in the words of the President, "that the United States be put into an armor and áttitude demanded by the crisis, and corresponding with the national spirit and expectations." And, to this end, they beg leave to submit, for the adoption of the House, the following resolutions: H. of R. persons who voted for the former, and 38 persons who voted for the latter gentleman, appear not to have been legally qualified voters. That of the polls taken for the county of Lancaster, Mr. Taliaferro had 122 votes and Mr. Hungerford 96 votes; and that on such comparison as aforesaid, 20 persons who voted for the former gentleman, and 20 persons who voted for the latter, appear not to have been legally qualified voters. 1. Resolved, That the Military Establishment, as authorized by the existing laws, ought to be immedi- That of the polls taken for the county of Northumately completed by filling up the ranks, and prolong-berland, Mr. Taliaferro had 228 votes and Mr. Hunging the enlistment of the troops; and that to encour-erford 75 votes; and that on such comparison as aforeage enlistment, a bounty in lands ought to be given in said, 35 persons who voted for the former gentleman, addition to the pay and bounty now allowed by law. and 1 person who voted for the latter, appear not to have 2. That an additional force of ten thousand regular been legally qualified voters. troops ought to be immediately raised to serve for three years; and that a bounty in lands ought to be given to encourage enlistments. 3. That it is expedient to authorize the President, under proper regulations, to accept the service of any number of volunteers, not exceeding fifty thousand; to be organized, trained, and held in readiness to act on such service as the exigencies of the Government may require. 4. That the President be authorized to order out, from time to time, detachments of the militia, as in his opinion the public service may require. 5. That all the vessels not now in service belonging to the Navy, and worthy of repair, be immediately fitted up and put in commission. 6. That it is expedient to permit our merchant vessels, owned exclusively by resident citizens, and commanded and navigated solely by citizens, to arm, under proper regulations, to be prescribed by law, in selfdefence, against all unlawful proceedings towards them on the high seas. CONTESTED ELECTION. The House resumed the consideration of the unfinished business, viz: the report of the committee on the petition of John Taliaferro, contesting the election of JOHN P. HUNGERFORD, which said report is as follows: The Committee of Elections, to whom was referred the petition of John Taliaferro, contesting the election of John P. Hungerford, returned, as one of the Representatives for the State of Virginia, in the present Congress, and praying to be admitted in his stead, have had the said petition under consideration, and report, in part, That, at the last General Election in Virginia for Representatives to Congress, the said John Taliaferro and John P. Hungerford were opposing candidates in the district composed of the counties of Westmoreland, Richmond, Lancaster, Northumberland, King George, and Stafford from the polls of the several counties, the sitting member appears to have obtained a majority of six votes in the district, and he was accordingly returned as elected. : That of the polls taken for the county of King George, Mr. Taliaferro had 114 votes and Mr. Hungerford 125 votes; and that, on such comparison as aforesaid, 38 persons who had voted for the former gentleman, and 50 persons who voted for the latter, appear not to have been legally qualified voters. That of the polls taken for the county of Stafford, Mr. Taliaferro had 159 votes and Mr. Hungerford 26 votes; and that, on such comparison as aforesaid, 29 persons who voted for the former gentleman, appear not to have been legally qualified voters. The result of such examination and comparison is, that deducting from both polls the persons challenged, who do not appear to have been qualified to vote according to the land lists of 1810, Mr. Taliaferro has a majority over Mr. Hungerford of 121 votes. The committee further report, that on the 7th day of May last, the petitioner gave notice to the sitting member of his intention to contest the election, on the ground that the former had a majority of the legal and qualified votes, and that such notice was accompanied by a list of the persons challenged by the petitioner, with his objections to them. On the 28th of May, the sitting member furnished the petitioner with a list of the persons challenged by him, setting forth his objections against such voters. These lists contain, as well the names of the persons who the committee find not to be on the land lists, as others who are challenged by the parties for the want of the freehold qualification, and for other causes. That on the 27th day of September last, the petitioner gave notice in writing, subscribed by him, to the sitting member, that testimony would be taken in relation to the present controversy, and to be used in the deci sion of the same, at King George court-house on the 10th; at Westmoreland court-house on the 17th; and at Richmond court-house on the 22d of October; and that the petitioner, agreeable to such notice, has taken sundry depositions, which are now before the committee; but the sitting member did not attend such examination, for reasons stated by him in a protest which he caused to be delivered to the petitioner. The committee further state, that they made the comparison of the polls with the land lists, at the partiThat of the polls taken for the county of Westmorc- cular request of the petitioner, and for the purpose of land, John Taliaferro had 37 votes and John P. Hung-reducing the controversy before them as much as poserford 316 votes; and that, on comparing the poll with the land list of the year 1810, and taking the list as a test, it appears to the committee that 9 persons who voted for the former, and 162 persons who voted for the latter gentleman, were not qualified to vote. That of the polls taken for the county of Richmond, Mr. Taliaferro had 103 votes, and Mr. Hungerford 130 votes; and that, on such comparison as aforesaid, 12 sible; and that they were induced to this course from adopting as a principle, that, according to the laws of Virginia, the land list of the year prior to the election is, in the first instance, to be received as evidence of all the freeholders in the county: but this evidence they conceive, and so it was admitted by the parties, is only conclusive in the absence of all other evidence; and they accordingly are of opinion, that it is competent for the parties to show, by other testimony, that persons appearing on the land list are not freeholders, and thus not entitled to vote; and on the other hand that persons not appearing on the land lists are freeholders and voters. The sitting member, before such examination was gone into, asked for time to take testimony, under the conviction that in a reasonable period, to be fixed by the committee, he would be able, by evidence to be taken, to support his challenges and his poll, and he still requests such time to be allowed to him: the petitioner, on the other hand, has at all times opposed such request, on the ground that the sitting member has had sufficient time, since he was apprized that the election would be contested, to procure his testimony. The committee are aware that some inconvenience must arise to the petitioner, if this contest is laid over for any time; but they think the right of suffrage ought not to be hazarded or destroyed on account of any individual inconvenience. If there has not been gross neglect in the sitting member, the committee conceive that it is due to the electors of the district who polled for him, and to himself, not to hurry his case to a decision without affording them and him an opportunity to make good the election, if they can do it. NOVEMBER, 1811. sheriffs and two of the deputy sheriff's who attended to compare the polls, that if an equality of votes had ap peared, they would have voted for the petitioner, which certificate was transmitted by the magistrate, before whom it was attested, to the clerk of this House, at the request of Mr. Taliaferro, to be retained until called for by him. This, the petitioner alleges, ought to be regarded as the commencement of his testimony, and contends that it not only advertised the sitting member that his seat would be contested, but made it necessary for him forthwith, and without further notice or act on the part of the petitioner, to proceed to his examinations. The committee, however, have nothing before them which goes to show distinctly the object of the petitioner in procuring the certificate; nor can they, in any point of view, consider it as such a prelude to the scrutiny as to require from the sitting member that he should proceed to his canvass. The committee, therefore, upon a view of all the circumstances of the case, are of opinion, that further time ought to be granted to the sitting member to procure testimony, and they accordingly submit the following resolution: Resolved, That a reasonable time be allowed to John P. Hungerford, a member of this House, to procure testimony relative to his election, and that the Committee of Elections have power to examine witnesses, and to make order for such examinations in the case of the said election. It has already been stated, that the petitioner gave notice of his intention to contest the election, to the sitting member, on the 7th of May; and this the former contends was sufficient to put the latter to the task of collecting and arranging his proof; your committee see, however, that this proceeding was modelled on the laws WESTMORELAND COUNTY, April 29, 1811.. and usages of Virginia, and according to them it is SIR: The enclosed document was taken, signed, regarded as a mere incipient step, calling for no pro-and sworn to, by the subscribing gentlemen, in the ceeding from the other party. Such a notice on the heel of a contested election, is an index to the feelings of the person giving it, but not always the proof of a settled determination. As the period of the election recedes, and the difficulties attending a canvass become more apparent, the unsuccessful candidate sometimes abandons his notice and his scrutiny. It ought not, therefore, to be required of the person returned, for such cause alone, to wade through all the trouble, difficulty and expense of a tedious examination, while it remains doubtful whether his opponent will proceed: it is surely in season to begin to take defensive testimony when the opposing party has commenced the investigation. The notice given by the petitioner on the 27th of September, for the examinations on the 10th, 17th, and 22d of October, the committee have accordingly regarded as the first efficient measure towards the scrutiny, and they are satisfied that in a district composed of six counties, and in a case where the votes challenged exceeded four hundred, it was not practicable for the sitting member to take his testimony in season for the commencement of this session. A notice given by him after the 29th of September, would not have been deemed reasonable for an earlier day than the 10th of October; nor would it have been allowed in him to call the petitioner from his own examinations, which were to continue until after the 22d of October: after the 22d of October, it is not possible to conceive that the sitting member could procure his evidence, allowing him time before the first day of the session to travel to the seat of government. The committee, in addition to the facts already stated, report, that it appears to them that on the 29th day of April last, being the day of the canvass, the petitioner procured the certificates, under oath, of two of the presence of John Taliaferro, Esq., General Hunger- THOMAS ROWAND. PATRICK MAGRUDER, Esq., Clerk of the House of Reps., U. S. We, the undersigned sheriffs, who have assembled at Westmoreland court-house, on the 29th day of April, 1811, to count and compare the polls taken in our respective counties for a delegate to serve in the House of Representatives for the Congress of the United States, do certify that, if an equality of votes had appeared on the whole of the poll, we should have voted in the following manner: Richard Claughton, deputy sheriff for Thomas Hurst, sheriff of Northumberland, should have voted for John Taliaferro. William S. Sterne, deputy sheriff for Enoch Mason, sheriff of Stafford, should have voted for John Taliaferro. J. Diggs Dishman, sheriff of King George, would have voted for John Taliaferro. Joseph Carter, jun., sheriff of Lancaster, would have voted for John Taliaferro. STATE OF VIRGINIA, Westmoreland county, to wit: This 29th day of April, 1811, the aforesaid Richard Claughton, William S. Sterne, James D. Dishman, and Joseph Carter, jun., made oath before me, a justice of the peace for said county, that they would have given their vote in the manner as above stated by them. Given under my hand the day and year above. THOMAS ROWAND. |