Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

991

H. OF R.

[ocr errors]

Naval Establishment.

tution never thought of delegating. In what terms is this extraordinary power granted? "Congress shall have power to provide and maintain a Navy." From this expression alone, gentlemen, for the first time since the adoption of the Constitution-for until now the doctrine was never heard of-have considered the power implied which places the liberties of this people completely at the mercy of the General Government. If such an authority as this can be drawn by implication, all the restrictions contained in the Constitution are nugatory. have power to borrow money," &c. Here is a Congress shall similar grant of power; and indubitably if, under the authority to provide a Navy, you can deprive the citizen of his liberty, it follows, that under authority to borrow, you may force him to lend his money. So, under the power "to raise and support armies," you may compel enlistments; and thus your authority over the persons and purses of the people becomes unlimited. Sir, such a doctrine, I am persuaded, will never be sanctioned by this House.

Mr. B. said, his indisposition would not permit him to say more upon the subject. He considered it impracticable to carry into effect the proposed system, without subverting the foundations of the Constitution; and he would not consent to destroy the temple of liberty for the purpose of building on its ruins a Naval Establishment.

992

JANUARY, 1812.

canism, which he drew in with his first breath, so long would he lift up his hand against the improvident expenditure of public money, and endeavor to keep the Government within those rules of economy which brought it into existence. But, though he was an advocate for economy, he was not for withholding appropriations for any expenditure which he believed necessary for the public safety; nor would the people of this country ever disapprove expenditures of this kind.

Mr. N. was well aware that, at the time the Republican Administration came into power, wasteful expenditure of public money; for having there had been great complaints against the raised an army and increased the Navy without necessity; for having constituted a long list of offices unnecessary for the due administration of justice, and for having, in many things, departed from the true principles of republican economy.

against the extravagance of that day, Mr. N.. But, in all the complaints which were made never heard it denied that a moderate naval force harbors of this country. And he did not mean was necessary for the protection of the coasts and be able to meet the navy of Great Britain on the to advocate the building of a navy which should ocean. protect our commerce in our own waters, and be He wished for such a one only as would able to drive off any vessel of war which should come upon our coast for the purpose of annoying and distressing us.

Mr. NELSON said he would make a few remarks on this question, as this was the first op- which might be calculated to wound the feelings He would forbear to make any insinuations portunity which he had found of offering his sen- of any gentleman; but he thought, when co libtiments on a subject, considered, on all hands, as eral a land force had been granted, some attenof the first importance to the country. It was tion ought to be paid to the wishes of gentlemen not for his own gratification that he should tres- who deemed a small increase of our Navy as abpass on the patience of the House; not because solutely necessary for our protection. What was he feared to send out his vote unaccompanied by our object in raising an army of twenty-five a speech; not because those who in any way thousand men? Was it not to obtain redress for favor the Naval Establishment are charged with injuries committed on our maritime and commer anti-republican principles. Considerations of this cial rights? Were the injuries committed on the kind he disregarded. It was true that he, like land? Certainly they were not. Will the capevery other Republican in this House, was alive ture of Canada compel Great Britain to respect to the dangers to which the liberties of the country might be exposed from large navy or army believe it would. Canada was not of much use our commercial rights in future? He did not establishments. But he had no fears from any to Great Britain, nor would it be of much benefit naval establishment at present proposed, nor from to us. the expense to be incurred in carrying it into of losing Canada may influence Great Britain to It is possible, however, the apprehension effect. Nor had he any fears from an additional repeal or modify her Orders in Council; if so, it army of twenty-five thousand men, so long as a will be very well; but if we proceed to take that spirit of republicanism and a love of liberty pre-country, she will not surrender that which she dominates in this country; but if, by indulging in luxury, and giving way to a corruption of manners, the pure fountain of republicanism should hereafter become polluted, then we might have some ground to fear the effects of a standing army of even twenty-five thousand men, drawn round some ambitious military chief, who might turn them against the Government.

enjoys without restraint for the restoration of a barren rock; for, according to his ideas, Canada was of no advantage to Great Britain but as a road and harbor for her vessels.

this country had just cause of war against Great Mr. N. said it was unnecessary to prove that Britain; this had been acknowledged by their Economy, said Mr. N., is the life and heart of Secretary of State. The conduct of this Govown Minister, in his correspondence with our every republican Government. It was a devia-ernment has been strictly impartial to both, the tion from this principle which destroyed a former Administration (Mr. Adams's) and brought into existence the present republican Government. So long as he felt those attachments to republi

belligerents; none but a madman would insinuate the contrary. The same terms had been offered to both nations, and, if one accepted, and the other rejected them, they had each their own choice.

[blocks in formation]

Both belligerents, Mr. N. said, have disregarded our neutral rights; have not considered what was due to us as a neutral; but rather how much injury and injustice a neutral country would submit to. Whence has this proceeded? From our own acquiescence. Because we did not resist the first aggression, but acquiesced until accumulated injuries of both nations overwhelmed us with violence. But we have, at length, determined manfully to rise and maintain our rights, not by bulletins and resolutions, not by appearing only to take war measures, but in a manner that shall convince our enemy, and the world, that we are in earnest,

But, will it be sufficient to raise a land force to go against the British provinces? Suppose, Mr. N. said, we get possession of the two Canadas, New Brunswick and Halifax, shall we have obtained the objects for which we take up arms? Certainly not. It will be necessary, therefore, that we should make every exertion to raise a force with which to protect and enforce our maritime rights.

H. of R.

did not think so. The people, Mr. N. said, understand the nature of an impost duty as well as we do. They know it is a duty laid on imported articles, which, if they purchase, they pay; but they are at liberty to purchase them or not. But no man can avoid paying a direct tax, and if you have not the money to pay, your property will be sold to produce it.

Mr. N. said, an idea had suggested itself to him, which he would submit to the Committee. We have tried the restrictive system in order to protect our commerce, and found it ineffectual, and are about to resort to another course. The expenses of the war will have to be provided for by loans, and it is proposed to resort to direct taxes in order to enable us to pay the interest of these loans. To prevent the necessity of having recourse to this mode of taxation, which would prove very oppressive to the people in some parts of the country, he would propose a repeal of the non-importation law, and by this means, we should not only get the goods wanting for our trade with the Indians, but draw money into our Treasury from impost duty; and if we had recourse to war, he saw no necessity for keeping this law in force.

If the resources of the United States were competent to the object, he would say, establish such a Navy as shall be able to cope with the British fleet at sea; but he knew this was not practica- Whence has arisen the opinion, at this time, ble; but we ought to do as much as we are able Mr. N. said, that to extend our Navy would be to do; we ought to put our Navy on the best foot-attended with bad consequences-that it would ing, as it is on the water that our rights are assailed. But he did not wish to extend his views further at present, than a sufficient force to clear our coasts of pirates and picaroons, to protect our ports and harbors, our coasting and our West India trade.

Mr. N. thought it necessary to make this effort, in order to convince the nations of Europe that the representations heretofore made of this country, were erroneous; to show them that we are competent to make exertions for the defence of our national rights, and willing to do so whenever necessary. He did not wish this nation to be considered as a great naval and military nation; but he wished the world to know, that we are at all times able and willing to maintain our rights whenever they are assailed; when we shall have established this character, said Mr. N., our rights will be respected.

Is commerce of no avail to this country? What is it that gives a spring to your agriculture? It is commerce. What is it that fills your Treasury? Commerce. What paid your national debt? Commerce. What was it which procured a sale for your surplus produce? It is foreign commerce. If it produce all these benefits to the country, is it not, then, worth protection ?

Commerce, both foreign and domestic, is necessary for this country. In a manufacturing country, a nation may, perhaps, dispense with commerce; but here, where we have no manufactures of any consequence; where agriculture is our chief interest, we could not exist without a commerce to find a market for the produce of our lands. But gentlemen say, our imposts are disguised taxes, which are anti republican. He 12th CoN. 1st Sess.-32

be anti-republican? Can it have been the cabalistic effect produced by the report of the Secretary of the Treasury? Or from what other cause? None of these apprehensions were entertained when the army bill was before the House, and he thought the danger to be apprehended from an army was infinitely greater than from a Navy Establishment. Mr. N. concluded with some further observations in favor of building the ten frigates proposed by the bill, and against striking out the section.

Mr. BURWELL moved to postpone the subject until the 4th of February. As the decision of this question had nothing to do with the preparatory measures for war, he supposed no inconvenience would be experienced from this postponement. As there were, no doubt, many gentlemen who still wished to be heard on this subject, they would have time to prepare themselves; for, as this debate had continued little more than three weeks, they could scarcely be expected now to be prepared; besides, their arguments would then be new; whereas, if they were now delivered, they would appear a mere repetition. He hoped the House would indulge him in this motion, as this subject swallowed up every other. There are a number of important bills before the House. Our table is loaded with business, and if the course which he proposed was not taken, after a session of six or eight months, Congress would adjourn without having done the business for which they met. Besides, he was something like the English priest, who, having expressed a fondness for partridges, was served with them until he was almost surfeited. He began to want a change of fare. He had heard enough about a Navy; he would be glad of a little variety. If he had

[blocks in formation]

thought there were any chance of getting the question in ten or twelve days, he would not have made the motion; but at present he saw no end to the debate.

JANUARY, 1812.

and rivers of a neutral nation, and lie there in wait for her enemies, who might be trading with the neutral? This, I presume, will not be contended for; nor will I contend for the whole of Some gentlemen appearing willing to debate our rights, at this time. I now come to the wathis motion, Mr. B. withdrew it; and after a few ters within our own territory. It is absolutely remarks from Mr. SMILIE against the Navy- necessary to have a more efficient navy than you Mr. WIDGERY said:-The subject of the bill now have to govern your harbors in times of peace. on the table had been so ably discussed, that it Let me call your attention to the insolent answer would seem as if nothing more could be said of a British commander, not long since, in the on the subject. By the Constitution of the United Delaware. When ordered off by the collector, States, Congress are empowered to build and sup- in pursuance of our laws, did he not send word port a navy. The framers of the compact, no that he had a very good berth, and that he lay very doubt, thought it necessary to have a navy, or well at his mooring? This was in plain English this provision would not have been made in the telling the United States he would go when he Constitution. It is the duty of a neutral nation pleased. Sir, soon after the British armed ships to keep peace and order within her own jurisdic- were interdicted the waters of the United States tion-she ought to be able to compel obedience by the President's proclamation, was there not a to her laws; and, for this purpose, it is necessary nore high-handed violation committed by the to have such an establishment of legal powers, as commander of a British armed vessel in the port shall pervade the utmost limits of her jurisdiction of Charleston, South Carolina? Will it be in -a government in which the belligerents, when your power to prevent the like insults on your they come within your harbors, may feel safe, Government, unless you have a sufficient force to otherwise they will be afraid to come and trade spread along your coast? Sir, if we are to have with you, lest they should get entrapped by their a war, one gun afloat, in a good ship, is worth tea enemy. It is certainly the duty of a neutral Pow- on land. They can be sent from place to place, er to govern their own harbors, as well on water along shore, as the occasion may require. Guns as on land for this purpose, it is absolutely ne- on shore are stationary; a ship, with a fair wind cessary that you should have a small navy, or at and tide, will pass them nine times out of ten; least some addition to what you have already but if she passes another ship, she may meet her got, in order to compel submission to the laws and again when she least expects it. But, say the ordinances of your Government; anything short gentlemen, the English will have them as soon of this will leave your system incomplete, and of as you have built them. Sir, if the captain of course incompetent to the purposes for which it a British ship should see an American of equal was established. What are the extreme limits force, he will be very careful not to crowd sail in of your jurisdiction? Sir, were I to fix them, I order to get himself into difficulty; nor will the should say the limits on the Southeast should be American in that case be in a hurry to get off. the Gulf Stream, a line drawn by the God of na- If an American frigate meets one more than her ture, and one which no maritime traveller can match, she can run from her; and it is well unmistake. When the armed ships of any nation derstood that no frigates on the ocean can outsail were hovering on our coast, within that line, I the American frigates. It is said they will rot would order them off as intruders. In this case and decay; so will your houses-yet every man I apprehend some will think me extravagant, be- wants a house to protect him from the inclemencause, by the law of nations, the extreme distance cy of the weather. This negative reason will go from land appears to have been fixed at three to the annihilation of the human species; all men miles; this law may very well apply to the Eu- are born to die-therefore, take no pains to nurse ropean nations, because in many cases nature has and bring up our tender offspring. Surely this so bounded the ocean as to compel them to pass kind of opposition cannot have weight with this narrow straits, in order to get to and from their Committee. But there is another reason: they own kingdoms; such are the Straits of Gibraltar, are "the means of external war; they invite agthe British Channel, St. George's Channel, thegressions, and hence the Danes lost their fleet narrow pass into the Baltic, and many other places; three miles from each shore would leave but scant room for them to pass with head winds. This doctrine cannot apply to the United States; she has no pass way through which it is necessary for other nations to travel with their ships; we may therefore fairly conclude, if they are found cruising on our coast, within the Gulf, it is for the purpose of depredating on our commerce. But there is another reason why three miles from land will not apply in this country for instance, you may be twenty miles up the Delaware or Chesapeake, and not be within three miles of the shore. Did any rational man ever presume that a belligerent had a right, according to the law of nations, to go up the bays

at Copenhagen-our ships would share the same fate." There is no similarity in the two cases: as well might gentlemen compare the dim taper of a damp cell to the bright luminary of Heaven. Copenhagen is on an island, surrounded with navigable water, that enabled the British fleet to land an army on one side and lay their fleet on the other, and at the same time prevent their getting a reinforcement from the mainland. The United States are a continent, containing large rivers and harbors, in which her fleets may lie safe, and from which assistance cannot be prevented. But gentlemen are so candid as to say they never will vote anything to the support of commerce, as they believe it not for the interest of our country.

[blocks in formation]

Sir, by comparison it is that we know the good from bad, or the lesser from the greater evil. In order, therefore, to see whether commerce is so detrimental, or of no use to the country, let us look into those countries who have wrapped themselves up in this kind of inland protection, and would have nothing to do with foreign commerce; are they a more happy people than ourselves? Are they not, on the contrary, the poorest and most distressed people on earth? Where you see thousands of poor, who have nothing to shelter them from the weather, and depending on cold charity for their support?

H. OF R.

exceptions: but admit it, for argument sake, and then it will be found that the maritime towns contribute a large portion of the money, which is paid into the public Treasury-they risk their large capitals; if you say they may insure it, still it is all done in and by the citizens of the maritime towns. The same may be said, as to clothing and to spirituous liquors, sugar, and many other articles, which in the inland towns are made among themselves; so that in any point of view, which gentlemen may please to take of the case, the maritime towns are entitled to the notice of Government. The Army raised under the idea Look into the North; the Russians seek no of supporting commerce is a farce, unless you foreign commerce with their own ships are they have a naval force to co-operate with it. Sir, à more happy people than we are? On the con- you cannot support commerce, in the frozen retrary, the poor or common people in Russia have gions of the North, nor on the mountains of the no will of their own; they are bought and sold Alleghany, It must be done where commerce with the lands to which they are attached, in the floats. Whence arises this mighty opposition to same way that the slaves in the West Indies or commerce? We seem to be like sheep, afraid of the South are bought and sold; they have noth- the water. Sir, I hope the hydrophobia has not ing to live on but black bread and salt, a great part got amongst us. Seven hundred thousand people of the year while, on the contrary, the Court is at least are employed in your maritime towns, in the most splendid in all Europe. Is this a situa- commercial pursuits. They have been brought tion to which gentlemen would wish to see the up in that line of life, and will not consent to Americans reduced? I call on any gentleman abandon it. You have upwards of a million of in the hall to show an instance where freedom tons of shipping in the United States. The peowas ever supported for any length of time, where ple who are connected directly and indirectly in commerce was precluded or did not flourish. I this immense tonnage, will not consent to give it think it will not be attempted by the most stren- up as a dead loss. Such a thing is not to be exuous opposer of the commerce of this country. pected, it must be for want of an acquintance Where is this unwillingness of the people to sup- with the situation of their country, that gentleport commerce to be found? in what section of men are induced thus to oppose commerce. Sir, the Union? In Massachusetts, where they have I was one of those who was in favor of the ema regular organized militia of upwards of seventy bargo-I thought locking the registers and ships, thousand, hear of a man who is not willing to ap- papers in the collector's office, would keep the ply a portion of the funds or income of the United ships at home-what was the effect? The BritStates to the support of our commerce! Gentle-ish pointed out the way to do without them, viz: men say, take Canada for the support of com- come when and where you please, we will promerce; and when you ask them what we are to tect you without papers; the effect is well known. get by that, the answer is, enforce the restrictive But in case of war, if you are not to have a Navy, measures. Sir, this cannot be effected in a coun- and you abandon commerce, what is to become try like ours; if you take Canada, unless you had of the tars of America? Are they to be left more naval force than you now have, two British either to enter your Army or starve in the streets? frigates would be able to prevent your getting in Sir, they will not submit to either; they will no or out of the St. Lawrence; this will, therefore, longer regard the country, than the country will have no effect in supporting your trade. Sir, afford them protection-no, sir, they will enter when I voted for the Army, I did it in full ex- into foreign service, and will become your enepectation that all the component parts of this mies, and the most dangerous enemies this counGovernment were to be protected equally, accord- try ever had: give them a chance with the rest ing to their wants and necessities. The other of your citizens on the element with which they day, when we voted for the Army, we made no are acquainted, and they will be ready in your complaint of our inability to raise a much larger defence to brave every danger; many of them Army than the Executive wished to ask for; we left your country during the last embargo, having were rich then, but by some strange magic, just no other way to get their bread. Sir, it is not before we are to give our votes on the subject of true that ships are the sole cause of war; we a few additional frigates, a report is ushered in have ever since history has been known, heard from the Secretary of the Treasury. Sir, if you of war. Charles XII., of Sweden, with his cannot afford to go farther, reduce, your Army, land forces, marched into Russia in the depth of and in that proportion add to your naval force; snow, in search of conquest: he had no navy to let those industrious citizens who inhabit your aid him. Sir, we have a more striking proof that maritime towns have a proportion of the defence wars have been as frequent, and more cruel, antewhich is to be supported from their industry. cedent to the use of navies, than since; look into Gentlemen say the consumer pays all; and, there- your Bible, there you will find a history of wars fore, the maritime towns have no more credit which tinged the whole face of the Christian than the rest of the community. This rule has world with blood; but does it follow, from those

[blocks in formation]

abuses, that Chistianity is not to be supported ? Certainly not, nor will it follow, that because some abuses may have happened in the naval system of the world, that, therefore, we shonld have no navy. If gentlemen who think this country has no need of commerce, could have what they wish, your streets would be crowded with the poor and distressed, begging from place to place, and starving for want of employ. Sir, in 1810, your whole amount of revenue was upwards of $16,000,000; it is true it did not all come into the Treasury, but what was paid out answered a good purpose, it gave bread to those who collected, and were concerned in and about it. Is this not worth protecting? Sir, with such a spirit of enterprise no nation can be enslaved; destroy your commerce, and you must become slaves, because you cut the cord on which enterprise is suspended.

The question on agreeing to strike out the section for building the frigates was carried-yeas 62, nays 59, as follows:

YEAS-William Anderson, Stevenson Archer, Ezekiel Bacon, David Bard, William W. Bibb, Adam Boyd, Robert Brown, William A. Burwell, William Butler, James Cochran, John Clopton, William Crawford, Roger Davis, Joseph Desha, Samuel Dinsmoor, Elias Earle, William Findley, James Fisk, Meshack Franklin, Thomas Gholson, Peterson Goodwyn, Edwin Gray, Felix Grundy, Bolling Hall, John A. Harper, Jacob Hufty, John M. Hyneman, Richard M. Johnson, Joseph Kent, William R. King, Abner Lacock, Joseph Lefever, Aaron Lyle, Nathaniel Macon, William McCoy, Samuel McKee, Arunah Metcalf, Jas. Morgan, Jeremiah Morrow, Anthony New, Thomas Newbold, Stephen Ormsby, Israel Pickens, William Piper, John Rhea, John Roane, Jonathan Roberts, William Rodman, Ebenezer Sage, Ebenezer Seaver, John Sevier, Adam Seybert, Samuel Shaw, Daniel Sheffey, John Smilie, George Smith, Richard Stanford, William Strong, John Taliaferro, Robert Whitehill, and David R. Williams.

JANUARY, 1812.

YEAS-Willis Alston, jr., Stevenson Archer, Ezekiel Bacon, John Baker, David Bard, Burwell Bassett, Abijah Bigelow, William Blackledge, Harmanus Bleecker, James Breckenridge, Elijah Brigham, Wm. A. Burwell, William Butler, John C. Calhoun, Epaphroditus Champion, Martin Chittenden, Lewis Condit, Wm. Crawford, John Davenport, jr., Roger Davis, John Dawson, Samuel Dinsmoor, Elias Earle, Wm. Ely, James Emott, William Findley, James Fisk, Asa Fitch, Meshack Franklin, Thomas Gholson, Thos. R. Gold, Peterson Goodwyn, Isaiah L. Green, John A. Harper, Aylett Hawes, John M. Hyneman, Richard Jackson, junior, Joseph Kent, Philip B. Key, Wm. R. King, Lyman Law, Peter Little, Robert Le Roy Livingston, William Lowndes, George C. Maxwell, Thomas Moore, Archibald McBryde, William McCoy, Alexander McKim, James Milnor, Samuel L. Mitchill, Jonathan O. Moseley, Hugh Nelson, Thomas Newbold, Stephen Ormsby, Joseph Pearson, Timothy Pitkin, jr., James Pleasants, jr., Benjamin Pond, Peter B. Porter, Elisha R. Potter, Josiah Quincy, William Reed, Wm. M. Richardson, Henry M. Ridgely, Saml. Ringgold, John Roane, Thomas Sammons, John Sevier, Daniel Sheffey, John Smith, Lewis B. Sturges, Samuel Taggart, John Taliaferro, Uri Tracy, George M. Troup, Chas Turner, jr., Laban Wheaton, Leonard White, William Widgery, Thomas Wilson, and Robert Wright.

NAYS-William Anderson, William W. Bibb, Adam Boyd, Robert Brown, James Cochran, John Clopton, Joseph Desha, Edwin Gray, Felix Grundy, Bolling Hall, Obed Hall, Jacob Hufty, Richard M. Johnson, Abner Lacock, Joseph Lefever, Aaron Lyle, Nathaniel Macon, Samuel McKee, Arunah Metcalf, James Morgan, Jeremiah Morrow, Thomas Newbold, Israel Pickens, William Piper, John Rhea, Jonathan Roberts, William Rodman, Ebenezer Sage, Adam Seybert, Samuel Shaw, John Smilie, George Smith, Richard Stanford, William Strong, Robert Whitehill, David R.

Williams.

Another question was on agreeing with the Committee of the Whole to make the above appropriation for three years, viz: for the years 1812, 1813, and 1814. This motion was carriedyeas 67, nays 52, as follows:

NAYS-Willis Alston, jr., John Baker, Burwell Bassett, Abijah Bigelow, Harmanus Bleecker, James Breckenridge, Elijah Brigham, John C. Calhoun, EpaYEAS-Willis Alston, jun., Ezekiel Bacon, John phroditus Champion, Langdon Cheves, Martin Chit- Baker, Burwell Bassett, Abijah Bigelow, William tenden, Lewis Condit, John Davenport, junior, John Blackledge, Harmanus Bleecker, James Breckenridge, Dawson, William Ely, James Emott, Asa Fitch, Thos. Elijah Brigham, J. C. Calhoun, Epaphroditus ChamR. Gold, Isaiah L. Green, Aylett Hawes, Richard Jack-pion, Langdon Cheves, Martin Chittenden, Lewis Conson, jr., Philip B. Key, Lyman Law, Peter Little, Robert Le Roy Livingston, William Lowndes, George C. Maxwell, Archibald McBryde, Alexander McKim, James Milnor, Samuel L. Mitchill, Thomas Moore, Jonathan O. Moseley, Hugh Nelson, Thomas Newton, Joseph Pearson, Timothy Pitkin, jr., James Pleasants, jr., Benjamin Pond, Peter B. Porter, Elisha R. Potter, Josiah Quincy, William Reed, William M. Richardson, Samuel Ringgold, Thomas Sammons, John Smith, Silas Stow, Lewis B. Sturges, Samuel Taggart, Uri Tracy, George M. Troup, Charles Turner, jr., Laban Wheaton, Leonard White, William Widgery, Thomas Wilson, Richard Winn, and Robert Wright.

The next question was, on agreeing with the Committee of the Whole to fill the blank for providing ship timber and other imperishable materials, with the words two hundred thousand dollars, which was carried-yeas 82, nays 37, as follows:

dit, John Davenport, jr., Roger Davis, John Dawson, Samuel Dinsmoor, Elias Earle, William Ely, James Emott, Asa Fitch, Thomas R. Gold, Isaiah L. Green, John A. Harper, Richard Jackson, jun., Joseph Kent, Philip B. Key, William R. King, Lyman Law, Peter Little, Robert Le Roy Livingston, William Lowndes, George C. Maxwell, Archibald McBryde, Alexander McKim, James Milnor, Samuel L. Mitchill, Jonathan O. Moseley, Hugh Nelson, Thomas Newton, Joseph Pearson, Timothy Pitkin, jun., James Pleasants, jr., Benjamin Pond, Peter B. Porter, Elisha R. Potter, Josiah Quincy, William Reed, William M. Richardson, Henry M. Ridgely, Samuel Ringgold, Thomas Sammons, John Sevier, Daniel Sheffey, John Smith, Silas Stow, Lewis B. Sturges, Samuel Taggart, Uri Tracy, George M. Troup, Charles Turner, jr., Laban Wheaton, Leonard White, Wm. Widgery, Thomas Wilson, and Robert Wright.

NAYS-William Anderson, Stevenson Archer, Wm.

« ZurückWeiter »