H. of R. Naval Establishment. JANUARY, 1808. itself, he should vote for concurrence with the twenty-four thousand to that distress which had number reported by the Committee. been depicted. If it were a matter of necessity to support these virtuous people, let gentlemen come forward and drain the Treasury to support them. But others suffered as well as sailors; and ploy, they would not leave a cent in the Treasury. He would now call the attention of the House to the famous gunboat bill; this was said, by its advocates, to contemplate a great superiority of the new establishment over the old; that it would require but very few regulars, the rest being supplied by a naval militia. We blow hot and cold, said Mr. T. We depart from the very principle laid down, on the passage of that bill, and are now going to raise a naval standing army, for, whether by sea or land, it is a standing army. I say it is not expedient. If the gunboats were now all ready for service, under the state of things which now exists, I should not be in favor of employing more men than would be sufficient to trim the boats and keep them in order. So that, take this measure on principle, it appears to be departing from the principle on which we set out; and, if it is meant to be done in charity, it is doing nothing. Therefore, unless gentlemen can show me that such a number of men is necessary for taking care of the boats, having, at the same time, an eye to a naval militia, I shall vote against the bill on the table. Mr. DANA said, if he understood the report of the Secretary of the Navy, the estimate for one thousand two hundred and seventy-two men, was the number supposed to be required for two frig-if they were to support all who were out of emates and the gunboats already built. Considering the number of gunboats authorized, he should really doubt whether two frigates, with these men and officers, were competent to take care of the gunboats. Whether it were intended to employ the gunboats, or not, if the object now were to save from perishing such a number of seamen, he was much disposed to pass the bill. The case of these men was different from that of any other in the United States. The qualities which fitted them for service unfitted them for taking care of themselves; of all men on the earth they were the first that would divide their purses with those in distress. To be provident and saving was not their character; when called to public service they exposed their lives as if of no worth; always ready to give away what little they had earned. It was for these men, said Mr. D., that you professed to have laid the embargo, to secure to them protection. The protection you have secured is the utter deprivation of employment. Those who understood the character of a seaman, need not be told how peculiarly difficult it was for him to employ himself in any other branch of labor. It was true that many of the men employed in merchant vessels could cultivate land; but, as it respected the great body of the seamen, it was more difficult for them to procure employment, except on board of a vessel, than any other men. Their very habits at sea were not favorable to habits of industry on shore; he therefore thought their case peculiarly entitled to attention. If the corporations of our cities had manifested a generous attention to the distresses of these men, he was not disposed, for that reason, to withdraw from them any means of support which it might be in the power of the House to afford. He thought, with an overflowing Treasury, and so much solicitude as had been displayed for the interests of these men, by laying the embargo, that it was but right that the House should provide them employment, on the principle of humanity. Mr. TAYLOR said, the scope of the argument of the gentleman who introduced the bill, and of the gentleman who was last up, was, that these men were in distress, and therefore should be employed. If they were to be employed, Mr. T. wished it to be for some service. As to their being confined, forty or fifty in a boat, and eating up the money of the planters, who suffered equally with them, he could not agree to it. Taking it up, however, as a matter of charity, it was contemplated to employ one thousand two hundred seamen. The seamen of the United States amounted to between fifty and sixty thousand. Suppose one-half of these to be employed in the coasting trade, twenty-five thousand remained; and he wished to know whether they ought to select twelve hundred of them, and leave the other twenty-three or Mr. CHANDLER asked for what purpose the bill contemplated these seamen to be raised? The SPEAKER said, for the service of the United States. Mr. CHANDLER said, he had understood that to be the case, and wished things to be called by their proper names. He thought, as this was the case, that these men were to be raised for the service of the United States, and not merely for the sake of supporting them, as gentlemen seemed to fancy. This number was declared to be necessary, and was only contemplated to be called into service if the public exigency required, and not otherwise. Mr. DAWSON said he was extremely sorry that he could not express himself to the comprehension of gentlemen. He had indeed mentioned that there were a number of seamen unemployed. He had given it as a reason why that number should now be raised, as when unemployed they could be got without difficulty. He had not considered the bill as contemplated to afford charity to seamen; but if gentlemen would bring forward a motion of that kind, he would go as far as anybody. But the present bill contemplated no such thing; the fact was, that the vessels now built were not manned. The simple question was, would they, or would they not, give the Government men sufficient to man these vessels for actual service? Mr. QUINCY was glad that the motives on which the bill was founded had been explained, for really he had not been able before distinctly to ascertain them. As he now understood the object of it was, that the vessels now lying in our harbors without men should be immediately manned. Would this be produced by the bill on the table? He thought not. He could not correctly understand the operation of the bill, for it had been read but once or twice, and then the hearing of it was almost precluded by the noise and inattention which prevailed; but it did appear to him that the President had not any right given to him to employ these men, except in case of an exigency yet to arise. The bill did not contemplate the immediate manning of all the vessels; these men were not to be raised unless an exigency should arise. If that exigency did exist, the bill should take away the discretion, and express affirmatively that this number should be raised. Mr. NICHOLAS said, that upon this subject he owed it to himself to say, that he had entertained but one opinion. He had believed that arming the nation, and being prepared for war, had been the duty of this House and of the other branch of the Legislature, ever since they had been convened. Not that I want war, but that if it comes upon us we may be prepared to meet it. If we want peace, the only way to obtain it is to show that we are ready for war. Upon this ground I have been anxious to see the nation put in a state of defence. If all the gunboats were in readiness to receive men, my vote should be given without hesitation to raise a sufficient number of men to man the whole. We are told that the present number is wanted; I will, therefore, vote for it with the greatest cheerfulness. I wish more could be employed. Whenever the question occurs of relieving those seamen out of employ and in distress, I will meet it with as much liberality as any gentleman. The only question now is, do the circumstances of the country require that we should raise this number? I believe that the circumstances of the country require that we should not only raise seamen but landsmen. Therefore, at present, I shall vote for the number asked, and as soon as more boats are ready my vote shall be given for manning them as fast as they can be erected. After a further desultory debate (in which the SPEAKER repeatedly reminded gentlemen of the question under consideration) in which Messrs. LYON, GARDENIER, LIVERMORE, FISK, DANA, REA of Pennsylvania, SMILIE, and TALLMADGE, took a part, and none of whom opposed the bill: Mr. TALLMADGE moved that the further consideration of the bill be postponed till to-morrow, that gentlemen might have an opportunity of filling it with a smaller or greater number. This motion was opposed by Messrs. DAWSON, NELSON, and TAYLOR, and supported by Messrs. DESHA, QUINCY, BLACKLEDGE, COOK, and DANA; in the course of which, Mr. NELSON wished to see who were desirous of consuming time in this way, who were in favor of arming the nation, and who against it. If the documents before the House were voluminous, if the bill were long, or if there were any difficulty in understanding either, he should be willing to postpone in order to have them printed. But the plain question was, whether would they or would they not, employ 1,272 seamen? Every hour was 10th CoN. 1st SESS.-48 H. of R. of consequence; they could now get men for five or seven dollars per month; but if they waited till these men could get employ on board merchant ships at fifteen dollars a month, it would be difficult to procure them for national service. As he said before, he was desirous to see who were willing to arm the nation and who were not, and therefore he called for the yeas and nays on the motion for postponement. Mr. DANA.-Have we an enemy at our doors? Are we now to be called into battle? Is there anything new which calls upon us particularly at this moment? Shall it be said, those who wish to postpone this bill till to-morrow are not ready to provide for the defence of the country? Mr. D. said one day could make no difference. Hearing this bill read as well as he could from the peculiar difficulty of distinguishing exactly what was said in this splendid structure, he understood it as providing for means of defence, or as providing for the employment of such a number of seamen now out of employ. In either case it was not an improper exercise of legislative power, and need not be so hastily pushed through the House, there being nothing contained in the bill which forbade the usual course of proceeding. Mr. HOLLAND moved to adjourn. Negatived, 53 to 43. Mr. QUINCY Supported the motion for postponement, contending that they were now legislating in the dark. The yeas and nays being taken on the motion for postponement, it was decided in the negative, yeas 51, nays 64, as follows: YEAS-Evan Alexander, William Blackledge, John Boyle, Robert Brown, William A. Burwell, William Butler, Epaphroditus Champion, Martin Chittenden, Howell Cobb, Orchard Cook, Samuel W. Dana, John Davenport, jr., Joseph Desha, Daniel M. Durell, Jas. Elliot, William Ely, Meshack Franklin, Barent Gardenier, Chas. Goldsborough, Peterson Goodwyn, Edwin Gray, William Hoge, James Holland, Reuben Humphreys, Robert Jenkins, James Kelly, William Kirkpatrick, Joseph Lewis, jr., Edward St. Loe Livermore, Matthew Lyon, Daniel Montgomery, jun., Thos. Moore, Jonathan O. Mosely, Timothy Pitkin jr., Josiah Quincy, John Rea of Pennsylvania, John Rowan, John Russell, Samuel Smith, John Smith, Richard Stanford, William Stedman, Lewis B. Sturges, Samuel Taggart, Benjamin Tallmadge, Jabez Upham, Nicholas Van Dyke, Robert Whitehill, Marmaduke Williams, and Richard Winn, NAYS-Willis Alston, jr., Ezekiel Bacon, Joseph Barker, Burwell Bassett, William W. Bibb, Thomas Blount, Joseph Calhoun, John Chandler, Matthew Clay, John Clopton, Richard Cutts, John Dawson, Josiah Deane, John W. Eppes, William Findley, James Fisk, James M. Garnett, Isaiah L. Green, John Harris, John Heister, William Helms, David Holmes, Benjamin Howard, Daniel Ilsley, Thomas Kenan, Nehemiah Knight, John Lambert, John Love, Nathaniel Macon, Robert Marion, Josiah Masters, William McCreery, William Milnor, John Montgomery, Jeremiah Morrow, Gurdon S. Mumford, Roger Nelson, Thomas Newbold, Thomas Newton, Wilson C. Nicholas, John Porter, John Pugh, John Rhea of Tennessee, Jacob Richards, Matthias Richards, Samuel Riker, Ebenezer Seaver, H. OF R. Naval Establishment. JANUARY, 1808. Dennis Smelt, John Smilie, Jedediah K. Smith, Henry | meeting of Congress; but he would not compro- James Witherell. Mr. STANFORD moved that the House adjourn. Negatived, 65 to 49. The question was then taken on concurrence with the number, "twelve hundred and seventytwo," reported by the Committee of the Whole, and decided in the affirmative-yeas 108, nays 10, as follows: mit his principle for a year. Till the 1st of June would be time sufficient in which to organize the marine militia. Although there appeared to be a great majority in favor of this bill, it would, as it now stood, compromit the principle on which they had lately acted. If he were but permitted to read the speeches of gentlemen on the gunboat system, he could satisfactorily prove this. He was desirous, not for himself, for he should vote consistently, but that the body should hold out to the nation the ground on which they acted. Mr. NELSON wished, upon the subject of conYEAS-Evan Alexander, Willis Alston, jr., Ezekiel sistency, that the sins of every man should lie Bacon, David Bard, Joseph Barker, Burwell Bassett, upon his own head. If he gave an inconsistent William W. Bibb, William Blackledge, Thos. Blount, vote, he should never ask his friend from South John Boyle, Robert Brown, William Butler, Joseph Carolina to come forward and account for it; he Calhoun, Epaphroditus Champion, John Chandler, had no doubt but those who elected him, the suMartin Chittenden, Matthew Clay, John Clopton, How-perior power, would punish him if he deserved it. ell Cobb, Orchard Cook, Richard Cutts, Samuel W. A majority of the House had thought proper to Dana, John Davenport, junior, John Dawson, Josiah vote for the number of 1,272; they had thought Deane, Joseph Desha, Daniel M. Durell, James Elliot, it necessary as the country was in a dangerous William Ely, John W. Eppes, William Findley, Jas. situation, perhaps on the eve of war; they did not Fisk, Meshack Franklin, Barent Gardenier, Francis know how soon these seamen might be wanted Gardner, Charles Goldsborough, Peterson Goodwyn, Isaiah L. Green, John Harris, John Heister, William to defend the nation. Did any gentleman supHelms, James Holland, David Holmes, Benjamin pose that, if we are to have war, its force will be Howard, Reuben Humphreys, Daniel Ilsley, Robert spent before the first day of July next, at that Jenkins, Richard M. Johnson, Walter Jones, James time we may be in the same situation in which Kelly, Thomas Kenan, William Kirkpatrick, Nehe- we now find ourselves. I trust no gentleman, miah Knight, John Lambert, Joseph Lewis, jr., Edw. who is a friend to the measure, will vote for the St. Loe Livermore, John Love, Matthew Lyon, Robert gentleman's motion. I would rather negative the Marion, Josiah Masters, William McCreery, William bill altogether than say that a defensive measure Milnor, John Montgomery, Thomas Moore, Jeremiah shall exist but four or five months. If the gentleMorrow, John Morrow, Jonathan O. Mosely, Gurdon S. man will amend his motion so as to extend the Mumford, Roger Nelson, Thomas Newbold, Thomas duration of the bill to the end of the next session Newton, Wilson C. Nicholas, Timothy Pitkin, jr., of Congress, or till the first of January, instead of John Porter, John Pugh, Josiah Quincy, John Rea of July, I will vote for the amendment with all my Pennsylvania, John Rhea of Tennessee, Jacob Rich- heart and soul. I have as little disposition to ards, Matthias Richards, Samuel Riker, John Russell, erect a standing army of large naval force as any Ebenezer Seaver, James Sloan, Dennis Smelt, John Smilie, Jedediah K. Smith, John Smith, Henry South-gentleman; but as this is a measure of relief to ard, William Stedman, Clement Storer, Lewis B. Sturges, Peter Swart, Samuel Taggart, Benjamin Tallmadge, John Thompson, George M. Troup, Jabez Upham, James I. Van Allen, Nicholas Van Dyke, Archibald Van Horne, Daniel C. Verplanck, Jesse Wharton, Isaac Wilbour, Marmaduke Williams, Alexander Wilson, Richard Winn, and James Witherell. NAYS-James M. Garnett, Edwin Gray, William | Hoge, Nathaniel Macon, Daniel Montgomery, John Randolph, Samuel Smith, Richard Stanford, John Taylor, and Abram Trigg. Mr. TAYLOR moved to amend the bill by inserting a clause restricting the continuance of the law for a longer time than till the first day of July next, and no longer. Mr. T. said, as in the course of discussion the naval militia had been considered as an object likely to be accomplished, and as he considered the bill as it now stood as compromitting this principle, which had been avowed by many gentlemen in a discussion of a former subject, and as he conceived it necessary to give to the people some pledge that the boats would be manned as expected, he had proposed this limitation. It might be said that the limitation should not be so restricted; that it should extend until the next defence on the other, I shall vote for it. TUESDAY, January 26. Mr. MUMFORD presented a memorial of sundry merchants and shippers in the City and State of New York, which was received and read, stating the losses and inconveniences to which the memorialists will be subjected, in consequence of the operation of an act passed during the present session of Congress, "laying an embargo on all ships and vessels in the ports and harbors of the United States;" and praying that an extension of time may be granted to them for the payment of their bonds for duties on merchandise imported by them; and that such measures may be adopted as Congress, in their wisdom, may deem proper, to prevent the memorialists from being deprived of the benefit of drawback on the exportation of the same.-Referred to the Committee of Commerce and Manufactures. On motion of Mr. JEREMIAH MORROW, the Committee on the Public Lands were instruted to inquire into the expediency of extending the time JANUARY, 1808. Classification of the Militia. H. of R. for the issuing and locating of military land war- C. appealed to the House for his correctness. He rants; and that they report by bill, or otherwise. On motion of Mr. FINDLEY, Resolved, That an Assistant Clerk be appointed by this House, who, during the necessary absence, or in case of the death of the Clerk of the House, shall perform the duties of the said Clerk; and for the faithful performance of such duties, shall be accountable to the House. On motion of Mr. GARDNER, Resolved, That the Secretary of State be directed to lay before this House a list of the names and places of abode of persons who have invented any new or useful art, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any improvement thereon, and to whom patents have issued for the same from that office, with the dates and general objects of such patents, from the first day of January 1805, to the last day of December, 1807, inclusive. Mr. NEWTON, from the Committee of Commerce and Manufactures, presented a bill to allow the importation of old copper free of duty; which was twice read and committed to a Committee of the Whole to-morrow. On motion of Mr. DAWSON, the farther consideration of the bill authorizing the raising of an additional number of seamen for the service of the United States, as amended by the House, together with the amendment proposed thereto by Mr. TAYLOR, which was depending yesterday at the time of adjournment, was postponed until to morrow. Mr. BASSETT, from the committee appointed on the fifteenth instant, presented a bill concerning public contracts; which was read and committed to a Committee of the Whole on Friday next. THE MILITIA. The House went into Committee on the bill to classify the militia of the United States; Mr. SOUTHARD'S motion, to strike out the first section of the bill, being still under consideration. Mr. M. CLAY rose to vindicate the bill from the objections which had been made against it. He took no notes, and he should therefore speak from memory. If he misstated any gentleman's observations, he should be glad to be set right. He had himself been egregiously misrepresented, but he did not attribute it to any intention to deceive, but to the difficulty of hearing in this spacious hall, where the sound of the voice is lost in echo. In reply to Mr. VARNUM, Mr. C. said, he would suppose that officer had never read the Constitution; he had never read the militia laws, or, like himself, he was old and forgetful; and did not recollect what was contained in them. That gentleman was forty-five, nay, over fifty-five years old. In reply to Mr. SOUTHARD, Mr. C. said that, gentleman told us that Alexander and his troops were old men. Mr. C. wondered where he got his knowledge. He suspected that gentleman, like himself, had not read the books. [Mr. SOUTHARD denied that he had mentioned Alexander.] Mr. then said that gentlemen spoke of Cæsar and Pompey, and perhaps he had not got the names right, as all lived near the same time, and in the same neighborhood. Mr. C. then mentioned Alexander, Hannibal, and other ancients, as examples, to show that young men make the best soldiers. Mr. C. however, said his memory was not very correct; he had not read these histories for thirty years, and a man must have a good memory, and read often, who quotes history. In reply to Mr. KELLY, Mr. C. was surprised that any objection on the score of morality should proceed from a gentleman so far South. If it had come from a quarter further East, it would not be strange. But are not old men given to the abominations of sin, as well as young men? They even go ahead in talking, if they cannot keep up in practice. As to ministers of the gospel, Mr. C. asked, if it did not look better to see a young man praying with young men, than an old man with them? Will not what they say, go more from the soul to the soul? Mr. C. next replied to Mr. TALLMADGE. That gentlemen spoke of the danger of corrupting young men in a camp. Mr. C. was not surprised at such an objection from such a quarter, though he was when it came from Pennsylvania (Mr. KELLY,) which was too near his own State (Virginia) for such an objection. Mr. C. then replied to some objections on the score of officering the militia. Mr. C. next replied to the gentleman from Boston, (Mr. QUINCY;) when he rose, Mr. C. was very much afraid; he felt like a parent who is like to lose an only child, and began to think about a retreat. He felt the effect of his eloquence before it was produced, but when at last that gentleman came to his point, it was point no point. Mr. C. invited gentlemen to the field of argument. He wished to discuss the subject fairly. If when the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. SOUTHARD) went to Rome he had stopped on the road at France, he would have done better. There we may see what fine soldiers young men can become. General Washington also performed wonders when a young man, at Fort Duquesne, now Pittsburg. Mr. C. spoke nearly an hour. Mr. VARNUM opposed the principle of the bill with considerable spirit and force. He considered the bill as introducing a new system, as trying a new experiment, attended with great difficulties, promising nothing useful in the result. Mr. NELSON spoke of the inefficacy of the present militia system. Men with wives and children could not be dragged from their homes to a distance, and compelled to fight with that courage and ardour which constitute good soldiers and insures victory. Mr. N. knew from experience the inefficiency of the present militia. Mr. N. did not understand the bill, as it had been said, to disorganize the present militia of the Eastern States. In case a detachment is wanted, this bill directs that those of a certain age should be designated for service, instead of resorting to a draught, as had been practised hitherto. Mr. N. conceived the argument that a camp was a school of immorality, to be unfounded. The large cities of New York and Philadelphia were more dangerous to the morals of young men. As to the idea of putting a parson into camp to preserve their morals, he wished to be delivered from them. They often turn their hands to a very different kind of business. As to their preaching with any benefit, it was actually out of the question. The camp was the best school for a young man. There he would learn much of human nature and of the world; he would learn how to take care of himself, and how to treat his fellows; he will acquire the character and adopt the conduct of a gentleman. JANUARY, 1808. WEDNESDAY, January 27. On motion of Mr. NEWTON, the House proceeded to consider the report of the Committee of Commerce and Manufactures, on so much of the memorial of the first and second Chambers of the City Council of Washington, as prays that the Capital of the United States may be made a port of entry and delivery, which lay on the table: Whereupon, Resolved, That the prayer of the memorial of the first and second Chambers of the City Council of Washington ought not to be granted. The House proceeded to consider the amendments proposed by the Senate to the bill, entitled "An act authorizing the erection of a bridge over the river Potomac, within the District of Columbia:" Whereupon, the House agreed to the said amendments. Mr. DAWSON, from the committee appointed on so much of the President's Message, of the twentyseventh of October last, as relates to the Military and Naval Establishments, presented a bill authorizing the raising an additional army; which was twice read and committed to a Committee of the Whole on Monday next. Mr. VAN DYKE spoke against the principle of the bill on the Constitutional ground, as well as that of expediency. By the Constitution, the militia may be called out to "repel invasion, to suppress insurrection, and execute the laws." For no other cause, in Mr. V. D.'s opinion could the militia be called into service. But, by the provisions of the bill, the President may order the junior class to any part of the United States on the appearance of national danger. If then there is, to borrow a phrase from high authority, "a speck of war" in the horizon, the whole body of the younger class of militia may be marched and countermarched from one end of the country to the other; a power not only unconstitutional, but dangerous to the rights and liberties of the people. From the arguments of gentlemen who advo- The House again resolved itself into a Comcated the bill, Mr. V. D. perceived it was the ob-mittee of the Whole on the bill to amend the sevject to employ the militia for every operation of eral acts to provide more effectually for the naactual war, to the exclusion of all other military tional defence by the militia of the United States; force. He conceived they could not be relied on and, after some time spent therein the Commitfor the operation of actual war. For their Con- tee rose and had leave to sit again. stitutional purposes, they were an adequate force; for a short enterprise or a sudden exploit, they might be relied on; but could not be regarded as the great and exclusive bulwark of the nation in war. Mr. V. D. conceived that men of the age of thirty-five were as competent as those of twentyfive, to endure fatigue and to perform every kind of military service. The experience of the very gentlemen who advocate the bill, will show that this is the case. Nay, men at a more advanced age than is proposed, are generally better fitted for military life. By this bill a great part of our most efficient strength, is entirely excluded from the defence of the country. Mr. V. D. considered the camp as furnishing temptations to young men which would lead many to destruction. From twenty-one to twenty-five years of age is a most important and critical period of life. It is then that habits are established, that a character is formed, and the mind matured. If he wished to do the greatest possibly injury to a young man of that age, he would place him in a camp. If he was disposed to corrupt his habits. blast his character, and ruin his prospects forever, he would send him to a camp. On motion of Mr. SOUTHARD, the Committee rose without coming to any decision, and obtained leave to sit again. Mr. DAWSON, from the same committee, presented a bill authorizing the President of the United States to raise a provisional army; which was read twice and committed to a Committee of the Whole on Monday next. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. The House took up for consideration the resolution lately offered by Mr. KEY, for the erection of a standing committee of the House to inquire of Columbia. and report on all concerns relative to the District Mr. FINDLEY observed, that he had long been in favor of appointing a committee of this kind. The citizens of the District of Columbia were not and could not be represented on this floor. He wished to see the business consolidated, so that they might be justly heard. merely been to render more simple to the House Mr. KEY said his object in this motion had the legislating for the District. It would save many committees from being raised, and promote consistency and uniformity in the laws relating to the District. The resolution was then agreed to without a division, and Messrs. KEY, VAN DYKE, Love, HOLLAND, BROWN, LIVERMORE, and TAYLOR, appointed the committee. MILITARY ESTABLISHMENT. Mr. G. W. CAMPBELL moved for the order of the day on the bill from the Senate for increasing the Military Peace Establishment of the United States. [This bill contemplates the raising one battalion |