Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

H. OF R.

Removal of the Seat of Government.

peculiar felicity by the gentleman from New York, (Mr. GARDENIER.) They were, indeed, very safe from the evils of a populous city, so long as they remained at Washington.

It had been said that the Legislature, if in a commercial city, might be unduly influenced by commercial men. Mr. B. would invert the argument. He imagined that the inhabitants of the city would be beneficially influenced by the Legislature. Erroneous sentiments might be more easily corrected, and true statements of facts more generally presented to the public. For proof of this, he would adduce a late important occurrence in the town of Boston. A petition had been presented to the Selectmen, purporting to be signed by a large number of seamen, complaining that they were out of employment, and in a state of extreme penury and distress. The Legislature of Massachusetts, who then happened to be in session, directed an inquiry to be made into the case, and it appeared, on inquiry, that few of the seamen could be found, and the petition was a base imposition on the public.

FEBRUARY, 1808.

day, which was ordered to lie on the table, in the words following, to wit:

Resolved, That two other members be added to the committee called "the Committee of the District of Columbia."

And the same being twice read, was on the question put thereupon, disagreed to by the House. The following Message was received from the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: To the House of Representatives of the United States: In my Message of January twentieth, I stated that some papers forwarded by Mr. Daniel Clark of New Orleans, to the Secretary of State, in one thousand eight hundred and three, had not then been found in the office of State; and that a letter had been addressed to the former Chief Clerk, in the hope that he might advise where they should be sought for. By indications received from him they are now found. Among them are two letters from the Baron de Carondelet, to a officer serving under him at a separate post; in which his views of a dismemberment of our Union are expressed. Extracts of so much of these letters as are within the scope of the resolution of the House, are It had been contended that this was a very im- now communicated. With these were found the letproper time for removal. He, in reply, conceived ters written by Mr. Clark, to the Secretary of State, in that this crisis of our national affairs called for a only of these relates to this subject, and is extracted and one thousand eight hundred and three. A part of one removal. In the city of Philadelphia, the opera-enclosed for the information of the House. In no part tions of war could be more effectually directed, of the papers communicated by Mr. Clark, which are and our fiscal concerns better managed. He voluminous, and in different languages, nor in his therefore thought this the very period for removing the Government.

Mr. Love, of Virginia, had hoped that the question would be taken without debate; for the more it is discussed, the more unfit is the House for the discussion of any other subject. But he conceived himself called upon to support, in reply to what had been said on the other side, the impropriety of removing the Government. He then went at length into a discussion of the subject, and supported the objections which he had urged on a former day.

The House adjourned, without taking the question.

THURSDAY, February 4.

Mr. POINDEXTER presented a representation of the Legislative Council and House of Representatives of the Mississippi Territory of the United States, stating various matters for the consideration of Congress, relating to the acts for the sale of lands belonging to the United States in the said Territory; to the right of suffrage within the same; to the appointment of commissioners to lease, for a limited time, the section of land granted for the use of Jefferson College, in the said Territory; to a free navigation of the Mobile and Tombigbee rivers; and to an extinguishment of the Indian title to the lands in the Yazoo country; and praying that such measures may be adopted by the Legislature of the United States as will tend to promote the general interest of the people of the Territory aforesaid-Referred to the Committee on the Public Lands.

letters, have we found any intimation of the corrupt
receipt of money by any officer of the United States,
from any foreign agent. As to the combinations with
foreign agents for dismembering the Union, these
papers and letters offer nothing which was not probably
known to my predecessors, or which could call anew
for inquiries, which they had not thought necessary to
institute, when the facts were recent, and could be
better proved. They probably believed it best to let
pass into oblivion transactions, which, however culpa-
ble, had commenced before this Government existed,
and had been finally extinguished by the treaty of one
thousand seven hundred and ninety-five.
TH. JEFFERSON.

FEBRUARY 4, 1808.
The said Message, and the papers accompany-
ing the same, were read, and ordered to lie on the
table.

On motion of Mr. NEWTON,

Resolved, That the Committee of Commerce and Manufactures be instructed to inquire into the necessity of making a proper disposition of the charts of the coast of North Carolina, published in conformity with a resolution which passed the second of March, one thousand eight hundred and seven.

Mr. CLINTON presented a representation of Thomas Paine, stating various services performed by him for the United States, during the Revolutionary war with Great Britain; and praying that Congress will take the same into consideration, and grant him such compensation therefor, as to their wisdom and justice shall seem meet.— Referred to the Committee of Claims.

The bill sent from the Senate, entitled "An On motion of Mr. Love, the House proceeded act to revive and continue certain causes and to consider a resolution proposed by him yester-proceedings in the District of Columbia,” was

FEBRUARY, 1808.

Removal of the Seat of Government.

read twice and ordered to be read the third time

to-morrow.

The bill sent from the Senate, entitled "An act to provide for the payment of certain expenses incurred in the inquiry into the conduct of John Smith, a Senator from the State of Ohio," was read twice and committed to a Committee of the Whole on Monday next.

REMOVAL OF THE SEAT OF GOVERNMENT. The House resumed the consideration of the resolution offered by Mr. SLOAN, for the removal of the seat of Government to Philadelphia.

Mr. LEWIS, of Virginia, said, his object in moving an indefinite postponement, was to obtain an immediate decision, but not, as had been said, to preclude discussion. But, as some gentlemen who concurred with him thought it best, he would withdraw that motion, with a hope that the question would now be taken on the resolution itself. Mr. SLOAN, of New Jersey, immediately rose to move that the resolution take the usual course, and be referred, like all other important subjects, to a Committee of the Whole. There had, he said, been attempts made to harass, to intimidate those who had brought forward this resolution, and whose views were as pure as the crystal stream. It had been said that he was actuated by base motives. I trust, said he, that the number of those is small who expect to terrify us. It is not the first time in which my life has been threatened for doing what I conceive to be my duty. As I was coming to the House this morning, I was insulted by a parcel of boys, who cried out: "There goes the damned old Quaker rascal, who ought to be hung." This was by boys, who were old enough to know better. He concluded, with moving that the resolution be referred to a Committee of the Whole, and made the order of the day for next Monday two weeks, when he pledged himself to show the reasons that induced him to bring forward the subject.

Mr. LYON, of Kentucky, thought the insult offered to Mr. SLOAN, ought to occupy the first attention of the Government. He was unwilling to sit here a single moment without taking some notice of it.

Mr. MASTERS, of New York, was in favor of the commitment. He had heard it said that the Government could be supported much cheaper at some other place, and wished a due inquiry might be made. The Government has been here seven years. What is the commerce and the tonnage of this place? It is said this place ought to have the preference to Philadelphia. Look at the commerce of that city, its manufactures, and its wealth. When Congress were insulted at that place, it was at the close of the Revolutionary war, and before its police was formed. Will any man say its police is not now good? Besides, at this place, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. SLOAN) has been insulted for only bringing this resolution before the House. This fact furnishes the strongest reason for our going away.

We have been told that the citizens of this place have been disfranchised; that they have no

H. OF R.

rights. Can the place flourish in such circumstances? It is impossible. The people here hang on the Government; they expect to live on the Government. Our time is taken up in legislating for them; we must even repair their roads and bridges. Let the subject be committed, and receive a fair discussion, in the usual way.

Mr. VAN HORNE, of Maryland, said, he would not now enter into the discussion; but he would briefly reply to the gentleman from New York. He says that this District has no rights; he would, also, by his conduct, say that they should have no property. If this city is abandoned, the State of Maryland is not bound to receive it, and, I trust, would not receive it. Every disposition of the human heart ought to excite the members of the House to make a speedy decision. It is said some great and responsible officer of the Government has stated that $150,000, or $200,000, a year may be saved by a removal. I should be glad to have him named to the House; I should be glad to know who among the officers of Government is intriguing for a removal to Philadelphia He conjured the House to decide speedily whether they were for or against the resolution; for a delay of the subject would almost have the effect of a removal.

Mr. MASTERS said, the city had been declining ever since Congress came here, and even before that time. He knew a gentleman from the State of New York, who had laid out $40,000 in this city, and the property was now not worth five hundred dollars.

Mr. VAN HORNE, in reply, stated that there were six thousand souls in this city. All the houses which have been finished, are inhabited. Property has fallen in some places, and risen in others. But one great reason why the city does not flourish, is, that a man caunot find a lot here to purchase; for the lots have been so often sold and mortgaged, and been so long in the law, that the real owner cannot be discovered.

Mr. TAYLOR, of South Carolina, opposed the motion of commitment. It has been said that, by a removal we can economise. I deny it. But are we to go a begging, and, like old King Lear, to live with one of our daughters, who can, at any time, kick us out of doors. You have heard no complaiuts; no petitions for a removal have been laid on the table.

Is this the time, when you are buffeted by the nations, when you may be compelled by the exigencies of the country to borrow millions, is this the time to violate the national faith? is this the time to agitate a question of this sort? I wish no tale of your faith's being violated. If your hands are to be untied in respect to the fourteen or fifteen millions here, let us not go to work by halves, let us get rid of the fifty millions of our national debt. There is the same material principle in both cases.

As to the place, Philadelphia, I will say nothing about its being unhealthy. I will only say that the advocates of this measure do not tell us where we are to go, when we get there; whether we shall meet in the streets or on the house-tops. I

H. of R.

Removal of the Seat of Government.

hope we shall not decide to go, without knowing where to go.

FEBRUARY, 1808.

be paralyzed. He did not believe that such would be the result of continuing the question until a fair discussion could be obtained. He was in possession of a fact which proved that no possible proceeding, on the part of the House, could prevent improvements here.

The gentleman from New York (Mr. GARDENIER) speaks of his martyrdom in staying here. He looks well. It must be a suffering of the mind. But what will he think, when he has laid the ploughshare to the city, fixed by his great WASH- A neighbor of mine, said Mr. K., bought a lot INGTON, Whom those of his way of thinking claim in this city, for which he gave about four hunexclusively as their own. When he also consid-dred dollars. A tax, of which he was ignorant, ers those ladies in the galleries, whom he is leav- of ninety cents, was due at the time of the puring, his martyrdom will be doubled and trebled. chase. On account of this tax the lot was sold, He hoped that those who, for some years, had and produced but sixty-five cents, and the furprophecied instability in the National Councils, ther improvement of this place was, then, at an would not, by their conduct, assist in verifying end. their own prophecies, and afterwards urge it as a The motion to commit the resolution to a Comcomplaint against the Government. There is, said Mr. T., another subject of deli-Messrs. BACON, FISK, LIVERMORE, ALEXANDER, mittee of the Whole, was further supported by cate consideration, but which deserves to be men- and BIBB; and opposed by Messrs. J. Rhea, of tioned. I believe that there is, in Philadelphia, Tennessee, HOLLAND, and MACON. The quesJess sympathy than in either New York or Bos- tion was finally taken by yeas and nays, and reton, for a certain subject, in which the Southern solved in the negative-yeas 61, nays 63, as folStates are deeply interested. When formerly there, one Warner Mifflin, and his associates, continually kept Congress in hot water, by teasing and pestering them with something about slavery. They had no regard to our feelings.

Mr. BLOUNT, of North Carolina, was astonished that the friends of the resolution should want more time. They had been three months preparing this subject. He had himself heard, a month ago, the mover of the resolution say that he thought of bringing it forward, and he understood some doubts were entertained, whether the President would sign a bill for this purpose. The friends of the measure had been long deliberating how to bring forward the subject, and they had thought of waiting until the close of the session, when some members, hostile to the measure, might be gone. If this resolution is adopted, I shall, when I go home, think it my duty to tell my constituents they can have no further confidence in the Government. I will agree to sit here night and day, until the question is determined, and shall vote against every adjournment.

Mr. SLOAN called on the gentleman last up to prove, by one respectable witness, that he had ever said he doubted whether the President would sign a bill for removing the Government. He had always said, he believed the President would not counteract the wishes of the people.

lows:

YEAS-Evan Alexander, Ezekiel Bacon, William

W. Bibb, John Blake, jr., Robert Brown, Epaphrodi-
tus Champion, Martin Chittenden, Matthew Clay, Sam-
uel W. Dana, John Davenport, jr., Daniel M. Durell,
James Elliot, William Ely, William Findley, James
Fisk, Barent Gardenier, Francis Gardner, Edwin Gray,
John Harris, John Heister, William Hoge, Reuben
Humphreys, Robert Jenkins, James Kelly, Edward St.
Loe Livermore, Matthew Lyon, Josiah Masters, Wil-
liam Milnor, Daniel Montgomery, jr., Thomas Moore,
Jonathan O. Mosely, Gurdon S. Mumford, Thomas
Newbold, Timothy Pitkin, jr., John Porter, Josiah
Quincy, John Rea of Pennsylvania, Jacob Richards,
Matthias Richards, Samuel Riker, John Rowan, John
Russell, Lemuel Sawyer, James Sloan, John Smilie,
Jedediah K. Smith, Samuel Smith, William Stedman,
Clement Storer, Lewis B. Sturges, Peter Swart, Sam-
uel Taggart, Benjamin Tallmadge, John Thompson,
Rensselaer, Robert Whitehill, Isaac Wilbour, Alexan-
Jabez Upham, Nicholas Van Dyke, Killian K. Van
der Wilson, and James Witherell.

NAYS-Lemuel J. Alston, Willis Alston, jr., David Bard, Joseph Barker, Burwell Bassett, Wm. Blackledge, Thomas Blount, John Boyle, William A. Burwell, William Butler, Joseph Calhoun, George W. Campbell, John Campbell, John Chandler, John Clopton, Howell Cobb, Richard Cutts, John Dawson, Josiah Deane, Joseph Desha, John W. Eppes, Meshack Franklin, James M. Garnett, Charles Goldsborough, Peterson Goodwyn, Isaiah L. Green, William Helms, James Holland, David Holmes, Benjamin Howard, Daniel Ilsley, Richard M. Johnson, Walter Jones, Thos. Kenan, Philip B. Key, William Kirkpatrick, John Lambert, Joseph Lewis, jr., Edward Lloyd, John Love, Nathaniel Macon, Robert Marion, Wm. McCreery, Mr. KELLY, of Pennsylvania, supported the pro- John Montgomery, Jeremiah Morrow, John Morrow, priety of committing the resolution, and giving it Thomas Newton, Wilson C. Nicholas, John Rhea of a fair discussion, in the usual way. He conceived Tennessee, Ebenezer Seaver, Dennis Smelt, John it necessary that more information relative to the Smith, Henry Southard, Richard Stanford, John Taysubject should be obtained, before the House pro-lor, Abram Trigg, George M. Troup, James I. Van ceeded to give a final decision.

Mr. BLOUNT replied that, when the gentleman from New Jersey obtained his information from a great officer of the Government, he pledged himself to prove hy that officer the truth of what

he had said.

It had been said that the question might be compared to daggers, suspended by a hair, over the heads of the people in this District; that property would fall in value, and every improvement

Allen, Archibald Van Horne, Daniel C. Verplanck,
Jesse Wharton, Marmaduke Williams, and Richard

Winn.

On motion, the Committee rose, and the House then adjourned.

FEBRUARY, 1808.

Removal of the Seat of Government.

H. of R.

Mr. NICHOLAS said, the expense at Philadelphia would not be greater than here, except in particular points, into which he trusted an inquiry would not be made. They had already been four days deliberating on the main question, and the mind of every gentleman must be made up on the subMr. RHEA, of Tennessee, moved to postpone this resolution till to-morrow.

FRIDAY, February 5. Mr. HOLMES, from the Committee of Claims, to whom were referred, on the twenty-sixth ultimo, two petitions, one of Matthew Smith and Darius Gates of East Haddam, in the State of Connecticut, the other of the said Darius Gates, presented a bill for the relief of Matthew Smith and Da-ject. rius Gates, jointly, and Darius Gates, separately; which was twice read and committed to a Committee of the Whole on Monday, the fifteenth in

[blocks in formation]

the table.

Mr. NEWTON, from the Committee of Commerce and Manufactures, reported a resolution in the form of a concurrent resolution of the two Houses, to authorize the disposition of certain charts of the coast of North Carolina; which was read, and, on motion of Mr. MILNOR, referred to a Committee of the Whole on Monday next. REMOVAL OF THE SEAT OF GOVERNMENT. On motion of Mr. NICHOLAS, the House resumed the consideration of a resolution proposed by Mr. SLOAN, on the second instant, for a removal of the seat of Government of the United States to the city of Philadelphia; and the said resolution being again read in the words following, to

wit:

Resolved, That it is expedient, and the public good requires, that the seat of Government be removed to the city of Philadelphia for years; and that a committee be appointed to bring in a bill for that pur

pose.

Mr. MASTERS offered the following resolution, which the House agreed to consider-56 to 49: Resolved, That a committee be appointed to inquire into the loss or gain to the Treasury of the United States, provided the seat of Government should be removed from the City of Washington.

Mr. LovE opposed the motion, on account of the delay which the passage of it would occasion to the progress of the main question of removal.

Mr. LYON supported it, from a desire for the inquiry; the result of which, he had no doubt, would do away with many false estimates on the subject.

Mr. DAWSON had no objection, if he thought the resolution would produce information; but, independently of its being out of the power of the Departments to make the estimate, there was now on the files of the House, and in the printed reports, an exact account of the expenses of removal from the city of Philadelphia, from which an estimate might be formed of the expense of moving back.

Mr. MASTERS said the gentleman had mistaken the object of the resolution; it went not to inquire into the expense of the removal, but into the comparative expense of Government at each place. 10th CoN. 1st SESS.-50

We

Mr. TAYLOR said, if any information for the instruction of the House in deciding the main question could be acquired by this resolution, he should most willingly agree to adopt it; but, even if this resolution were to produce information of a saving of $120,000 or $150,000, (which gentlemen had positively asserted, and which he as positively denied.) he should not be influenced by it. are now, said he, in the situation of Athens, when Themistocles proposed to the Assembly that he had a project most beneficial to the community, but on which it was improper to address them publicly; but, if they would appoint a committee or name a person, he would tell his project to that committee or that person, and upon this report the Athenians might decide. They chose Aristides. The two great men conferred together-and what was the project? To seize the Grecian fleet, then in the harbor of Athens, by which the Athenians might secure the predominance over the Grecian States. Aristides, in making his report to his countrymen, observed that indeed the project might be beneficial to his country, but that it was most unjust. For this very decision of this great man he obtained the surname of "The Just." Although this title were given to the individual, the honor and credit was greater to the Assembly That same inconsistent, which he addressed. wavering, democratic society, which we hear so often denounced, at once gave a decided negative to the proposition. From the observations made yesterday; from the observations addressed to the feelings of members on the floor; from the anxious countenances by which we have been and now are surrounded; we have at last come to the single proposition, Will it be just ?-will it be consisttent with good faith? If it will not be just, why make the inquiry ?-why ask if the various statements which have been made are true? I hope the present proposition will not be adopted-that the subject will have an end, with that deliberation and prompt decision on it which this House owes to the community, to itself, to the individuals awaiting our decision, and to the major part of the people of the United States, whose feelings are sensibly alive to our proceedings.

Mr. MASTERS withdrew his resolution, as he had not expected to cause a discussion by moving it.

The House having taken up for consideration Mr. SLOAN's resolution for the removal of the seat of Government to Philadelphia,

Mr. SLOAN withdrew his resolution, and

Mr. BLOUNT renewed the motion. He did not renew it because he intended to vote for it, but because it was important, since it had been agitated, that it should be decided; and because, since yesterday, another meeting (caucus) had been held

H. OF R.

Removal of the Seat of Government.

FEBRUARY, 1808.

by the friends of the measure, to determine on the Mr. W. ALSTON could readily conceive that course proper to be pursued. He had said yester-gentlemen possessing the same sentiments as the day, and he would repeat it to-day, that the adop- gentleman from Connecticut could vote, as that tion of this resolution would be a most flagrant gentleman had done, for a reference; but gentleviolation of the faith of the nation. If it should men who could not be induced to vote for a remonow be adopted, he would immediately lay upon val under any circumstances would vote as Mr. A. the table a resolution to repeal the Funding sys-did-against it. This, said Mr. A., is my situa tem-not to vote for it himself, but to quiet the tion. No arguments could have influenced me in fears of the people, which would be excited by voting for a removal, and therefore I should give such a measure. He was yesterday, and now, de- my vote against it in any shape. This question prived of saying much that he very much wished has been discussed in various ways, but the refuto say on this subject, by a severe pain in the head. sal to refer yesterday decided the principle that Mr. DANA wished, if it were designed to repeal there was a majority of the House against remothe Funding system, that a resolution should be val on any principle whatever. The vote for comlaid on the table for that purpose, and that both mitment having been negatived by a small mathe resolutions should be referred to a committee jority, might induce a belief that but a few were for discussion. I confess, for my own part, said against removal. For this reason, it is proper to Mr. D., that I am not perfectly satisfied of the pro- show the sense of the House by an immediate priety of removing the seat of Government; and decision of the resolution, as well as to settle the when the question comes I shall vote against it, question-to put the matter to rest-and prevent because I would not vote for any positive meas- agitation of the public mind; for no question could ure without being satisfied of its propriety. But, be discussed which could agitate the public mind as to all this noise-this talking of the breach of equally with this. He therefore hoped it would faith, of the public debt, and these menaces to in- be decided. dividuals they do not influence me. We are not Mr. GARDENIER rose to inquire whether the sent here by our constituents several hundred miles motion was in order. In introducing the resoluto be controlled or influenced to deviate from the tion, the gentleman had said he should vote against ordinary course by the feelings or displeasure of it himself; it was therefore introduced, not for the those interested in this District. If this operated purpose of being carried, but for the purpose of in any way, it would induce me to vote for remov-taking up the time of the House uselessly; and ing the seat of Government, because the attempt to control the freedom of deliberation is not to be tolerated. The correct course for every individual, is, not to suffer his mature or better judgment to be influenced by such considerations. Not being perfectly satisfied on the subject, I wished to give it a fair discussion. This was my opinion. I should vote for the reference of any motion on general principle, and give any subject a fair discussion in the usual course, except it were so palpably wrong that no man of sense or information could support it. I was not at liberty to refuse a reference to this on this ground, from a knowledge of its advocates. As gentlemen wish a decision on this question, my own vote will be against removal, because I have not been convinced of its propriety. As to the breach of public faith, this argument does not influence me. I do not consider that there is a Constitutional injunction against removal. I consider it as an honorary pledge of the public faith, which constitutes, not a perfect obligation, as in case of debt, but an imperfect obligation a case of estimation and uncertainty. I would rather cherish a caution as respects deviation from the course of public faith would rather err from excessive scrupulousness than from too much laxity. This is my view of the subject. The real question is one on which gentlemen of information, ability, and unsullied integrity, may well The question on considering Mr. SLOAN's resodiffer; it takes in so many questions-geograph-lution, as renewed by Mr. BLOUNT, was then negical, political, and moral-that we may well differ; atived-yeas 51, nays 68, as follows: and its being an imperfect obligation renders it a peculiarly difficult question. The arguments in favor of the removal not having been sufficient to satisfy my mind, I shall vote against it, from my present impressions.

he submitted it to the Speaker, whether a motion was in order, when the mover of it declared he should himself vote against it-whether it was not inconsistent with the honor and dignity of the House. In this Hall, no proposition should be submitted which the mover does not mean to persist in; nor should any member be permitted to introduce a motion calculated uselessly to consume the time of the House. Was it in order?

Mr. MACON asked whether the House had agreed to consider the motion? Mr. M. objected to the waste of time which would be occasioned by this motion, if the House agreed to consider it-not that he was one of those who thought they wasted time when they did nothing: as he thought, the less they legislated the better. If the House had not agreed to consider, he hoped they would not.

The SPEAKER first decided the question of the gentleman from New York, stating there had occurred in this session an instance in which a gentleman from Virginia (Mr. RANDOLPH) made a motion, against which he had declared at the time of making it that he himself should vote. This motion was, therefore, in order. He then said the House had not yet agreed to consider the motion. Several gentlemen rising to speak,

The SPEAKER declared that debate on this mo. tion was inadmissible.

YEAS-David Bard, Joseph Barker, Burwell Bassett, William Blackledge, Thomas Blount, John Boyle, William A. Burwell, Joseph Calhoun, George W. Campbell, John Campbell, John Chandler, John Clopton, Richard Cutts, John Dawson, Josiah Deane, Joseph

« ZurückWeiter »