FEBRUARY, 1808.

Embargo.

H. of R.

occasion in their power, are riveting on them-ing from the gentleman from New York giving

selves chains of infamy that they never can shake

off.

Mr. ALEXANDER said he was not among those luminous gentlemen, who, upon any subject, could take up the time of the House in discussion. The bill seems to have been variously amended, and not to be very distinctly understood; and, therefore, I think it highly proper to let it go to a committee. The gentleman from New York objects to the bill because it is radically distinct from the original bill called the embargo act; and in confirmation of this, introduces the Message of the President, recommending an inhibition, which the gentleman supposes only to have included our vessels. If there be anything in the terms of the Message which limits the communication by water exclusively, it will be found just policy also to extend it to prohibit exportation by land. But the gentleman says the bills are different; that this is a non-intercourse bill. Indeed, I cannot see the difference; the embargo is a total restriction of trade, not upon one part of the community, but upon the whole. It is a misfortune, in a debate of this sort, that gentlemen will not confine themselves to the question, but range wide from it. If the gentleman from New York is of this opinion, he has a right to retain it, and support it with all the argument he can. This is an homogeneous part of the original measure, and the question is, whether it shall or shall not be committed. I have not formed a distinct opinion for or against it, but when I see gentlemen for whom I have a respect, and to whom no suspicion can attach of being disposed to delay the bill, think it would be just and proper policy to commit it, I shall vote with them.

me any kind of offence, except that we were under foreign influence. So far as relates to myself, the observation has no application. I shall always pursue what I believe to be true policy, with regard to any man or set of men. I wish the bill to be recommitted, to have such amendments made to it as are necessary.

Mr. BIBB wished to make one or two observations. It will be recollected (said he) that the embargo law did not pass with my assent; but since the majority thought proper to pass it, I determined that nothing should be wanting on my part to render it as effectual as it can be made. My conduct has gone to this effect. I have done everything I could, consistently with my own opinion, to reconcile my constituents to the measure. But in the course of that discussion it has been urged on the one hand that the House were governed by French influence, and on the other that there were no substantial reasons for opposing the embargo. In the first place I disclaim the operation on my mind of such an opin ion as that expressed by the gentleman from New York, (Mr. GARDENIER,) for I did not then or now believe that any other than proper influence induced the passage of the law. On the other hand I will observe that, notwithstanding the reasons given by the gentleman from New York had no operation on my mind, there were reasons which had. I believed it premature and unnecessary, and I still believe the same.

Mr. MONTGOMERY said, that before the adjournment of the House on Saturday a base and infamous charge had been made by a member from New York (Mr. GARDENIER) against the honor and dignity of the Executive and Congress, relative to the adopting the measure of the embargo; that the indecorous language then used had ex

To the embargo, I was opposed; and I do not regret the opposition now, though I admit that certain subsequent events do tend to show the util-cited the honest indignation of the whole House; ity, if not the wisdom of the measure. My principal objection then was and now is in point of time; but, since it is adopted, it is my wish that it should operate equally. I do not wish to hear gentlemen expatiate in debate on the relative pressure of the measure on foreign Powers. It is immaterial to me whether it operates more on one or on the other. It is necessary that it should be a just measure. So as to our own citizens, by the same rule, the embargo should be just. The Southern citizen cannot export his cotton and tobacco; the same is the situation of the citizens of the Middle States with respect to their produce, while those States on the confines of some adjacent territories will have an immense advantage over those who are otherwise situated. On the confines of Canada, and on our Southern extrémity, we find this to be the case. It is entirely unjust that the citizen of one district of the country should be permitted to trade, while another is obliged to endure these privations. Therefore, I think this bill is not objectionable on the ground taken by the gentleman from New York.

I will here observe, that any man entering into debate is at liberty to make use of such language as he pleases, if it be not personal. I heard noth

a motion was made for an adjournment, for the avowed purpose of affording an opportunity to the member from New York of adducing proof and satisfying the nation of the validity of the unprincipled charge; that he had designedly kept his seat, and impatiently waited for the member to rise and exhibit his testimony; he had waited in vain. Can the member (Mr. M. asked) produce to this House a single individual who has ever seen a solitary document in possession of the Executive relating to and having a bearing on our relations with France, and which it is important, for the information of Congress or the nation, the Executive should have communicated, and which they have wilfully concealed? Can he show a particle of evidence to excite the slightest belief that the proceedings of the Government have flowed from a mandate of a Napoleon, or from the influence of any foreign potentate on earth, or that they have been actuated by any influence other than a sacred, solemn, and honorable sense of duty, and with a view solely directed to promote the best interests, protect the inestimable rights, and provide for the common defence of our common country? If he has such testimony, why does he not exhibit it? His total inability to do so, and

before these were made, to intimate a design shortly to adjourn. He was unwilling that an impression should be made on our enemies, or the foreigners in this country, that the House even thought of an adjournment before these measures were discussed. The gentlemen who proposed the resolution, however, might be possessed of information which would remove his scruples.

Mr. LIVERMORE understood the object of the resolution to be to ascertain precisely what the gentleman from Kentucky was desirous to know; information on the state of affairs.

Mr. SMILIE would only ask before the question was taken on the appointment of a committee, what that committee could do? Is any man within this House, said he, possessed of the necesary information to enable him to say when we should adjourn? Our adjournment depends on contingent circumstances; for my own part I wish to know how things are; and till I do. I never shall consent that the resolution shall be adopted. If we do adjourn in the situation in which we now are, we cannot account to our constituents for our conduct. If a committee be appointed, except they procure information, they can do nothing; and I think gentlemen concerned in diplomatic business will not disclose its progress till something with certainty be known.

Mr. RowAN wished it to be understood that he was anxious to adjourn and depart hence, but he did not wish that the idea should go abroad, that they thought of adjournment till measures assumed one shape or other. Business belonging to our interior regulations they were all acquainted with, and could act upon without further information. They had met here for a specific purpose, and till the negotiation should terminate one way or the other he did not wish to adjourn. Mr. DAWSON was sorry that his object in offering the resolution was so little understood. Far, very far was it from him to wish Congress to adjourn till they had done that business which the public interest demanded and their duty required. This was not his intention. It was in order to bring these matters before the House that he now offered the resolution. It was painful to him to repeat that Congress had been in session between four and five months, during which time they had been discussing mere projects, removals of the seat of Government, and matters of a local and personal nature. It was now time that they should proceed to the adoption of those measures which the protection of the country required. He begged the House to cast their eyes for a moment to the occurrences on the other side of the water. Look at Copenhagen; examine the decrees of the British Government, and the more recent one of the French Government; and look at the hostile measures in the territories adjoining. It is time that the public attention should be called to public measures. There were several bills for that purpose before the House. It was his wish to bring these matters forward, and not to waste the time of the House for days, weeks, and months, on local and

H. OF R.

personal matters. It was in order to attend to the state of the nation and to inquire what was necessary to be done that this resolution was proposed, and not from a wish to adjourn before the House had accomplished the purpose for which they had met.

After some further discussion, a motion having been made by Mr. RHEA of Tennessee, without effect, that it lie on the table, the question was taken on the resolution and negatived, 55 to 50.

After refusing to go into Committee of the Whole on the bill concerning contracts, the House adjourned-yeas 64.

WEDNESDAY, February 24.

A message from the Senate informed the House that the Senate have passed a resolution appointing a committee, jointly, with a committee to be appointed on the part of the House of Representatives, to have the direction of the money appropriated to purchase books for the use of Congress, pursuant to the "Act making a further appropriation for the support of a Library," passed on the twenty-first of February, one thousand eight hundred and six.

On a motion made by Mr. LEWIS, that the House do come to the following resolution:

Resolved, That the Postmaster General be requested to state to this House whether or not, in his opinion, the public good and general convenience will be promoted by changing the present post route, so as to pass through the town of Occoquan, instead of Colchester, and that he detail his reasons for such opinion;

The House proceeded to consider the said resolution: Whereupon, a motion was made by Mr. DAWSON, and seconded, to amend the same to read as follows:

Resolved, That the Postmaster General be requested to state to this House whether or not, in his opinion, the public good and general convenience will be promoted by changing the present post route, so as to pass through the town of Occoquan instead of Colchester, and that he detail his reasons for such opinion; and whether the mails, during the last year, have been carried from Alexandria to Fredericksburg, according to the existing laws and contract.

And on the question that the House do agree to the proposed resolution, as so amended, it was resolved in the affirmative.

Mr. NEWTON, from the Committee of Commerce and Manufactures, presented a bill to permit John and Samuel Gardner Derby, and John Prince, junior, to despatch a vessel to Sierra Leone, on the coast of Africa; which was read twice and committed to a Committee of the whole House to-morrow.

An engrossed bill extending the terms of credit on revenue bonds, in certain cases, and for other purposes, was read the third time and passed.

An engrossed bill making appropriations for the support of the Military Establishment of the United States, for the year one thousand eight hundred and eight, was read the third time, and passed.

Mr. FINDLEY, from the Committee of Elections,

Maryland Contested Election-Constitution.

to whom was referred, on the twenty-third in- to General Forrest and his family, who were in a desstant, a certificate from the Governor of Northtitute condition, induced Mr. Key to permit him to Carolina, of the election and return of John Cul- draw the half pay to the time of his death, which happepper, to serve in this House as one of the mem- pened in July, 1805. The six months' half pay, endbers for the said State, made a report thereupon, ing in December, 1805, was received by Mr. Key, being as follows:

resolution is, that if any member speaking shall violate order and decorum, he may be called to order by the SPEAKER, or by a member; the objectionable words shall be repeated by the person calling to order, and taken down by the Clerk. The member who has spoken may apologize, explain, or retract; if he declines, he may, if requi-joint address of a majority of both Houses of Consite, be subjected to the censure of the House. Ordered to lie on the table.

MILNOR) very absurd. These are not joint resolutions, but are intended to express the sense of the two Houses of the Assembly.

At the instance of Mr. KELLY, the resolutions were again read.

Mr. KELLY supported the objections taken by Mr. MILNOR. He thought, from the wording of the resolutions, that they were intended as a joint act, and required the signature of the Governor. There was no propriety in committing them, or in even laying them on the table.

Mr. MARION thought the only difference in the signature of the Governor, would be the influence of his opinion. That circumstance would have no great weight with him.

Mr. BARKER thought a little reflection would show that the House had nothing to do with these resolutions. They might as well commit a letter, which a member should receive from a friend, in relation to the same subject.

At the instance of Mr. GOLDSBOROUGH, of Maryland, the ayes and noes were agreed to be taken.

Mr. MILNOR, in reply, enforced, at some length. and with considerable spirit, the objections to a commitment of the resolutions.

Mr. HOLLAND said the resolutions had substance, and the House ought not to stand and cavil about

forms.

Mr. MACON would refer the resolutions, if they had come from one branch of the Legislature only. He would be willing to refer them, if they had come even from a town meeting.

H. OF R.

then said, he presumed there must be some error in the Journal, through the mistake of the Clerk. Mr. J. CLAY referred to the memorial of Massachusetts on the Yazoo claim. It was presented by a member, and committed. He also referred to resolutions of the Legislatures of North Carolina and Kentucky, which had been presented by members of the House, and committed. Has Pennsylvania done anything, that she should not be treated with as much respect as other States; that she should be put to the ban of the Empire?

The commitment of the resolutions was further supported by Messrs. SMILIE, SOUTHARD, and FINDLEY; and opposed by Messrs. DURELL, KELLY, GOLDSBOROUGH, MILNOR, COOK, and WILLIS ALSTON.

After a debate of about two hours, the question was taken and carried-yeas 82, nays 27, as follows:

YEAS-Evan Alexander, Lemuel J. Alston, Ezekiel Bacon, David Bard, Burwell Bassett, Wm. W. Bibb, William Blackledge, John Blake, jun., Thomas Blount, Robert Brown, William A. Burwell, William Butler, Joseph Calhoun, George W. Campbell, Joseph Clay, Matthew Clay, George Clinton, junr., John Clopton, Howell Cobb, John Culpepper, Richard Cutts, Samuel W. Dana, John Dawson, Josiah Deane, Daniel M. Durell, James Elliot, William Findley, James Fisk, Meshack Franklin, Francis Gardner, James M. Garnett, Peterson Goodwyn, Isaiah L. Green, William Hoge, James Holland, David Holmes, Reuben HumKnight, John Lambert, Nathaniel Macon, Robert Maphreys, Daniel Ilsley, Wm. Kirkpatrick, Nehemiah rion, Josiah Masters, William McCreery, Daniel MontMr. KELLY said, if the resolutions had been ad- gomery, jun., John Montgomery, Nicholas R. Moore, dressed to Congress, he would treat them with as Thomas Moore, John Morrow, Thomas Newton, Wilmuch respect as any gentleman. They are now son C. Nicholas, John Pugh, John Rea of Pennsylvaonly an expression of the sense of a number of nia, John Rhea of Tennessee, Jacob Richards, Samuel individuals addressed to certain other individuals. Riker, John Russell, Ebenezer Seaver, James Sloan, Mr. GOLDSBOROUGH repelled the idea, that the Dennis Smelt, John Smilie, Jedediah K. Smith, SamLegislature of any State had a right to control or uel Smith, John Smith, Henry Southard, Richard Staninfluence the deliberations of Congress; but he ford, Clement Storer, Peter Swart, John Taylor, John did not regard these resolutions as a legislative Thompson, Abram Trigg, George M. Troup, James I. act. Besides, if the whole truth were known, it Van Allen, Daniel C. Verplanck, Jesse Wharton, Robwould appear that one branch of the Legislature ert Whitehill, David R. Williams, Marmaduke Wilhad, on a former day and in a fuller House, nega-liams, Alexander Wilson, Richard Winn, and James tived exactly the like resolutions. Mr. G. gave a short history of the subject.

Mr. QUINCY read an extract from the Journal of the Pennsylvania Legislature, to show that these resolutions were specifically addressed to the Congress of the United States.

Messrs. UPHAM and GOLDSBOROUGH understood the Journal differently from Mr. QUINCY.

Mr. LYON said, the Pennsylvania members might put these resolutions in their pockets, and read them when they pleased. The House had nothing to do with them. If a copy was sent to the SPEAKER, it was, that we might watch the Pennsylvania members, and see if they obeyed their instructions. Besides, these resolutions were adopted by an accidental majority, and would have no great weight.

Witherell.

NAYS-Willis Alston, jun., Joseph Barker, John Campbell, Epaphroditus Champion, Martin Chittenden, Orchard Cook, John Davenport, jr., William Ely, John Heister, Robert Jenkins, James Kelly, Joseph Barent Gardenier, Charles Goldsborough, John Harris, Lewis, jr., Edward St. Loe Livermore, Matthew Lyon, William Milnor, Timothy Pitkin, jun., Matthias Richards, Lewis B. Sturges, Samuel Taggart, Benjamin Tallmadge, Jabez Upham, Nicholas Van Dyke, Archibald Van Horn, and Killian K. Van Rensselaer.

NAVAL MONUMENT.

The House then went into Committee on the bill to remit the duties on the monument imported from Italy, and intended to commemorate the officers and men who fell in the attack on Tripoli, in the year 1804; Mr. MILNOR's motion to amend Mr. TALLMADGE inquired, if the SPEAKER had the bill, by appropriating a sum to defray the exreceived any copy of these resolutions, accordiag penses of erecting the monument, and guarding to the Journal of the Pennsylvania Legislature. it by suitable railing, being still under considThe SPEAKER replied in the negative. Mr. T. [eration.