Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB
[ocr errors]

FEBRUARY, 1808.

Removal of the Seat of Government.

On the motion to consider this resolution, being a question of course previous to disposing in any manner of any motion, and on which, by the rules of the House, there can be no debate, the question was decided by yeas and nays-yeas 68, nays 47, as follows:

H. of R.

sons which must so obviously influence the mind on the subject.

The objection first in magnitude appeared to him to be of a Constitutional nature. The Constitution having provided for the establishment of a seat of Government of the United States, certainly intended it to be permanent; it was one of those provisions which was to act in the prospective, and being once acted on by law, the provision so made was carried into effect, and became a part of the Constitution itself. Such was the provision of the Constitution for taking the census of the people of the United States, it was to be acted New Jersey, or any other, say that when the census was taken, and the ratio of representation once fixed for ten years, that it would be competent for Congress to alter it by law?

YEAS-Ezekiel Bacon, Wm. W. Bibb, John Blake, jun., John Boyle, Peter Carlton, Epaphroditus Champion, Martin Chittenden, Matthew Clay, George Clinton, junr., Howell Cobb, Orchard Cook, Samuel W. Dana, Joseph Desha, Daniel M. Durell, James Elliot, William Ely, William Findley, James Fisk, Barent Gardenier, Francis Gardner, Edwin Gray, John Heister, William Helms, William Hoge, Benjamin How-on prospectively; but would the gentleman from ard, Reuben Humphreys, Robert Jenkins, Richard M. Johnson, James Kelly, Edward St. Loe Livermore, Nathaniel Macon, Josiah Masters, William Milnor, John Montgomery, Thomas Moore, Jonathan O. Mosely, Gurdon S. Mumford, Thomas Newbold, Wilson C. Nicholas, John Porter, John Pugh, Josiah Quincy, John Rea of Pennsylvania, John Rhea of Tennessee, Jacob Richards, Matthias Richards, Samuel Riker, John Rowan, John Russell, James Sloan, Dennis Smelt, John Smilie, Jedediah K. Smith, Samuel Smith, Richard Stanford, William Stedman, Clement Storer, Lewis B. Sturges, Peter Swart, Samuel Taggart, Benjamin Tallmadge, John Thompson, Jabez Upham, Nicholas Van Dyke, Robert Whitehill, Alexander Wilson, and James Witherell.

In another point of view, Mr. L. considered the measure unconstitutional; it would have the effect of impairing the obligation of contracts. It was true this was a restriction expressly only on the States, but was any gentleman ready to say, we had the power to do an act of iniquity, which had not been expressly authorized by the Constitution, and which it had inhibited by a positive declaration. The more correct course, Mr. L. said, would certainly be to modify the resolution so as to proNAYS-Lemuel J. Alston, Willis Alston, jun., David pose it as an amendment to the Constitution. Bard, Joseph Barker, Burwell Bassett, William Black-When that should be done, it would be time enough ledge, Thomas Blount, William A. Burwell, William to enter into this kind of discussion, which must Butler, George W. Campbell, John Chandler, Richard have the most baneful effects; it would then be Cutts, John Dawson, John W. Eppes, Meshack Frank- time enough to determine whether we should lin, Charles Goldsborough, Peterson Goodwyn, Isaiah sanction the violation of obligations solemnly enL. Green, James Holland, David Holmes, Daniel Ilsley, tered into, and destroy the contracts made with Walter Jones, Thomas Kenan, P. B. Key, Wm. Kirkpa-individuals under the faith of the seat of Governtrick, J. Lambert, Jos. Lewis, jr., Edward Lloyd, John Love, Matthew Lyon, Robert Marion, Wm. McCreery, John Montgomery, Nicholas R. Moore, Jeremiah Morrow, John Morrow, Thomas Newton, Ebenezer SeaJohn Smith, Henry Southard, John Taylor, Abram Trigg, George M. Troup, James I. Van Allen, Daniel C. Verplanck, Jesse Wharton, and Richard Winn.

ver,

Mr. Love feared the House had sacrificed too much to politeness in agreeing to consider the resolution before them; for he would attribute to no other cause the motion just agreed to, than the usual disposition discovered by the House, to hear with patience the proposition of any of its members, be that proposition ever so wild and extra

vagant.

ment being permanently fixed at this place; who have under this view made conveyances of their property, and that same property has in innumerable instances been again conveyed in fee simple to other persons.

It will under such a motion be considered whether it is proper to sanction the objection which has been so often opposed to popular Govvernments of the instability of their councils, and whether all these important considerations are to give way to the arguments of the author of the resolution, of convenience and cheap living to ourselves, and that it is better we should eat our beef in Philadelphia than in this place.

For these reasons (some of the many he could offer,) Mr. L. said, he should move that the resolution be now rejected.

The SPEAKER declared that such a motion was not now in order, and could not be received.

Mr. LEWIS then moved that it be postponed indefinitely, and called the yeas and nays on the motion.

So many, indeed, were the objections to the resolution under consideration, that he found it more difficult to know where to begin with them, than how to make them. The time was certainly the most inauspicious, which could be conceived by any gentleman to offer such a subject for consideration. While the nation might be expected daily to be called on to defend itself against for- Mr. SLOAN rose with a view of moving that the eign invasion, and to combat for its independence resolution be referred to a Committee of the whole itself, the gentleman has thought proper to intro- House, and be made the order of the day for this duce a question which of all others is best calcu- day, and promised that they would not then call lated to divide and distract its councils. It was a it up to interfere with public business. I trust, subject on which he felt himself unprepared to said he, we have as much regard for the importact, and was taken by surprise; but in any situa- ant business of the nation as the gentleman from tion he should be ready to offer some of the rea-Virginia, (Mr. Love,) or any other gentleman.

H. of R.

Removal of the Seat of Government.

To that gentleman I shall make some reply, though I shall be very brief. He has undertaken to suppose that the large majority of this House in favor of consideration of the motion, was not from a belief of the propriety of passing it; I hope he will be convinced that the decision proceeded from a sense of duty and a firm conviction of the propriety of the measure. I shall never call anything extravagant which the interest of my country calls for a removal of the seat of Government from a place which has everything against it and nothing in its favor-which is exposed to sickness and to death.

The gentleman from Virginia has mentioned the danger of division. I am as much in favor of unity as that gentleman or any other on the floor, and shall always aim at it. Members of this House who are at least of equal standing with him and myself, consider it essentially necessary that this should not interfere; it is not our desire to call it up to interfere; we wish to progress with harmony to give our aid to every measure.

The gentleman supposes I have not read the Constitution. I may not possess the ability or nice discernment of that gentleman; but plain common sense will show to every observer, as that gentleman and some others want to stifle discussion on the subject and to prevent us from showing it by fair reasoning, that the contract is unconstitutional. This is what we wish to show at a future day, and what we shall show if we are not prevented. I will submit it to the good sense of this House, of the citizens in the galleries, and to the impartial determination of all the people of the United States, whether those who feel themselves laboring under a great national grievance, and have brought it before the National Legislature, and declared that they do not mean to urge it, but will give a full and fair opportunity for discussion, and every opportunity for argumentwhether these, the friends of the resolution, act fairly and impartially, or those the opponents of it, who wish to smother the investigation of it.

I will now barely observe that that gentleman may think as he pleases, and on a future day I will enlarge upon the subject, and show that it is the duty of this House, and I hope to God we shall fulfil it, to remove the seat of Government.

Mr. LYON said the gentleman from New Jersey had endeavored to have it understood that this was a subject of great importance. Mr. L. believed it was all-important to that gentleman; he appeared to think of nothing else. The matter was growing too serious now to talk of hobbyhorses. It seemed that gentlemen who had helped him on his hobby-horse found it necessary to adhere to him too closely. He was in hopes they would have left him and his hobby-horse together. The gentleman, said Mr. L. has talked about eating and drinking; everybody knows what is his profession-but I will drop all this sort of talking. It looks serious-twenty-one in a majority, by yeas and nays to consider this resolution. I will say that I am one of those who was dragged here against my will by a Federal majority. I then thought it was not time to come this far South;

FEBRUARY, 1808.

but having been brought here, I looked about me, like a farmer about a new farm; I endeavored to dress it up, to build improvements on it, and make it better, and I have acted in that way ever since. What has happened since then? We have acquired a new world to the Southward and Westward of this place. If it was then proper to fix the seat of Government here, what is it now? I cannot see how Federal gentleman can look or talk of the subject without blushing. What can they think of their predecessors for bringing us here when we had not that country! Kentucky too, which now sends six and which at the next census may send ten members to this House, then only sent two.

While I am up I will tell gentlemen a story. A question similar to this is now pending in Kentucky. The seat of Government is now at Frankfort. The people in the Southern and Western part of the State have joined to move it Eastward; and why, do you suppose? In order that they may hereafter carry it Westward. It is now immoveable except by a majority of two-thirds; and in order to carry the seat of Government Westward by and by, they agree to carry it Eastward now. The Kentucky policy prevails here; no kind of doubt of it. Gentlemen from the Southward and Westward intend to humor those Eastward, that they may move it Westward hereafter. Carry it to Philadelphia-how long will it stay there? The next census will give us ten or fifteen additional members from the Westward. Will they be willing to retain it at Philadelphia, or will they carry it to Pittsburg or farther West? It is mere trifling to suppose it will be fixed at Philadelphia. The only object is to destroy this place, on which so much money has been expended. Now I have been obliged to come here, very reluctantly I must say; but when I got here, the more I looked at it, the more I thought this was the proper site. It is one hundred miles nearer to the Western country than Philadelphia, with a water communication upon which improvements are daily making. It has been said that the merchants from the Western country can manage their business much better at Philadelphia. I know that, if I were sent to Congress for myself alone, I should wish to go to Philadelphia; but I have constituents, friends, children; and it is much better for the country that we should be here, and aid the improvement of the place. Bring here the Bank of the United States; we shall soon have a large city; no doubt of it. The reason why you have not now a large population or great improvements, is, that you are always talking about moving. I wish it to stand at least sixty or one hundred years as it is; I am convinced that this of all places in the Union is the best. It is said we ought to be near the seashore, near the water. Here is water. Some say we should go to New York. Here is a good place. Some sneer at the navy yard, and why? Because they refuse to do what they ought towards clothing it, and then laugh at its nakedness.

We have heard it said that if we move to Philadelphia we shall have a commanding lobby; we

FEBRUARY, 1808.

Removal of the Seat of Government.

shall learn the sentiments of the population! The only inducement which influenced me to be a little satisfied at moving from Philadelphia, was, because Congress were almost overawed by the population of that city; measures were dictated by that city. I had rather move into a wilderness; I do not want to go among these people; I have seen too much of them, I have seen the time when members of this House could not walk the streets in safety. I have seen the time when men with cockades in their hats would say "there goes one of the d-d minority." I can never forget the insults I received in Philadelphia whilst in the minority.

Here too is a Constitutional provision with regard to the seat of Government, whether held in this or any other place-a feature in the Constitution, and on that feature a contract is built; on which subject the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. LOVE) has dwelt very ably. I will not answer the observation of the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. SLOAN) about contracts; he knows how to make a contract about a cow or an ox; but as to any other contract he knows nothing. [Mr. LYON was here called to order.] I do not mean to be disorderly, I assure you. One word more as to the health of this place. The gentleman from New Jersey has unfortunately compared it with Philadelphia. Have we not been compelled to suspend business and leave Philadelphia on account of the yellow fever? I have been little sick here; and so I should perhaps any where else. Has any member of Congress lost his life here in consequence of the unhealthiness of the place? They have died of consumption or other diseases brought with them from home. I have seen or heard nothing of the unhealthiness of this place. It is really unfortunate to compare the two places together. In Philadelphia Congress sat one year till July, and would not then have adjourned but for the yellow fever; and it is a ridiculous story to talk of changing the seat of Government from this place to Philadelphia, on account of its superiority in healthiness. I have gone through the observations I mean to make.

Mr. GARDENIER said he should not indulge himself at this time in following gentlemen in any remarks they had made. He could easily conceive that there were members in the House to whom the proposition of the gentleman from New Jersey must be disagreeable, and who were impelled to oppose it more by their feelings than their reason. A very considerable and respectable portion of the House had manifested a disposition to hold the question open to discussion not that they were determined on removal, but that it was a case in which discussion might enlighten and could not do harm. The present motion was designed to stifle discussion; he would submit it to his friend from Virginia (Mr. LEWIS) whether he could calculate upon any permanent good to result from this procedure. Would they not prosper their cause infinitely more by reasoning with those gentlemen who were doubtful, than by telling them that they would give no opportunity to satisfy their minds on the subject? 10th CoN. 1st SESS.-49

H. of R.

Could gentlemen expect that a treatment of this kind will be submitted to hereafter, or that any session of Congress would pass by without agitating this question? He submitted to the opponents of the motion whether it would not be better to enter fairly into the discussion-to govern gentlemen who wished for removal by argument and not by force of numbers. He trusted there were very few gentlemen on the floor who were not open to conviction, even against their own wishes. It struck him that, if they were forced into silence, it would only be making discontent worse; if put down by fair argument, they would have nothing to complain of. The proper and regular course of debate would then be pursued. This question once fairly agitated and negatived, if that should be the result, would have the effect of putting the question more permanently at rest, and more substantially answer the purpose of the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. LEWIS) than the mode now pursued by that gentleman, who he had no doubt was actuated by honest motives, and Mr. G. honored him for it. He again repeated, would it not be better to promote discussion than thus to force them to silence-to smother the matter? He did not say this was the intention, for he believed the gentleman was influenced by better motives.

He had avoided making any observations on the main question, because he did not consider this the time for them. If the House were so perfectly satisfied on this subject, and thought so little was due to those who wished a discussion, he must submit; but this procedure would not satisfy the minority or the public. Without committing himself on the question one way or the other, because the vote which had already been taken did not commit any one, he wished to have the matter discussed, that those for it and those against it might have an opportunity to offer arguments. In his own mind, he felt a difficulty in declaring how he should vote, and therefore wished a discussion.

Mr. Lewis assured his friend from New York that he had no intention to stifle investigation. The subject was now before the House, and as perfectly open to discussion as if before a Committee of the Whole House. My object, said Mr. L., in making this motion, was to invite discussion, but to invite it at this moment; because every moment that the subject is pending is death to the interest of the District. I wish it to be ascertained at once whether a majority is in favor of removal or not. I wish this investigation, and was in hopes that the gentleman from New York, or some other, would offer some reasons for bringing forward this measure, so fraught with mischief and distraction to the District. It is no reason with me to remove to Philadelphia because I and others can be better accommodated there than at this place; it is no reason that beef or any other article sells cheaper than at this place, or that we can get information from the lobby at Philadelphia which we cannot get here. If members of this House should ever become so dependent that they must be indebted to persons out

H. OF R.

Removal of the Seat of Government.

FEBRUARY, 1808.

of doors for information as to the course of con- manent seat of Government. Could the people duct they should pursue, it will be time for the calculate on its being but a temporary seat of Govpeople to call us home, or to alter the Constituernment? Those things called public contract tion, and elect the whole representation of the and public faith do not seem, in the present quesUnion from the city of Philadelphia, because Phi- tion, to come into consideration. If public faith ladelphians alone are capable of directing legis- is violated in small things, it will soon be violated lation for the public good. Is the gentleman, so in great ones. Violate it as respects the City of full of economy, ready to answer to the nation for Washington, and we shall soon violate it in other the sacrifices which he will make by a removal? and greater matters. I consider the faith of the Does he not know that the nation has expended Government as much pledged that the seat of Govhere twelve or fifteen millions of dollars? ernment shall be permanently fixed here, as it can be to any contract under the sun.

If gentlemen will bring forward any reasons in favor of a removal, or show why this sacrifice should be made, I shall be prepared to meet them. If there be necessity for removal, why is it to Philadelphia, from which place we were a few years ago obliged to remove on account of our lives being endangered by the unhealthiness of the place, independent of other and not minor considerations. I do not believe that in the whole United States there is a more healthy place than this. My object, however, is not now to enter into a discussion, for I am totally at a loss to know what grounds gentlemen can take to support this motion.

As to living, Mr. M. said, it is possible they might live better in Philadelphia than here, but not cheaper. Gentlemen board here for precisely the same as formerly in Philadelphia. He himself boarded for the same sum here as he paid there.

If we were to remove, said Mr. M., I should be opposed to going to any large city. True, I have more acquaintance with Philadelphia than any other, but they are all much alike, I believe. There is scarcely a place in the United States to which I had not rather go than to Philadelphia-I had rather go to Fredericktown, Hagerstown, or Winchester. We may talk about our independence, Mr. MACON said the present motion brought the but every man in Congress, when at Philadelphia, resolution regularly before the House, and it was knew that city had more than its proportionate now in order for the friends of the resolution to weight in the representation of the Union. Go justify it. It was not proposed to postpone it in- to any city, and the same influence will be expedefinitely, with a view to stifle discussion. If gen-rienced. Do gentlemen recollect what was the tlemen recollected that the friends of the measure state of the public mind there during the years were prepared, (as he had no doubt they had had 1797 and 1798-the time (as before said by the genit under consideration long enough to be prepared,) tleman from Kentucky) when the name of Rethere was no occasion for further time. As the publican and Democrat was accounted a disgrace? question was now regularly before the House, he There are gentlemen in my hearing who were would state his objections to the resolution, and then associated with me in legislation, and who to a removal. know and will attest the truth of what I say, that we were shunned as a pestilence-the yellow fever could not be more carefully avoided. I do not mention this as any reflection on the then Administration, but as an evidence of what may be expected in large cities. We may do very well in peaceable times, but come to the times which try men's souls, and we should have to desert them for Princeton or some other convenient village.

[ocr errors]

A greater question than this, said Mr. M.. has not, in my opinion, been agitated since the adoption of the Constitution. If I understand it, the Constitution requires that this shall be the permanent seat of Government. Though the word permanent is not contained in the clause of the Constitution relative to this subject, it is clearly implied. The Congress shall have power "to exercise exclusive legislation, in all cases whatsoever, over such district (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the Government of the United States," &c. Can language be more explicit? Would gentlemen say that the addition of the word permanent would make it more so? It only requires reading to be convinced that the Constitution contemplates a permanent seat of Government.

A great many objections had been offered to this place, instead of a demonstration of the right of Congress to remove from it. The sickness of the place has been much relied on. I am not sure that this place is more or less sickly than any other: this is a mere matter of opinion, on which men will differ. In examining this question, my mind has been forcibly turned to the situation of the people in Washington and its neighborhood, who gave up their landed property to the Government -On what terms? That this was to be the per

There is another evil which I dread, and which may have influence as an objection to the resolution. I have lived in a State where for some years the government was always on the wing-where the Assembly, at each session, determined where they would sit the next. What I saw there fully satisfied me of the propriety of a permanent seat of Government. This question, should the House determine on moving, will undoubtedly work itself into your elections for President and Vice President. Give us this seat of Government for so many years, it will be said, and we will give you a President. It will go to corrupting your Legislature by making this a contracting Government; and I believe, as much as I believe in anything, that it will have this effect.

I have another reason, why I think Philadelphia the wrong place, and this the wrong time for removal. The charter of the Bank of the United States expires in 1811. In 1809, it is proposed that we shall be in Philadelphia. We shall then

FEBRUARY, 1808.

Removal of the Seat of Government.

have two years before us to talk and be talked to about this bank. Let us be as far from them as possible. If we must remove, let us go over the Alleghany. Remember that these large cities are the places where every advantage will be taken of our proceedings. Recollect the speculations, at the conclusion of the war, on the claims of our brave soldiers and officers. These large cities have always had too much influence in this body: go among them, and it will be increased an hundred fold.

The gentleman from New York seems to think that those opposed to the resolution are influenced in their opposition more by their situation than by their judgment. This is one of those arguments which works both ways-which applies as well to the supporters as to the opponents of the resolution, If it is a good argument because I live in Carolina that I have a local prejudice against a removal, is it not equally good because he lives in New York that he is for it? I should not have noticed this, had not the novelty of the idea drawn my attention to it.

I do not agree with the gentleman from New York, that by a decision in any way, this question can be put finally to rest. The subject has been always spoken of more or less, and for my part I am ready to meet it here, or go to a committee on the subject; but I can always say in twice speaking all I wish to say on any subject.

I am so satisfied that this proposition contemplates a breach of public faith, (which in free governments ought to be as sacredly adhered to as anything among men,) that I should not hesitate to give my vote against it. But, in addition to this, when gentlemen consider the effect it will have upon the election of President, if we shall be set at liberty to go East or West, North or South, it must appear best to stop it here; for, unquestionably, talk as much as we may of independence and integrity, when the thing is once afloat-when the Government is once started-it will be said by each, since it is to be removed, we have as much right to the benefit of it as any one else; and thus may it be made a matter of bargain or compro

mise.

Mr. JOHNSON rose to notice an observation of his colleague (Mr. LYON) relative to intrigues in Kentucky concerning the removal of the seat of government of that State. If he who has so lately come into the State knows of this intrigue, said Mr. J., I who drew my first breath in that country am ignorant of it. I can say that I believe the citizens of Kentucky do not manœuvre in that way.

I voted for the consideration of this resolution because I wished a discussion; but if the interests of the people of this District are to be sacrificed, and no remuneration made, I certainly shall not agree to the resolution; and I would rather spend my time while here in a dungeon than violate the public faith. But I wish an investigation of the subject. I go out of this Hall, and what do I hear? That Government can carry on its operations in Philadelphia at a saving of $250,000, annually, less than at this place. If I am fully satisfied of

H. OF R.

this, I shall vote for a removal. If the crisis will not justify a removal, or I shall be convinced that these inducements for removal do not exist, or that it will be a breach of the faith of the nation, I shall vote for staying here: whatever my private inconveniences may be, I care not for them. If, in the course of discussion, I shall be convinced either way, so shall I vote. If I am convinced that it is expedient and for the public good, and that it is consistent with the Constitution and good faith to remove, I shall vote for the resolution in spite of all that can be done to prevent me. If, on the contrary, I shall be otherwise convinced, I pledge myself to myself and to my country to vote against removal and every breach of public faith.

Mr. LYON restated the circumstance of the removal of the seat of Government of Kentucky. He did not mean to charge his colleague or any others with these designs; he had merely stated facts and reasoned from those facts. But he did say, that it was no more than natural that when the Eastern interest was joined by the Western, when the latter was increased by ten or fifteen additional Representatives, they would have the whole of this interest to carry the seat of Government hereafter Westward.

Mr. KEY rose to offer some observations on the all-important question now before the House. He was most decidedly in favor of an indefinite postponement of this question, because he himself was opposed to it in every shape, and as those whom he had the honor to represent on this floor were unanimous in their opposition to the measure. He should therefore violate his own principles if he did not in every stage of the business give this his utmost opposition. He had not, when he casually came into the House this morning, the smallest expectation that this subject was to be agitated; but as he considered that the first view of the matter furnished ample reason to defeat the measure, he should without preparation endeavor to give his sentiments upon it.

I believe, said he, that we are now about to give all that the friends of the measure can ask-not a stifled, but an ample discussion. I understand the resolution now to be fairly before the House, as if in Committee of the Whole, or in any other state. If I am correct in the opinion that it is the proper time to make observations on the merits of the question, I must be permitted to express my surprise that gentlemen in favor of the measure should require farther time to make up their minds. Had we, the opponents to it, asked for time, it might have been reasonable; but that others who had been so long in preparation should wish to procrastinate, has really astonished me. I believe that the sooner a question of this sort receives the decision of the House the better, because on it depends the fortunes of thousands. To us it is of very little moment whether it is disposed of on this day or on some weeks hence; to those over whom the dagger is suspended by a hair, it is of moment. Let them immediately know the worst.

I do not know what may have been said before I arrived here; but no reason has been offered since to justify the resolution on the table. The

« ZurückWeiter »