網頁圖片
PDF
ePub 版
[ocr errors][merged small][merged small]

your own :'and if the gentleman refuses to march to de- damage good ? Sir, there cannot be a question of it. (Mr. fend the frontier, when it is attacked by an enemy, he v. then quoted the opinion of Vattel, on the power of a will soon find the frontier at his own door. The war military commander.) Here, sir, you find it held, that which he refused to combat at a distance, will come even for the act of a subaltern, an act which, as such, home to his own threshold.

might be denied as being without sufficient authority, On the gentleman's principles, how could we, (in Obio reparation must be made if demanded. and Michigan,) have ever discharged the debt which! In further evidence of what was the extent of sufferthey incurred to Kentucky! No, sir, we did not think ing on the frontier, Mr. V. said, that it was seriously rein this manner when the war was in Michigan; our doc- commended to Government by some of their ablest comtrine was, that the people of that territory were fighting manders, to remove the whole population from part of our battles, and we went cheerfully to help them. Nor the frontier to the interior, and the support of them did the thought of their paying us for it, so much as en there at the public expense. Sir, this looks very little ter our minds. Sir, the doctrine is fallacious, as much like that pleasant and prosperous condition in which so as any that ever was advanced. Another position, the gentleman has represented these people to have assumed by the gentleman, is that which requires per- / been. manent occupancy of the property of an individual by We have heard, said Mr. V. in continuation, much the Government, in order to constitute a claim for in- from the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Barbour,) about demnification. Sir, on that principle, not one sufferer perfect and imperfect obligation. But I appeal to that in this Union, either by acts of the enemy, or of our own gentleman, himself, to say, whether there may not be troops, would ever be indemnified. Yes, said Mr. V. some cases where an imperfect obligation is stronger there would still be one claim, (but he believed, even and more perfect than perfection itself Yes, sir, I repeat against that the Committee of Claims had reported, as it-more perfect than perfection itself. I think, after occasioned by an unlawful act of the enemy)-he meant the vote that gentleman gave in the case of Lafayette, the case of that house on the River Raisin, which our he cannot deny this. Let me say to that gentleman, unbappy fellow citizens did occupy until they were con- that, in the village of Buffalo, he might, on one day, have sumed by the flames by which it was destroyed. found a family well housed, well clothed, surrounded

The next argument of the gentleman was, that the with every comfort of life, who, froin its hospitallity in people on the frontier were not so much to be pitied as throwing open its doors to the American soldier, was they would have it believed ; that they have not suf. the next day houseless and homeless, destitute of all fered so very much-nay, have rather been benefited things: if he had chanced, eight months afterwards, to by the war. 'Sir, I will say, that if that gentleman knew be wandering on the flats of the Ohio, he might there what was the true state of facts on the N. W. fron- see a family scarcely covered by a wretched hovel, in tier generally, he would never have uttered such lan- squalid poverty, one day shivering with ague, and the guage. But, sir, he does not know it-the country does next consumed with raging fever: if his compassion not know it---the country never will fully know it-the should lead him to enter and inquire into their situation, truth was withheld at the time from motives of policy- he would hear them say, our father lived in plenty and and, except to eye witnesses, it can never be known. I comfort, on the Niagara frontier- he saw the American might appeal to the first men of this nation for my truth soldiery ready to perish-be opened his door to take when I say, that, while the American army was lying at them in-and for that we are here, ruined, and in th: French Mills, three men out of five who had slept wretchedness. Sir, the sufferings of the French, on in one tent, were more than once drawn out in the morn-their retreat from Moscow, present not too strong a pic. ing dead, being literally frozen to death for want of co-ture to convey a just idea of what was endured while vering. The gentleman from North Carolina lives, bim- the whole country on the Lakes was converted into one self, in a mild climate; but if he had seen that army wide cantonment. Other districts suffered as well as encamped in the midst of snow more than three feet Niagara, but none, by any means, in so great a degree. deep, and not half clothed, be would talk and feel dif- Had the gentleman seen an American regiment on that ferently. Sir, it was as necessary to give that whole frontier drawn up on a frosty morning, and supporting district a military character, (so far as admitting the arms while their limbs were chilled to the bone, standtroops into the private houses could do this) as it was ing, in their thin cotton dress, in snow two and three to provide clothing or subsistence for your army; and the feet deep; had he seen these claimants opening their enemy had as much interest in the destruction of the houses to receive men in immediate danger of perishing, houses, as in that of your magazines. And, if losses (many of them did perish,) and afterwards turned out sustained under such circumstances, do not call upon us of bouse and home for doing it, he would not, he could for relief, I do not know what does, or can.

not, deny that something ought to be done for their re. I will now say a few words on the subject of military lief. I will not undertake to say how much, or in what occupation; and I contend in the outset, that the depo-way, but I do say that this House ought to do something. sition of General M'Clure is conclusive. Nor did the Sir, if we can get nothing from perfect obligation, we gentleman enforce the legal obligation which arises will accept it from imperfect, from charity if you please, from it, in the way I think he ought to have done. What but I do hope you will give it in some way. does General M'Clure say? (Here Mr. V. quoted his de. The gentleman has insinuated, that the inhabitants of position, in which the remonstrance of the people of the frontier are actuated wholly by a principle of selfishBuffalo against occupying their houses is mentioned, dess; that, unless stimulated by a sense of interest, they together with his reply. Now, sir, I admit, that it may will do nothing in their own defence, and will surrender be doubtful how far à commanding General can coni- up their property an easy prey to the enemy. But, sir, promit the government under which he serves by any that gentleman surely did not consider the feelings of promise or pledge that it will pay for acts of injury he the American people when he advanced such a sentiment. may think it necessary to do; but it seems to be agreed If nothing had operated on thieir minds but selfishness, by writers on that subject, that he has very extensive the army of the frontier could not have been kept topowers in this respect. I put this case: Suppose the gether a single day. No, sir, not a single day. There American army had been formed in the rear of Buffaloe; were our soldiers, lying naked and perishing on one that, in the mean while, the British should attempt a bank of the Niagara river, while, directly opposite, they landing there, having nothing between to shelter them could see the British sentry parading backward and for. from the American fire but the town; and suppose that, ward in a good comfortable watchcoat, and hear him cry under such circumstances, the American commander out, cheerfully, “all's well.” They had only to cross en had ordered every house in that town to be blown up, masse to the British side, to exchange a lodging on the would not the Government be held liable to make the ground, in thin cotton that admitted the rain, and, when

[merged small][merged small][ocr errors]

the rain was over, froze upon their bodies, for warm Mr. NEALE, of mil. then rose, and said, that as he clothing and good quarters. Had selfishness, been the had been one who assented to the present bill, it might ruling principle, where would have been your militia? not be deemed an intrusion upon the time of the comWhere would have been your regulars ?-At their own mittee, to state some of the reasons that had governed homes, or over the British lines !

him in doing so-and, as the law of nations had been Mr. V. observed, in conclusion, that he was sensible frequently referred to by the gentlemen who were op. he had delayed the committee too long, and he should posed to the bill, he asked to be permitted to read from only add that, if gentlemen were displeased with the an approved writer, what was the language of tbat law. present bill, he hoped that they would not, on that ac- (Mr. N. here quoted Vattel, to show, that where procount, abandon the measure entirely, but draw a new perty was destroyed by a nation's own Government, or bill, that should be less objectionable, and if they felt its order, “ deliberately and with precaution,” as when alarmed lest establishing any general rule might en houses are removed to erect a fortification, it must be danger the ruin of the Treasury, let them guard against paid for by the Government--as also what that writer the danger by granting a limited and definite sum of says respecting injuries by an enemy, and debts of imcompensation to the claimants.

perfect obligation.) This, Mr. N. observed, was nationMr. REYNOLDS, of Tennessee, next rose, and ob al law, as recognized by European nations and here a served, on rising, that it had not been his fortune to wit. distinction was made between injuries inflicted deliberness the scenes wbich had been so handsomely depicted ately, and those by accident-the one created a perfect by the gentleman from Ohio; yet he had feelings and obligation on the Government for remuneration, the principles, and though he did not attempt to urge bis other appealed to the charity of the nation. By referown opinions as arguments upon the House, he thought ring to the acts of 1816 and 17, it would clearly be perit proper to assign his reasons for voting in favor of the ceived that the principle was established, viz: that if the bill. Much complaint, said he, was made of the law Governmnt occupied property, and inade use of it for of 1816, and we were told that, in that act, the House military purposes, and it was then destroyed, the United had gone beyond all principles of the law of nations; States must pay for it. Those acts created a perfect and on similar grounds, we are warned against the obligation. And was not this a just princinle? And if present bill because a similar one is not to be found it were not enactea then, ought it not to be now? Whe. in the codes of foreign nations. But, admitting such ther the United States destroyed the property itself, or to be the fact, our own statute books furnish a suffi- by its act caused the enemy to destroy it, was immatecient precedent. Look said Mr. R. at the horses, the rial. Such a case does not come under that clause of bridles, the saddles, for which we have paid in the Vaitel, which refers to accident. The occupancy is a West ; look at the negroes for which we have provided deliberate voluntary act, and the law of 1816 and 17 says, indemnity in the South. Are we to stop here? Shall that the Government must pay for the loss in such case. we not provide soinething for the case of these suffer. The reason of the law is, as has been stated, that pro. ing claimants in the North? We are told that the act of perty, while possessing a private and pacific character, 1816 has impoverished the Treasury-but where, asked is not liable to injury by the enemy, according to the Mr. R. has the money gone? It was the People's money, rules of civilized warfare, but, as soon as the Governand it has gone back to the People-it circulates at ment gives it a public and belligerant character, it is. home. What injury has it done? Is not the country as Now it is necessary that the motive of the enemy in flourishing at this moment as any country on the globe? | the destruction of any particular portion of property Look at the condition of the Treasury Can we not, should, in some way, be established. But the acts of through the able management of that Department, 1816 and '17 do not allow that the fact of its public ocboast of a balance of three millions? It was the object cupation by Government shall be presumed to be of of the law of 1816, not to reward the services of the sufficient proof of this intention or motive of the enemy; citizen it did not attempt that-but only to repair the the present bill does allow this: it remedies, in this reslosses he had endured in the service of his country. By pect, the great defect of the former laws. If the occucarrying that law into effect, we shall hold out to the pancy and the destruction are proved, it is enough-the world that our country is grateful to those who serve her, one is presumed to be the reason of the other. In many and pities their distress. We shall enable the old war cases it would be impossible to prove the motive of an rior to say to his son: I have fought for a grateful enemy in any other manner. country-go and do likewise.

Before he sat down, Mr. N. said, he would endeavor Those who suffered from the military occupation of to point out what was the error of those who were optheir premises, during the war, were surely as much en- posed to the bill. They hold, that continued occupation litled to relief as those who lost a horse or negro. | by the Government is necessary to give a belligerant

Here Mr. R. adverted to the evidence of the suffer. character to private property ; that the occupation must ings on the frontier as already placed betore the commit- continue up to the monient of destruction. But his tee-to whole villages occupied by our own troops, and construction of the law of nations, on this point, was, by the burning of New Ark, exposed to the vengeance that the belligerant character superinduced on private of an irritated and powerful enemy. Adverting to the property, by its occupation for public and military purletter of Secretary Armstrong authorizing that act, he poses, may continue after its actual occupation ceases, said, let us not stand on names he was the organ of the and this for a greater or a shorter space of time, accord. Government-the head of the War Department, and, as ing to circumstances. He would illustrate this by one such, his letter authorized the burning of that village. case-be might easily adduce a thousand. Suppose the

Mr. R. said he had had the honor of participating in forces of the enemy to be advancing-with a view to the passage of the act of 1816--for he had witnessed all stop him, Government seizes upon a private building, the steps of this claim since its first introduction--he which lies in his line of march, fills it with troops, and had beard his friend from Kentucky say, and with too uses it as a point of annoyance, with such success as to much truth, that the privilege of those sufferers to pre. interrupt his progress: the enemy, perceiving this, makes sent their claims to this House, would be a privilege to a feint of marching in a quite different direction---suchave their claims rejected. Sir, the event shewed that ceeds in inducing our army to follow; and our army he had spoken like a prophet. We have lately done one leaves the building: shortly after, the enemy suddenly act of justice to a foreigner--(an act in which I am counter marches -- returns to the building which had proud to say I had the honor and happiness of partici- proved such an obstacle in his way, and, reaching it bepaling by my vote)-let us now do another to our own fore our troops, seizes and destroys it. He asked whe. citizens.

ther the occupancy here continued up to the time of

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors][merged small][merged small]

destruction ? Certainly not. Yet was not the building frontier. Our advances on the Niagara country were in destroyed solely on account of the warlike character oc- some instances intended to create a diversion-to distract casioned by the occupancy? Assuredly. And was not the attention of the enemy, and turn sim from the invathe Government as much bound to pay for the building sion of the frontier of Ohio, to the protection of his own as if the occupation had continued ? It would be easy territory, One great object of the invasion by us of the to multiply examples. The true principle, then, was Niagara frontier, he had always understood, was to prothis: that, if the occupation by Government gave a pub- tect the frontiers of Ohio, and of the states west of it: lic character, and at any time during the continuance of and he had himself no dubt that one great object of the that character, the property was destroyed, the Govern. devastation of the Niagara frontier by the enemy, was to ment is bound to indemnify the owner. The quo animo prevent its occupation as a military station, from which with which the enemy destroys, must be presumed froin Canada might be invaded. When Newark was burnt, the change of character in the thing destroyed. If you the British commander, who sought for a pretext for the will not admit this, your law is illusive : it promises to destruction, thought he had found it in the burning of pay if the quo animo is proved, but it refuses to receive Newark; by availing himself of which, he could throw the only proof the case admits of.

the odium of his conduct on the United States, whilst Mr. BUCK, of Vermont, said, that he did not rise to his real motive was very different from his avowed one. debate the general principle of the bill, but to correct That, said Mr. S. was the real history of the proclama. a material error in point of fact. The error was so im- tion, which was relied upon as an argument against the portant, that, when it was shewn, it would appear that claimants now before the House. Their obiect was to the advocates of the bill had been going wholly on an secure themselves from our incursions. They accomassumed state of the facts, which in reality had no exist. plished it: they did, by the devastation of the Nia rare ence. The gentleman who introduced the bill went so frontier, secure themselves, until a larger and better ap. far as to say, that he rested the cause of the claimants on pointed force penetrated their frontier, &c. this one point, viz: that the reason of the destruction of I did not rise to discuss the question now before the property had been its occupation by the Government; House, said Mr. S. but since I am up, I may as well say and, having established the fact of such occupation, he a few words upon it. I think that the principle of the seemed to conceive that the claim was made out. But, bill is carried too far; and bad I been one of the commit. Mr. B. said, be had in his hand a document to show con- tee who reported it, I would not have given my assent clusively that the ravages of our frontier were not caus- to it. But, if we vote to strike out the first section of ed by the occupancy by our army, but were inflicted the bill, being willing to legislate at all on the subject, entirely on a principle of retaliation, in consequence of we shall lose the opportunity of shaping it to our wishes. the burning of Newark. This document was the pro. The question involved in this bill, Mr. S. remarked, bad clamation of Gen Prevost, the officer who commanded been called a question of perfect or imperfect obliga. the British forces at the time, and who, he believed, di- tion. That, he said, was not the question. The prorected, and in person superintended, the work of desperty of a citizen appeurs, by the usages of nations, to be truction. (Here Mr. Buck quoted the proclamation, in exempted from destruction by an enemy, unless, by givstrong terms denouncing the conduct of this Governing up his property to public use, he has converted it ment, and justifying the devastation of the Niagara fron- from a private to a public character. Now, when a cititier. Thus it appears that we are not driven to pre- zen bas given up his house for the public use, and it is sume the motive of the enemy; we have it in express destroyed by reason of such conversion, an obligation is terms, declared by himself. He should not attempt to created upon the Government to indemnify him for the discuss the subject at large-be thought such a repre-loss-Mr. S. spoke not of the obligation of a bond, but sentation of facts as was contained in the testimony, of the moral obligation, arising from natural justice, coming almost wholly from parties interested, was not which constitutes an obligation in the meaning of the to be put in competition with a public document such law of nations. What is the obligation of the Govern. as that he had just quoted. This changed the state of ment to the citizen who has given up his property for the question. It was not now to be settled, whetber its use? It is this: you have converted his dwelling. this Government was bound, because its acts had chang- house into a public building--you have changed its chared the character of the property--but whether it was acter-to accommodate the public, you have destroyed bound to remunerate the sufferers for injuries inflicted its sanctity as a private building you have rendered it by the enemy on a principle of retaliation. On this dis- liable to destruction-you have divested it of the chiarcussion, Mr. B. said, he should not enter, but only ob-acter which, by the law of nations, would have prou..ctserve, that, if we admit that payment is to be made on ed it. What then is the Government bound to do? To the principle of retaliation, we, having been the begin say to the individual so circumstanced, As you have renmers. by burning Newark, are of course bound to pay. dered up your property for our use, we are your insur

Mr. STORRS, of New York, rose to call the attention ers: After you have placed yourself out of the protec. of the House to what were really the facts of the case tion of the law of nations, you shall not suffer by having now before it, however perverted by the document done so. This, said Mr. S. is what I call a perfect obliwhich had just been quoted. It was true, he said, that, gation-- a perfect moral obligation. The question for in that proclamation, the pretext for the devastation of indemnity for losses sustained under such circumstances, the Niagara frontier was the destruction of Newark, but, is a question, not of charity, but of absolute right: the in his judgment, it never was the real cause of it. Who- whole of it turning on the principle that the party has, ever looks to the situation of that frontier, and the his. for your use, exposed his property to destruction lawtory of the War with Great Britain to that period, must fully by the enemy. It is unjust, morally, that one who be satisfied that that document deserves no other char. has thus surrendered up, and exposed to destruction, acter than that of mere hyperbole. It was not issued bis property, on account of the public, should himself until after the burning of the Niagara frontier, when it suffer that loss thereby which the public ought to bear. had become necessary to give to the civilized world when you take the property of a citizen for public use, some plausible pretext for such an act as burning that during war, you become the insurer of it against every frontier. Mr. s. reviewed the facts which attended the act of the enemy, lawful or unlawful, and for this reason: destruction of Newark, &c. We had considered the that, when he has once surrendered his house into your Niagara frontier generally as a point from which the Ca possession, it is no longer bis dwelling house ; tbe pronadian frontier could be most easily invaded. We had perty then belongs to the public, and not to him. Now, made the experiment, not without the loss of blood. said Mr. S. if there be any definition of perfect obligation, The enemy bad similar objects on the North Western which does not include this, it is beyond my conception.

Dec. 30, 1824–Jan. 3 825.] Inland Trade between Missouri and Mexico.

[ocr errors]

Congress had, indeed, he said, frequently legislated exceeded the visions of the wildest imagination. The under a sense of this obligation. We have in existence journey to New Mexico, but lately deemed a chimerical a law, by wbich, if a citizen loses arms in the service- project, had become an affair of ordinary occurrence. arms w bich, by law, be is obliged to supply bimself with Santa Fe, but lately the Ultima Thule of American en. -you consider yourself under an obligation to pay him terprise, was now considered as a stage only in the profor his property so lost. So, too, we pay for the gress, or rather, a new point of departure to our invinloss of horses in service, of accoutrements, and of boats cible citizens. Instead of turning back from that point, in public employ. These, Mr. S. said, were plain prin. the caravans broke up there, and the subdivisions ciples, to his mind; and, if there be such a class of cases branched off in different directions in search of new the. among the claims for losses on the Niagara frontier, atres for their enterprise. Some proceeded down the riCongress was morally bound to provide remuneration ver to the Passo del Norte; some to the mines of Chifor them. He asked of any gentleman to tell him where huahua and Durango, in the province of New Biscay : were the public barracks, during the late war, on the some to Sonora and Sinatoa, on the Gulf of California, Niagara frontier; or whether he has ever heard of a and some, seeking new lines of communication with the single public building on that frontier, excepting fort l'acific, bad undertaken to descend the Western slope Niagara, during that period. Yet the troops of the Unit of our continent, through the unexplored regions of the ed States were comfortably lodged. Where was the Multnomah and Buenaventura. The fruit of these enterarsenal of th United States on that frontier? Where prises, for the present year, amounted to $ 190,000 in were the stores deposited? Where, except in dwelling gold and silver bullion and coin, and precious furs; a houses? The hospitals, too, were in the dwelling sum considerable, in itself, in the commerce of an infant houses at Buffalo, and the inhabitants of that village State, but chiefly deserving a statesman's notice as an were the nurses of the sick soldiers. Are we to be told, earnest of what might be expected from a regulated and said he, that this was not a military occupation? Is this protected trade. The principal article given in exwhat is called a casual or temporary occupation ? Either change, is that of which we have the greatest abundance. the property of individuals was occupied, or we must and which has the peculiar advantage of making the circome to the conclusion that the troops were not lodged, cuit of the Union before it departs from the territoand that all the animunition, the hospitals, and military ries of the republic-cotton-which grows in the South,

re in the open air. There must, he said, bel is manufactured in the North, and exported from the some class of cases on that frontier, for the loss of which West. Mr. B. said, that the attention of the Senate had the Government is, by the most perfect obligation already been drawn to this subject, and the Committee bound to provide.

on Indian Affairs stood charged with an inquiry into the If the first section of the bill were stricken out, it would expediency of treating with the Indian tribes between be declared that there was no claim to indemnity on the Missouri and Mexico, for the right of a safe passage part of any of the sufferers by destruction of property through their countries. The paper presented containon the Niagara frontier. Although, therefore, he was ed information essential to that committee. It contain: opposed to the bill as it now stood, thinking the princi- ed precise information upon the route to be pursued, and ple too broad, and that the House ought not to pass a the tribes to be conciliated. It contained, besides, aubill to indemnify all losses without discrimination, still thentic details upon the extent and value of the trade, he thought the bill might be modified so as to make it and suggestions for its protection. It had been drawn just and reasonable; and he was, therefore, opposed to up at his particular request, and in answer to queries striking out the first section of the bill.

proposed by him. He deemed it the fairest, sarest, and The committee then rose, reported progress, and ob. most satisfactory manner of conveying to the Senate the tained leave to sit again; and

body of facts on wbich he should rely when the quesThe House adjourned to Monday.

tion of extending protection to this trade shall be called

up for decision. He therefore moved, that the stateIN SENATE, Monday, January 3, 1825.

ment of Mr. Storrs might be printed for the use of the

Senate, and referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs. INLAND TRADE BETWEEN MISSOURI & MEXICO. The motion was agreed to. Mr. BENTON rose, and stated to the Senate that he

LAFAYETTE had received a paper which he took the liberty of pre- Mr. SMITH, from the Joint Committee appointed to senting. It was a statement of facts in relation to the announce to General Lafayette the passage of the act origin, present state, and future prospects, of trade and in his favor, and to request his acceptance of the provision intercourse between the Valley of the Mississippi and made for him, reported to the Senate the following copy the Internal Provinces of Mexico. Intending, for a of an address of the committee to to the General, and his year past, to bring this subject before the Senate, and reply. to claim for it a share of the national protection, Mr. B. From the Joint Committee to General Lafayette. said, that he had felt the necessity of resting his demand GENERAL: We are a Committee of the Senate and upon a solid foundation of facts. With this view, he had House of Representatives, charged with the office of inaddressed himself, during the last summer, to many informing you of the passage of an act, a copy of which we habitants of Missouri, who had been personally engaged now present. You will perceive from this act, sir, that in the trade; among others, to Mr. Augustus Storrs, the two Houses of Congress, aware of the large pecuniary late of New Hampshire, a gentleman of character and as well as other sacrifices which your long and arduous intelligence, every way capable of relating things as he devotion to the cause of freedom has cost you, have saw them, and incapable of relating them otherwise. | deemed it their privilege to reimburse a portion of them. This gentleman had been one of a caravan of eighty | as having been incurred in part on account of the United persons, one hundred and fifty-six horses, and twenty- States. The principles that have marked your characthree wagons and carriages, which had made the expe-| ter will not permit you to oppose any objection to the dition from Missouri to Santa Fe, (of New Mexico,) in discharge of so much of the national obligation to you as the months of May and June last. His account was full admits of it. We are direcied to express to you the conof interest and novelty. It sounded like romance to fidence, as well as the request, of the two Houses, that hear of caravans of men, horses, and wagons, traversing you will, by an acquiescence with their wishes in this with their merchandise the vast plain which lies be respect, add another to the many and signal proofs you tween the Mississippi and the Rio del Norte The story have afforded of your esteem for a people, whose es. seemed better adapted to Asia than to North America tecm for you can never cease until they have ceased to But, romantic as it might seem, the reality had already prize the liberty they enjoy, and emulaie the virtues by

[ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors]

which it was acquired We have only to subjoin an said allegations are not well founded, it may make an expression of our gratification in being the organs of order, to be entered on record, discharging the said bail this communication, and of the distinguished personal or security from his or their surttyship;” being still unrespect with which we are, your obedient servants, der consideration.

SAMUEL SMITH, Committee On this motion the debate was resumed and continued
ROBT. Y. HAYNE,

of some time. Messrs. JOHNSON, of Kentucky, and BARD. BOULIGNY, The Senate. BOUR opposing the amendment, and Messrs. COBB, WM. S. ARCHER,

Committee | BRANCH, and BROWN, of Ohio, supporting it.
S. VAN RENS ELAER, of the The question on striking out the clauses was finally

PHILIP S. MARKLEY, House Reps. I decided by yeas and nays, as follows:
Washington, Jan. 1, 1825.

Yeas-Messrs. Bell, Brown, Chandler, Clayton, Cobb, GENERAL LAFAYETTE'S REPLY.

D'Wolf, Dickerson, Edwards, Elliott, Gaillard, King, of

New York, Lloyr, of Md. Lloyd, of Mass. M'llvaine, Gentlemen of the Committee of both Houses of Congress :

Mills, Noble, Palmer, Parrott, Ruggles, Seymour, ThoThe immense and unexpected gift, which, in addi mas--21. tion to former and considerable bounties, it has pleased! NAYS-Messrs. Barbour, Barton, Benton, Bouligny, Congress to confer upon me, calls for the warmest ac- Branch, Eaton, Findlay, Holmes, of Me. Jackson, Johnknowledgments of an old American soldier and adopted son, of Ky. Jobnston, of Lou. King, of Alab. Lanman, son of the United States-two titles dearer to my heart | Lowrie, ú’Lean, Macon, Smith, Talbot, Tazewell, Van than all the treasures of the world.

Buren, Williams-21. However proud I am of every sort of obligation re- The Senate being equally divided on the question, the ceived from the people of the United States and their motion was, of course, lost. Representatives in Congress, the large extent of this by Various other amendments, of inferior importance, nefaction might have created in my mind feelings of he were offered to the details of the bill, some of which sitation, not inconsistent, I hope, with those of the most succeeded, and others were lost--in the proposition or grateful reverence. But the so very kind resolution of discussion of which Messrs. COBB, MILI.S, VAN BUboth Houses, delivered by you, gentlemen, in terms of REN, BROWN of Ohio, and JOHNSON of Ky.took part. equal kindness, precludes all other sentiments but those Before the bill was gone through, the Senate adof the lively and profound gratitude of which, in respect. journed. fully accepting the munificent favor, I have the honor to beg you will be the organ.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES-SAME DAY. Permit me, also, gentlemen, to join a tender of my af

Mr. LIVINGSTON, of Lou, offered the following: fectionate personal thanks to the expression of the high

Resolved, That a committee be appointed to consider est respect, with which I have the bonor to be,

and report on the expediency of establishing an AcadeYour obedient servant,

my for instruction in those sciences necessary for the LAFAYETTE.

service of the military marine; with power to report by Washington, Jan. 1, 1825.

bill or otherwise.” The Senate took up for consideration the bill“ for Mr. WILLIAMS, of N. C. suggested that it would be the relief of Thomas L. Ogden and others,'' (appropriat. more proper that this resolution should go to the Coming 3,710 dollars to indemnify the petitioners for wood mittee on Naval Affairs, than to a select committee. taken from their lands contiguous to the village of Sack. Mr. MERCER, of Va. said, that he had had the bonor ett's Harbor, and consumed by the army of the United of submitting a resolution, similar to that now presented Slates, during the late war.]

by the gentleman from Louisiana, at the last session of Mr. CHANDLER opposed the bill, on the ground that Congress: it bad been referred to the Committee on Na. the public naval and military establisbments, formed at val Affairs, but, owing, as he presumed, to the pressure Sackett's Harbor, by the Government, had imparted a of business before that committee, nothing had been value to that place, and to the lands in its vicinity, much done respecting it till the middle of the session, and it greater than the alleged damage done to the petition

amage done to the petition proved too late to be acted on. He considered no sub. co's; further, that, so far from the use of the timber by

the timber by ject as more impurtant and more worthy of the considthe army, now proposed to be paid for, being an injury, leration of the House, than a provision for the instrucit was a real benefit to the claimants-as every one knew tion of those who are to uphold the naval glory of the who was acquainted with the labor of clearing new land; I country. and that, in fact, the consumption of the wood in ques- Mr. 'FULLER thanked the gentleman from Virginia tion, was worth at least ten dollars an acre to the land for his suggestion to save the time of the Committee on from which it was removed.

Naval Affairs, but he could answer him, that he was Mr. RUGGLES and Mr. VAN BUREN advocated the mistaken if he supposed that the resolution he offered justice and equity of the claim. It had twice passed the at the last session had been neglected by that commit. House, but had not got through both Houses for want tee. It had received mature consideration and the of time. The claim was originally for 7,000 dollars, but measure it proposed had been enerafted in a general had been reduced to the sum now proposed, of $3,110, bill for the reorganization of the Navy Department; to which the petitioners were fairly entitled, in the opino but that bill had been pressed out by other business, ion of the committee that reported the bill, &c. The and now lay over; he hoped it would receive an early debate continued some time; when,

attention during the present session. Believing that On inotion of Mr. KING, of Alabama, the bill was laid this would be the case, he moved to lay the resolution on on the table, to give opportunity for a further examina- the table. tion of the facts of the case.

The SPEAKER decided, that, inasmuch as the subThe Senate, according to the order of the day, project-matter of the resolution was before the House in ceeded again to the consideration of the bill abolishing another form, the resolution was out of order. imprisonment for debt-the motion of Mr.COBB to strike Mr. LIVINGSTON inquired, whether the bill, in out the following clauses from the first section, viz. which the gentleman from the Committee on Naval Af “ But, after the return thereof, the defendant or de fairs (Mr. Fuller) had stated this subject as being infendants may contest the allegation of the said oaths or cluded, did not contain sundry other matters, and wheth. affirmations, before the court in which the said suit or er, by being thus entangled with matters foreign to action is instituted, in such form as the court shall pre-itself, and possibly of doubtful practicability or expediscribe. And if the court shall be of opinion that the ency, ary measure might not be easily, and forever, de.

CICI

« 上一頁繼續 »