H. of R. & Sen.] Chesapeake and Delaware Canal.-Imprisonment for Debt. [JAN. 17, 1825.

other public acts. The credit now depends on the ac. Spaight, A. Stevenson, Stoddard, Taliaferro, Tattnall, tual execution, the science on the subject being so well Taylor, Ten Eyck, Thompson, of Geo., Tracy, Tucker, known. of Va., Tucker, of S. C. Tyson, Vance, of N. C. WhipSome imagine that the nation is too young. No opi-ple, Whitman, Williams, of N. Y. Williams, of Va. Wilnion can be more fallacious. On this head, I was pleased liams, of N. C., Wilson, of S. C., Wood-83. with a remark of the Abbe de Pradt, on the Colonies. So the bill was ordered to be engrossed. In speaking on the age of a nation, he says it does not depend on time, it is on the resources and population of the country-and I will add to his sensible remark, that it may depend also, in a degree, on the enterprising character of the people. Ten millions of people are capable of performing all the important interests of a nation. This ought not, on subjects of this description, to be considered a young nation.

The New York works are a complete and satisfactory answer to any objections made in respect to the age of the nation. We have occular demonstration of the immense works that have been accomplished there in a period of seven or eight years; and I will ask, has any of the other concerns of the state or the nation been neglected on that account? It is true, that state is in debt for nearly the whole expenditure-but would any man in the state give up the canal to be free of the debt? Not one. Now, the General Government can do the same things on a still greater scale: and why should not the same results follow? In ten years, the whole face of this country might be changed. Gentlemen talk of the national debt-but what is a debt of eighty or ninety millions to such a country as this? Had the system of internal improvements been commenced long ago, the value of the country might have been doubled at this day-nor would it have involved the sacrifice of any other interests, to promote internal improvements, as the example of New York, already quoted, has plainly demonstrated. I sincerely hope, Mr. Chairman, that we shall now make a beginning. I am well convinced the spirit of the nation is on this subject in advance of Congress-and I am equally persuaded that, if a beginning is to be made, no spot could be selected freer from objections, than that in which the canal has been commenced, which it is the purpose of the present bill to aid.

The committee reported the bill without amendment, and the question being on ordering it to be engrossed for a third reading, Mr. COCKE called for the Yeas and Nays on that question, which were taken as follows:

IN SENATE.-MONDAY, JAN. 17, 1825.
IMPRISONMENT FOR DEBT.

The engrossed bill "to abolish imprisonment for debt," was again read; and, on the question "Shall this bill pass?"

Mr. VAN DYKE, of Del. rose, and addressed the Senate as follows: Having been a member of the Committee charged with the consideration of this bill, I have candidly lent my aid to remove objections which applied to it as introduced by the gentleman who has been its zealous advocate. The project now presented is preferable to that which received the sanction of this honorable body at the last session; but it still presents difficulties that are, in my judgment, insuperable. To abolish imprisonment for debt is the declared object of this bill; and to effect it we are urged to adopt and put in motion all the new machinery of this new system. New oaths, new trials, new proofs, and a strange commixture of law and equity, are the means to be used to accomplish this object. From the best consideration that I have been able to give the subject, I cannot assent to such an experiment. The administration of justice between cre. ditor and debtor, as now practised, is plain and familiar: where this innovation may lead us, it may be difficult to state; but one thing is not to be disguised; the creditor will be met with new difficulties and accumulated expense in prosecuting a claim for a just debt. And whence do you obtain satisfactory evidence that it is necessary for the good of the nation, that such a system should be adopted? From what quarter of the country have you received a memorial suggesting such a plan as that proposed by this bill? I have heard of none; and my own observation and experience, within the limited circle of a few states, induces a belief that the dreadful picture of oppression which has been drawn, in vivid colors, by the advocates of the measure, is a creature of the ima gination, and has no existence in real life. I boldly say, the original is not found in the Middle States, and gentlemen, in whom I place confidence, assure me that it will be sought in vain in other states. As a legislator, I do not perceive the necessity for this measure. prehend serious difficulties in executing the plan, and therefore feel constrained to vote against it. I ask the Yeas and Nays, that I may record my vote in opposition to the bill.

I ap

YEAS.-Messrs. Adams, Alexander, of Tenn., Allen, of Tenn., Allison, Bartley, Beecher, Blair, Buckner, Cady, Call, Cambreleng, Campbell, of Ohio, Cassedy, Collins, Condict, Cook, Cushman, Durfee, Dwight, Ellis, Foot, of Con., Forsyth, Forward, Gatlin, Gurley, Harris, Hemphill, Herkimer, Holcombe, Ingham, Isaacs, John son, of Va., J. T. Johnson, F. Johnson, Kent, Kremer, Letcher, Little, Livingston, M'Arthur, M'Kean, M'Lane, of Del, M'Lean, of Ohio, Mallary, Martindale, Matlack, Mercer, Miller, Mitchell, of Penn., Mitchell, of Md. Moore, of Ken. Neale,Newton, Owen, Patterson, of Penn. "Patterson, of Ohio, Plumer, of Penn., Reynolds, Sand-ed to apply, were those of contract, in the suits for the ford, Scott, Sharpe, Sloane, Wm. Smith, Standefer, Sterling, J. Stephenson, Stewart, Storrs, Swan, Thompson, of Penn., Tomlinson, Udree, Vance, of Ohio, Van Rensselaer, Vinton, Warfield, Wayne, Webster, Whittlesey, James Wilson, Wilson, of Ohio, Wolf, Woods, Wright-86.

NAYS. Messrs. Alexander, of Va., Archer, P. P. Barbour, Bassett, Bradley, Buck, Burleigh, Campbell, of S. C. Carter, Carey, Clark, Cocke, Conner, Crafts, Craig, Crowninshield, Culpeper, Day, Dwinell, Eddy, Edwards, of N. C. Findlay, Floyd, Foote, of N. Y. Frost, Garrison, Gist, Govan, Hall, Hamilton, Harvey, Hayden, Herrick, Hobart, Hogeboom, Hooks, Jenkins, Kidder, Lathrop, Leftwich, Lincoln, Litchfield, Livermore, Locke, Long, Longfellow, M'Coy, M'Duffie, Mangum, Marvin, Matson, Morgan, Nelson, O'Brien, Olin, Reed, Richards, Rose, Ross, Saunders, Sibley, Arthur Smith,

Mr. TAZEWELL said his objection to the bill was, that its object was not to abolish imprisonment for debt in all, but only in certain particular cases therein described; that the cases to which the bill was not intendenforcement of which contracts bail had been originally required. In all such cases, the writ of capias ad satisfaciendum might still issue, even if this bill became a law. Now, said Mr. T. very many cases of contract broken, might, and must, be prosecuted, in courts of chancery only; and, according to the rules of proceeding in these courts, bail could not be required in any case therein instituted. The effect of the second section of the bill was, however, to prohibit the writ of capias ad satisfaciendum, and all other process under which the body of the debtor might be taken in all cases of contract in which bail had not been originally requ red.— The provisions of the bill, therefore, were inconsistent with its object. The case of a lost bond was referred to as fully illustrative of this position. There could be no reason assigned why the debtor by bond which was not lost, might be imprisoned to satisfy the judgment of

a court of law rendered for the amount of his bond; and that the debtor, where bond was accidentally destroyed, should not be imprisoned to satisfy the decree of a court of equity for a like sum. In either case, the obligation upon the debtor, and the rights of the creditor, after the judgment at law, or the decree in equity, were the same, and the same means of enforcing these rights, and the performance of these duties, ought to be allowed in both. But, under this bill, a difference, said Mr. T. is created, for which I can see no good reason.

[Senate.

to the communications of the Governors of Louisiana, South Carolina, the Society in Boston and New York, relative to this subject; and having looked at these expressions of public opinion, let gentlemen, opposed to this measure, console themselves that the voice of the people has not called for it. The voice of the people is in its favor; and, sooner or later, he hoped that voice would be respected in every department of the government. The gentleman from Virginia had objected to the bill, because, in some cases at common law, the defendant might he held to bail, upon certain conditions; and, in the same class of cases, when pursued in chancery, the defendant could not be held to bail.

Mr. JOHNSON, of Kentucky, said, that he was called upon, in consequence of the objections made to the passage of the bill, by the two gentlemen, from Delaware and Virginia, to vindicate the measure under con- Mr. J. said, he did not see any great force in the obsideration. It had been said, that we had not brought Jection, because now the same practice universally exfor ard any cases of hardship which proved the necessi-isted, as he believed, in relation to proceedings at comty of this measure. Is it necessary to detain the Senate mon law and in chancery. In many cases at common with the search after, and the reading of the jail records law, the party may be held to bail by the present sysof the different states, or of the United States, to prove tem, yet, if he should be driven to chancery, he cannot that he who has power in this respect will abuse it? hold the defendant to bail. If this was not the univerHuman nature was too well known to require him to il. sal practice, he called on the distinguished member, who lustrate the principle, that equal and just laws were re- had acquired so much fame for his legal acquirements, quired to exercise the increase of inordinate passions. to point out the state where a different practice prevailThe jail records of several states, at the last session, ed, or where it prevailed in the United States' courts. had been adduced and relied upon to prove the necessi- He believed no attempt would be made to correct his ty of this measure. The fact was established, and the view of this subject. If he was correct, then it followed, fact can been established, that there are unreasonable as an inevitable conclusion, that the objection was comand unjust creditors, as well as fraudulent debtors; the mon to the existing system of civil proceedings, as well bill was intended to restrain the one and to detect the as to this bill, and, therefore, was no objection at all. other. The case of the debtor recorded in Holy Writ, If a good objection, why did not the objector, in this who was forgiven his whole debt, and the next moment case, attempt to amend and provide a remedy for the put violent hands on his debtor, and cast him into prison, mischief? But no such attempt was made, and if made, was recorded to illustrate the disposition of man, and to he presumed, would not be sustained by either side of show what he has done and what he will always do, the Senate. when vested with power. If the gentleman from Delaware had the patience of Job, that patience could be exhausted by a recital of cases in which the same cruel and unfeeling disposition was manifested, and by which the misery of thousands had been increased, without any corresponding benefit resulting from such a course.

Mr. J. called the attention of the Senate particularly to that part of the bill which preserved the writ of ne exeat, and authorized its use. It was a privilege given to a complainant in chancery to hold the defendant to bail, when he would make oath that he was about to leave the state in which he was sued, or upon stating the It has been said, likewise, that we had received no pe-fact of his going beyond the jurisdiction of the court, by titions from the people; that they appeared to be satis-removing out of the United States. It is upon the very fied with the present system. Mr. J. inquired, if, in the same principle that at common law we propose, by this discharge of our various and important duties as mem- bill, to hold the defendant to bail, and in no other case, bers of this body, it was necessary to be stimulated and Here, then, is that equality for which we contend. goaded on by petitions from our constituents? He thought not. He believed the people would think with him on that point. But, if we look for the expression of public sentiment to respect it, he said, we have ample proof of the wishes of the people of the United States, on this interesting subject. At the last session, when a similar bill was adopted by this body, there was an expression of approbation from Maine to New-Orleans, from Boston to the Rocky Mountains, at least so far as we have an American population in that quarter. He would invite gentlemen to look at the public prints; and if that was any evidence of public feeling and pub. lic sentiment, and he believed it was, there was some thing like a universal approbation and congratulations throughout this vast republic at the mere prospect of passing such a measure. He invited gentlemen to look at the laws of Kentucky and North Carolina, which abolished imprisonment for debt. Were these communities less happy? Were they in commotion because of such a measure? He believed not, while thousands were saved from ruin by an unnecessary rigor in the collection of debts. He would venture to say, that, in those states, many sources of human misery had been dried up in consequence of it; and, the longer it existed, the more sacred and revered would be its principles; the transactions of men would be based more upon honor and common honesty, than upon the right to pursue a fellow man like the tyger his prey.

Mr. J. inquired of the Senate, if it was probable that any measure of so much importance could ever pass without real objections? Those who contended for the abolition of imprisonment for debt, could not get as much as they wanted; those who opposed the principle, contended that we had gained too much. He did not doubt but what some real objections might be made to the bill, but he thought many more imaginary objections had been made than real ones. He inquired if there was a member of the body who would vote against a simple proposition to abolish imprisonment for debt? He presumed none would give such a vote. Yet, when we had presented a system the most perfect that the wisdom of both parties could devise, could the members of this body vote against it, and return to their constituents, and say, although we approved the principle, yet we could not muster wisdom, knowledge, industry, and experience enough, to give this principle a living form, by passing a judicious law upon the subject? He thought we could not say so, and satisfy our constituents.

Mr. VAN DYKE replied: It was not my intention, sir, said he, to enter at large into the discussion of the merits of this subject; nor shall I now do so. The few remarks which I submitted, were designed merely as an apology for requesting the Yeas and Nays on the final question, about to be taken. But, sir, it now becomes proper for me to say a few words in reply to the gentleman from Kentucky. That gentleman, with his usual Mr. J. called the attention of gentlemen to the propo-zeal, has argued as if the rejection of this bill by the sition, in Alabama, to abolish imprisonment for debt; Senate gave the creditor a power to imprison, at his will

VOL. I.-15

Senate.]

Imprisonment for Debt.

[JAN. 17, 1825.

and pleasure, an honest but unfortunate debtor. If that to believe defendant has fraudulently concealed his prowere the question, there would probably be no voice perty, another denial by defendant produces another lifted up within these walls against the bill. No man trial; and if plaintiff fails to prove the allegation to the would be more willing than myself to abolish imprison- satisfaction of the jury, he must pay costs. These rement for debt, on such conditions, and under such provi-marks on two sections of the bill, will. I trust, illustrate sions, as should oblige the debtor to make a full disclo- the proposition which I advanced, that the bill is calcusure and surrender of his property for the use of his cre- lated to embarrass creditors unnecessarily, and to involve ditors. Such a provision prevails in most of the states, them in new scenes of litigation with their debtors; and and relieves debtors under State Court process. Hu- subject creditors to expense and cost, unprecedented manity would bind the creditor; honesty and justice in any court of justice in this happy country. would constrain the debtor to assent to this proposition. The objection stated by the honorable gentleman I am not one of those who would expect a poor man to from Virginia, (Mr. TAZEWELL,) appears not to have pay his debts by going to prison; but I have seen enough been fully understood by the gentleman from Kentucky, of man to believe that, with many, who have the means, or, if understood by him, I think he has not given a sait requires something beyond persuasion to make them tisfactory answer to it. The gentleman from Virginia pay their debts. If, then, I am asked whether it is just has justly remarked, that many claims on contracts for that a creditor should confine the person of his debtor, money were of necessity to be prosecuted in a court of who has committed no fraud, and is unable to pay? I equity-but for which this bill makes no provision for answer, No; such conduct would violate the common bail or security for appearance in any stage of the proprinciples of humanity, and would justly fix a stigma on ceeding, and yet takes away process against defendant's the character of him who should evince so merciless a person, after a final decree for payment of money, and disposition. But, if I am asked, whether, under the thus leaves a creditor, suing in equity, without any idea of relieving an honest debtor, I am willing to adopt means of compelling defendant to appear, or to pay the this system, by which a creditor who has loaned his mo- debt. This position is correct as the bill now stands, ney to a dishonest man, who, disregarding his promise, and, to remedy the evil, the complainant in equity must refused to restore it, though he has ample means to re-institute a new suit to obtain the writ ne exeat. Here, pay-shall be embarrassed in prosecuting his claim-be put to unnecessary expense, and be involved in endless litigation with such debtor? I answer, No. Those moral rules and precepts to which allusion has just been made, have no application to such a case; nor would I lend to such a debtor any facility to baffle his just creditor. But what does this bill require of every creditor against every debtor, before the debtor shall be put to the small inConvenience of giving bail, or, in plain language, entering into security, not for payment of the debt, but simply to appear and abide the judgment of the court? Read the first section-two oaths, in the first instance, must be taken by the creditor-first, he must swear to the amount of his debt; 2dly, that he has reason to believe the defendant intends to remove, &c. The first may generally be in the power of the plaintiff to do, satisfactorily; but the second is too indefinite, in my opinion, to be made the subject-matter of a solemn oath.

Sir, I have a repugnance to the multiplication of oaths unnecessarily, in the administration of justice. They are traps for men's consciences, and have a tendency to lessen the reverence which ought every where to prevail, for that all-important and solemn obligation. What man, regarding his reputation, and possessing the delicate feelings of an honorable mind, would feel at liberty to take that oath, under the penalty which must immediately follow? Read the following lines: "on the return of the writ, the defendant may contest the allegations of the oath, in such form as the court may prescribe," &c. The tables are now turned, and the plaintiff is immediately to be arraigned before the court by his debtor, for swearing to what the debtor says is untrue, and this issue is to be gravely tried before the court; and the plaintiff must then make out, by proof, that he had reason to believe, &c. If he fail to do so, the defendant triumphs in his discharge. Sir, it is mocking a creditor to invite him to enter the lists with a cunning, fraudulent debtor, on these terms. However strong the belief of the creditor, he would be unwilling to engage in such a contest; and the consequence would be, that the fraudulent debtor would escape from the suit without bail, and, at the end of it, laugh at the vexation of his creditor. This is the operation of a part of the machinery to be put in motion by the bill to abolish imprisonment for debt. Unless my optics deceive me, every part of the system will be found to operate against the just rights of creditors, and to involve them in litigation and expense. Thus, by the fourth section, even after judgment, if plaintiff shall make oath that he has ground

again, is further evidence of vexation and expense to the creditor. The gentleman from Kentucky, instead of meeting this objection, says, that bail is not now requir ed in a suit commenced in a court of equity. In this he is correct; the first process in such a court is a subpœna or summons to appear and answer; but, after final decree for payment of money, according to the British practice, which prevails in many of these states, the process issues first, in personam, by writ of attachment, for contempt, in not performing the decree; and when defendant is thus brought into court, the judge has it in his power to compel the defendant to do what, under circumstances, may appear reasonable, and agreeably to equity and good conscience. This attachment process is taken away by the second section of the bill, and it would seem incumbent on its friends to account satisfactorily for this incongruity in their system, and explain how a complainant in equity is to recover his just debt in those states where the existing course after decree is attachment for contempt, in not obeying the decree. Those views, sir, convince me that it will be unwise and inexpedient to disturb the relation between creditor and debtor, by such a system as that now proposed. A very short bill would, in my opinion, be sufficient to secure the personal liberty of honest debtors, who would surrender their property fairly to their creditors; such a bill I should cheerfully advocate: for that before you I cannot vote, with my present impressions of its injurious effects on society. The gentleman from K ntucky has boldly asked, whether, among the people at large there has been heard a dissenting voice since this measure was first moved in Congress? and whether all the newspapers have not advocated it in the strongest terms? I do not doubt that the public sentiment, if it could be obtained, would be in favor of discharging the honest debtor on the terms that I should propose. But I do not believe that one of a thousand of the people know any thing about the special provisions and complex machinery of this bill.

As to the newspapers, sir, I shall never legislate at their bidding. I prize highly the liberty of the press; its blessings are numerous and beyond calculation, and through the newspapers we derive many useful hints, and much valuable information upon all subjects; but I cannot take them as a standard for my judgment, standing as a Senator upon this floor.

I concede, sir, to the honorable gentleman, that his side of this question, as inferred from the title of his bill," to abolish imprisonment for debt," may be the

JAN. 17, 1825.].

Imprisonment for Debt.-Columbian College.

[Senate.

On the question "shall this bill pass?" the yeas and nays were then taken as follows:

popular side. It is that side on which many things may of the bar differed in opinion on the subject of the debe said handsomely, and in a manner to please the pub- tails of the bill. For his part, approving of the princilic ear. It is easy to call a creditor "Shylock," and rat-ple of the bill, he should vote with those who were in tle the chains of the unfortunate victim of hard-hearted its favor. rapacity. This can be understood and felt by all. I shall not, therefore, enter the lists upon this topic, or dispute the palm of eloquence with that gentleman. But I will combat this bill with the weapons of calm reason; and, in answer to all the glowing descriptions of hardships and oppressions to which we have listened with deep and fixed attention, I ask, in what region of this free and happy land are those Shylocks found? Sir, my observation has convinced me, that a 66 Shylock," demanding the pound of flesh, or any character bearing the faintest resemblance to him, does not exist in this republic

YEAS-Messrs. Barbour, Benton, Bouligny, Branch, Eaton, Elliot, Findlay, Holmes, of Miss. Jackson, Johnson, of Ken. Johnston, of Lou. King, of Ala. Lloyd, of Mass. Lowrie, Macon, Smith, Talbot, Taylor, Thomas, Van Buren-20.

NAYS-Messrs. Barton, Bell, Brown, Chandler, Clayton, Cobb, D'Wolf, Dickerson, Edwards, Gaillard, Hayne, King, of N. Y. Knight, Lloyd, of Md. M'Lean, Mills, Noble, Palmer, Parrot, Ruggles, Seymour, Tazewell, Van Dyke-23.

So the bill was REJECTED.

COLUMBIAN COLLEGE.

The Senate then proceeded to consider, as in com

lumbian College, in the District of Columbia."

I know, on the contrary, that imprisonment of an honest debtor is of very rare occurrence. The man who would wantonly exercise his power to oppress an upright poor man, would be frowned down by the mor sentiments and humane feelings which pervade the community. No man who regards reputation will dare so to of-mittee of the whole, the bill for the relief of the Cofend against the general feeling of the public. On the contrary, sir, I know, in some districts, an insolvent debtor must often tax the humanity of his friends to get into prison; and he generally effects his object the day before the meeting of the state court, to obtain a discharge as an insolvent debtor, which always follows in a few days, unless he be guilty of fraud. I do not differ with the honorable gentleman in his admiration of the moral precept inculcated by the divine Author of our faith, in the striking parable of the debtor, to which he has alluded. I differ from him only in his application of it to this bill, with which, in my view, it has no sort of connection. I have acted so frequently with the gentleman from Kentucky on this subject, said Mr. VAN DYKE, that his object is quite familiar to me. I know his humane feelings on this subject. He undoubtedly wishes to legislate the honest debtor out of his difficulties, and punish severely all attempts at fraud on the part of the debtor. I appreciate fully his good wishes to creditors, and his strong impressions in favor of debtors; but I cannot refrain from expressing surprise that such a bill should be so strenuously urged as a remedy for the evils of which he complains. Its great effect will be to increase litigation, and to embarrass creditors; and the execution of the system will create unnecessary delay and grievous expense to the parties.

Mr. LLOYD, of Maryland, in a few remarks, stated his objections to this bill. A statement of the facts by which the college had become debtor to the Government for the amount (25,900) proposed to be remitted by this bill had been made. By this it appeared, that the managers of the institution, for purposes not connected with the advancement of literature, entered into a speculation in which they were disappointed, and by which they incurred this debt. He, for one, would not make the Government underwriters for any speculators; and he therefore could not consent to release the institution, however friendly he was to it, and to the cause of education generally, nor did he think the Government could reasonably be asked for this donation in favor of an institution over which it had no control whatever, except the power of abrogating the charter, should the institution fail to be managed for the objects of its incorporation, &c.

Mr. JOHNSON, of Kentucky, defended, at considerable length, and with much earnestness, the reasonableness and expediency of the remission proposed by the bill; to shew that the purchase of the property was for the early operations of the institution, before its incorporation, &c. He, however, to satis y the objections of others, moved so to modify the bill that the Government should retain the property for which the College incurred $ 14,000 of the debt, remit that amount, and leave the remainder of the $25,900 to be recovered from Thomas L. M'Kenny, whose debt the College had assumed.

Mr. HOLMES, of Maine, intimated some amendments which he wished to propose to the bill, and moved its postponement until to-morrow.

Mr. LLOYD, of Maryland, vindicated the course he had pursued in relation to this bill, in answer to Mr. JOHNSON'S remarks.

Mr. MACON, of North Carolina, said that he should oppose any bill that deprived any man in the United States of a right; but did not understand how this bill would have that effect. This bill would be well understood, and would be taken into consideration in all contracts made after the 4th of July next; therefore, he could not understand that any right was touched by the bill. The law gave notice, and all persons making contracts after the time fixed by the law, would do so with their eyes open. They would know the remedy they must apply, and, therefore, on this point, no difficulty could possibly occur. Every body was agreed Mr. LOWRIE said, the session had now half expired, upon the abstract principle, that an honest man should and the Senate went on every day postponing unimpornot be imprisoned for debt, but objections were made tant subjects until they would come to those which must to the details of this bill for its accomplishment. The be acted on. He hoped, therefore, as every member's real question, Mr. M. said, was, whether this bill was mind was, no doubt, made up on this bill, which had better than the existing system? The gentleman said been before the Senate now about ten times, that it that there were not many persecuting creditors; but if would be finally acted on without further delay. As to there were only ten in the nation, who thought they had the bill, he had been in favor of it; but, after the expoa right to persecute, not to prosecute, he would endea- sition of the facts which had been reported by the comvor to deprive them of that power. Creditors, some-mittee, his opinion had changed, and he must vote how or other, generally contrived to find out the condi- against it. At the same time, however, he avowed that, tion of debtors. There would be no more difficulty if the institution were to come forward with a simple after this bill was passed, in ascertaining their condition, request for assistance, he would grant it, as he thought than there is now. No difficulty could, in his opinion, it deserved aid, and could look for it no where but to possibly arise. Mr. MACON concluded by saying, that Congress. he did not know what those, who were not professional men, were to do on this occasion, when the gentlemen

The question being put, the bill was postponed until to-morrow.

H. of R.]

Western National Road.

[JAN. 17, 1825.

line of turnpike road, extending to a total distance of two hundred and seventy miles; and there also exists a

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES-SAME DAY. The House went into committee of the whole, on the bill to provide for the continuation of the Cumber-like line of road from this city to the same place, with land road, Mr. STERLING in the chair.

The question being for filling the blank for an appropriation with 150,000 dollars.

Mr. CLAY, (Speaker,) rose, and observed, that, from his attachment to that system of internal policy, of which the measure now before the committee formed a part, he had entertained a wish to offer to their consideration some views in relation to it which had forcibly impressed his own mind; but had he anticipated the state of expectation which it would be needless for him to affect not to perceive, or that debilitated state in which he now appeared before the committee, he should have contented himself with giving his silent vote in favor of the bill.

the exception of one small gap between Montgomery Court House and Fredericktown. Taking its origin at the foot of the Alleghany Mountains, the Cumberland Road extends to the Eastern Bank of the Ohio a distance of one hundred and thirty-five miles. Of this distance eighty-five miles lie in Pennsylvania, thirty or thirtyfive in Maryland, and the residue in Virginia--the entire work, from one end to the other, and through its whole extent, lying exclusively in the states East of the Ohio river. The proposition now presented to the committee is to extend this road from the West bank of that river to Zanesville, in the state of Ohio, a distance of eighty miles. If the proposition shall meet with the favor of Congress, the whole length of road from Baltimore to Zanesville will be 350 miles.

Mr. C. then remarked on the character of the country through which the contemplated road is to pass, which he described as containing a succession of hills, some of which might perhaps have been called mountains, but for the altitude of the neighboring Alleghanies-and which continue as far west as the Muskingum River, on the bank of which Zanesville is situated. There, or a little to the west of it, commences a level plain of an alluvial character, extending from the Mus kingum to the Mississippi, a distance of four hundred and twenty miles.

The present proposition, Mr. C. said, was to be con. second, to what remained to be done. The proposed part of the road must be viewed, first, in respect to one termination of the entire line which is at Sumberland, and then in respect to the other termination of it, which he trusted would one day be on the Missouri. It must also be viewed in reference to that branch of it, which he hoped, at no distant day, would pass through Kentucky and Tennessee, to Natchez and New Orleans, intersecting the great road, now proposed from the latter place to this city. It must be remembered, said he, that it is a part of a road which is to traverse nine States and two Territories; so that whether we look to the right or to the left, we find the interests of nine entire States and two Territories, all concentrated in the present design.

The object proposed, he said, involved a question which had often been debated in that House, and the general views of which were already so familiar to the minds of those whom he ad lressed, that he despaired of adding any thing to that knowledge of it which they already possessed. Indeed, he considered the views of policy which he held on this subject as having been vindicated and maintained by the votes of the House at the last session. Yet he would say thus much: that he considered the question, as to the existence and the exercise of a power in the General Government to carry into effect a system of internal improvements, as amounting to the question whether the union of these states should be preserved or not-a question which involved the dear-sidered in reference, first, to what had been done, and est hopes and brightest prospects of our country. As to the opinion, that the carrying on of these improvements belonged to the states in their individual and separate character, it might as well be expected that the states should perform any other duty which appertained to the General Government. You have no more right, observed Mr. C. to ask the individual states to make internal improvements for the general welfare, than you have to ask them to make war for the general welfare, or to build fortifications for the general defence, because some of them may happen to have a peculiar local interest in either. They are no more bound to do any one of the duties which pertain to the General Government,than to do any other one of the duties which pertain to it. Sir, it is our provinee, not theirs. It is, indeed, true, that the interests of the whole and of one of the parts may be coin- Here Mr. C. wished to be permitted to state one fact cident, and sometimes to a very remarkable degree-nay, with which, perhaps, but few members of the committo such a degree as may induce a State Government to tee were acquainted. A distinguished member of the undertake a duty which more properly belongs to Con- other House had lately travelled in company with the gress. But such cases are rare, and such an effect has Delegate from Florida, now on this floor, over the very seldom happened. One instance, indeed, may be point-route which was contemplated in this bill for the road ed out-that of the great Canal in the state of New York. When that state applied to this House for aid in her great and spirited undertaking, it was my opinion that she ought to receive it--and it is now my opinion that, for what she has advanced in the completion of that noble enterprise, she has at this hour a just claim upon the General Government. But cases of this kind always will be rare-it is vain to expect that any state will feel a sufficient interest in any object or improvement (unless such as are purely local in their character) as to induce her to make an appropriation of her individual resources for its accomplishment.

With these preliminary observations on the great policy of measures of the kind of that now proposed, he would go on to inquire in the first place, is the object in the present bill of sufficient magnitude to authorize an application to it of the resources of the nation? To answer this inquiry, the object must be considered, not as standing isolated and alone-but as constituting one link in the great chain of the Internal Improvement of the Union. What, said he, is the actual state of the facts? There now exists from the city of Baltimore to Wheeling, in the state of Virginia, an uninterrupted

proposed. They had found it, though somewhat hilly, free from any mountainous obstructions, and abounding in all the materials which would be required for construction.

Mr. C. next proceeded to inquire, whether the object, such as he had now described it, was not justly entitled to be considered a national object. Look, said he, at the effect produced upon the convenience of the whole country, from what has been already done. The usual space of time formerly required to go from Baltimore to Wheeling, was from eight to ten days-the time now occupied is three days. The effect of such a saving of time would readily be conceived. To this consideration might be added the advantage resulting from the investment of so much capital, and the expenditure of so much public money, in a region of country where both were so much needed. Settlements had been multiplied-buildings of all kinds erected-villages had sprung up as if by enchantment; and, to use the language of one of the gentlemen who had ably advocated the bill, the road resembled one continued street, almost the whole way from Cumberland to Wheeling. The effect had been a great addition to the value