FEB. 7, 1825.]

Election of President.

514

[II. of R.

the principle, that you must present to the House one, other hand, that the members of this House should be vote for each member from a state, instead of one vote protected from his resentment, arising from a knowledge for each state, without regard to the number of mem- that any particular portion of them were opposed to his bers. The difference must be obvious. The rule pre-election. scribes the manner in which each state shall ascertain its vote, and when ascertained, how that vote shall be presented to the House, and be told off; the amendment seeks to deprive the states of a vote by ballot, and to confer power on the Tellers, who shall ascertain, by counting the ballots of the members, how the state would vote, to give that vote viva voce, not by ballot. The House, constitutionally, has little to do in determining the vote of the states. Its main power on the subject commences when that vote has been determined.

The amendment is objectionable in another point of view. It leaves to the Tellers to settle the disputed question, (without the control of the delegation or the House,) whether the vote or ballot of a state shall result from a bare plurality, or depend on a majority, of the ballots in each delegation. This is a question, sir, of too much importance to leave for adjustment in such a way. It should be settled by the House, voting per capita, and before any result is known, calculated to influence the decision-it should be settled now. W. said, having carefully examined the provisions of the For himself, Mr. constitution relating to the election of President, with a view to understand its literal meaning, as well as to discover its spirit, he entertained no doubt, but a majority of the delegation of any one state was necessary to determine its vote, and that nothing short of it would do. He felt confident the House would so determine.

know officially from whence his power was derived. He It was not proper that the President should should receive it from the whole people, and exercise it alike for the good of every portion of them. constitution was revised in 1801, this great fundamental principle was preserved untouched. The rule proposWhen the ed by the gentleman from South Carolina was calculated to render the Chief Magistrate the President of a party, not the President of the nation. The practical tendency was to array some of the states against the the seeds of faction, and to give to party spirit still greatPresident, and the President against them, to cherish er bitterness. It was the duty of the House to be umpres, not agitators-to pacify the nation, not to irritate it. ment. Mr. WRIGHT again spoke in opposition to the amendhave doubted that the constitution required only one He had supposed, he said, that no one could vote for each state, instead of one for each member of the House-in the present case twenty-four ballots instead of two hundred and thirteen; and he had supposcontemplated that the proceeding should stop the moed it equally clear, the framers of the constitution never ment you had ascertained whether the state intended to vote, before the ballot or vote was prepared and deposited; but in this he found himself mistaken. He should despair of removing those doubts, and would forbear further argument as to it. It is urged that the plan proob-members of the states secret, and that you have no way posed by the rule makes the proceedings among the to find out how each man voted. Why should that be known? What good could result from it? Does the constitution authorize you to require publicity in this proceeding? I think not. Individually, I have no desire to keep my vote secret-I am willing to proclaim it to the world. The gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Cook,) of the principles which govern elections by ballot, and has presented to you, much better than I could do, some urged some forcible reasons why the votes should be secret. submitted. I agree with the gentleman in the views he has endorse his name on the ballot, or to rise when about to The requisition upon a voter by ballot, to vote, and proclaim for whom he voted, would entirely defeat the object of voting by ballot, and break down all the guards the constitution has established to protect the elector in the free enjoyment of this right.

Mr. HAMILTON spoke in reply, and made some servations to show that his proposal was in conformity with the constitution. He hoped that at least so much of it as provides twenty-four separate ballot boxes would be adopted. He insisted, that it ought to be known publicly and officially, how each state had voted, and regretted the want of this knowledge touching the election of 1801.

Mr. M'DUFFIE advocated the amendment of the gentleman from South Carolina. The question now was, whether the constitution was to be so interpreted as to throw an impenetrable veil over the proceedings of this House, in so important an act as the choice of a Chief Magistrate. He felt bound to protest the honor of his state, and his own honor; but the rule, as it at present stood, rendered it impossible for him to show that he had been faithful to his constituents. the constitution, and insisted that the amendment was Mr. M'D. quoted not inconsistent with it-that the constitution did not require that the vote of the states should be concealed; nor did it ever mean to screen the votes of the delegates themselves from the public scrutiny. In declaring that the votes should be by states, that all the states should have an equal voice. It directmeant no more than ed not that they should vote by states, but that they should be counted by states. of the states had only one delegate, that did not alter the If it happened that some requirements of the constitution, nor the propriety of the plan proposed by his colleague. The constitution would still be obeyed. He had no suspicion that the gentleman from Delaware, or any other of those gentlemen who stood alone in representing states, had any wish to conceal the vote that they should give, and he expressed a hope that they would support the amend

ment.

Mr. COOK, of Illinois, disclaiming all wish to have his vote concealed, was yet opposed to the adoption of the amendment now proposed, which he considered as striking a deadly blow at the constitution. A fundamental principle of that instrument was, that the Legislative and Executive Departments should be kept entirely separate. While, on the one hand, the President was protected from having an improper influence exerted over him by members of this body, it was proper, on the

VOL. I.-33

Mr. STEWART, of Pennsylvania, regretted that time a proposition as that now before the House, before it was not allowed more maturely to examine so important was voted on. From the short consideration he had been able to give it, he could not perceive that it was it because he perceived that its object was to remove inconsistent with the constitution, and he should vote for every thing like secrecy from the transaction which was of this House on that occasion would be regarded by the approaching. It was well known that the proceedings people with suspicion. Was it a likely way of removing this to throw a mantle of secrecy over its proceedings? Was not this the way to set the tongue of slander in motion? When an allegation was made, affecting the purity of any individual, would they be removed by his skulking and shrinking from observation? Would not this rather rivet the suspicion? If a man was charged his door, and refused all admittance and observation? with theft, was it a way to remove the charge, if he shut But, if he threw open the suspected place, invited observation, and displayed a frank, open, and candid deportment, the report would be disbelieved. So long as shadows, clouds, and darkness, were suffered to rest on any of the doings of this House, the suspicions of the people would only be fixed and confirmed. ever, to the further examination of the amendment, he moved that the House adjourn. With a view, how

Election of President.-Chesapeake and Ohio Canal.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.-SAME DAY. Mr. TAYLOR, from the Joint Committee, appointed to consider the mode of counting the votes for President and Vice President of the United States, made a report, in part; which was read.

Senate proceedings.]
[The report is the same as that stated above in the

The House agreed to the resolutions reported, and Mr. P. P. BARBOUR and Mr. TAYLOR were appointed tellers according thereto.

CHE APEAKE AND OHIO CANAL.

of the General Assembly of Maryland, confirming an act
Mr. MERCER moved that the bill to confirm an act
of the General Assembly of Virginia to incorporate the
Chesapeake and Ohio Canal Company, be taken up.
The motion prevailed-and the bill was taken up.
Mr. COCKE observed, that he considered it dangerous
to a third reading, without due consideration, and inti-
to take up a bill of such importance, and pass it at once
mated his belief that the passage of the bill would, with-
propriation of money for the object embraced by it. Mr.
out doubt, be the precursor of a demand for a large ap-
C. concluded, by moving to refer the bill to a committee
of the whole for further consideration.

that this bill was of any more importance in principle
After a few observations from Mr. MERCER, denying
than other acts which had been passed as matter of
tinued within the District, after passing the line from
course, such as those authorizing Turnpikes to be con-
Maryland and Virginia, &c.

committee of the whole, and decided in the negative.
The question was taken on committing the bill to a
THROP, and Mr. McKIM, as to the phraseology of the
After a few words between Mr. MERCER, Mr. LA-

FEB. 8, 1825.]

Chesapeake and Ohio Canal.-Military Appropriations.

[H. of R.

Mr. RANKIN, of Mississippi, rose, in opposition to the days of General Washington, a Company was incorpobill, as proposing to accomplish the object of it in the rated, entitled the Potomac Company, to whom the most exceptionable form. He believed the people of the control of the undertaking was given? It is now proUnited States were ready to go into a systein of internal posed to organize another Company, with the consent of improvements, and there were two modes in which that the old Company, for the purpose of carrying the design object might be effected. The first was by the Go- further than was then contemplated. Even the state of vernment's aiding individual efforts, by subscriptions to Virginia had so far recognized the authority of the Postock, where a measure was of such a kind that the indi- tomac Company, that it asked the consent of that Comviduals could accomplish it themselves. The other was pany before it would incorporate the Shenandoah Comthat, where individuals were incompetent to an object pany. The gentleman was mistaken in supposing that by their own private resources, the Government should the General Government had ordered any surveys of the take that design wholly into its own hands, and effect it Potomac. That river had already been carefully surby the public means. But the course proposed by veyed by other authority, and there existed no doubt of the present bill was neither the one nor the other of the possibility of forming the Canal. But did that genthese. It is a compound measure, between the United | tleman ever hear of surveys being made by a Turnpike States, Virginia, and Maryland, who are all equally par- Company before the Company was incorporated? Did ties to it. any body ever hear of such a thing? The Company must first be created, and it is for the purpose of creating it that the present bill has been reported. Gentlemen would have us wait, said Mr. M. for a general system of Internal Improvement. This idea had been near paralyzing the measures improving the country at the present session, and he hoped it would not be suffered to mar this measure. The friends of the Canal might have asked a subscription to the stock of the Potomac Company as already organized, if they had not considered it wiser to take the present course. Mr. M. made some further remarks, in which he contended that there was no difference between incorporating a Turnpike Company, and incorporating a Canal Company. Congress had granted the one through the District without hesitation, and why not the other? He strongly represented the danger of delay, and the anxiety of the many thousands who were concerned in this great undertaking, and anxiously looking for the sanction of Congress. The bill took nothing from the soil, Mr. M. said, but, on the contrary, gave every thing to it.

The gentleman from Virginia had said, that the object of this bill is only to permit the cutting of a Canal through the District of Columbia. But this, Mr. R. said, was not all. The bill pledged the sanction of the United States to the Canal through its whole course. The Govern ment would be committed by it to go quite through to the Ohio. The authority of this Government is asked, in connection with that of Virginia and Maryland, for a chain of Canals from the Chesapeake to Lake Erie. The Government had already done much. Surveys, plans, and estimates had been made-and in every report on the subject, this Canal had been selected as one of the most important objects. Why should it be put into the hands of Companies, when the Government was already doing every thing for it? From considerations of this nature, Mr. R. was opposed to the passage of the bill at this time, and moved its reference to a committee of the whole.

It

Mr. MERCER replied, that he felt satisfied, that, if the honorable gentleman from Mississippi had devoted as much attention to this object, as he was in the habit of devoting to those which emanated from that committee of which he was the distinguished chairman (Committee on Public Lands,) he could not have so much mistaken the nature and object of the bill. The United States were called on to assent to the cutting of the Canal through the District of Columbia, where it was to terminate; in the same way as the state of Delaware or Maryland would have been called on had it terminated in either of them. The assent of each must be given to the same object, as far as its territory was intersected, and that assent was as necessary for a Canal of two miles long, as it would be for one of two thousand. bad been a question in the Convention of respectable gentlemen which assembled in this City some eighteen months ago, whether it was best to call on the states of Virginia and Maryland, for an appropriation of money, or to adopt the present course. Virginia was known to have constitutional scruples, adverse to the measure. There were but slender funds in Maryland, and if they called on the General Government prematurely for an appropriation for the object, they would only defeat it. They therefore determined to call on those two states, and on the General Government, merely to assent to the act of incorporation, without asking for any appropriation of money whatever. If the bill had not been thus guarded, it would never have passed the Legislatures of Virginia or Maryland. It came before Congress with

the sanction of both those states, to receive its sanction in its capacity of the Legislature for the District of Columbia. The bill, therefore, was not what it had been represented to be by the gentleman from Mississippi. That gentleman had proposed that further plans and estimates should be obtained previously to passing such an act. Does not the gentleman know, said Mr. M. that the General Government has no power over a great part of this Canal? That, so long ago as 1783, in the

Mr. STEWART, of Pa. stated that the books of subscription for this Canal, could not be opened until the present act was passed, as no body would subscribe to the Canal before they were sure that Government would permit it to enter the District of Columbia. Nor would Virginia or Maryland do any more without the same assurance. Mr. S. was going on in some general remarks on the importance of the Canal, which the Speaker interrupted, as not being pertinent to the motion for commitment, which is a question not of principle, but as to the mode of proceeding only.

The question was then taken, on referring the motion to a committee of the whole, and decided in the affirmative, 73 to 67.

MILITARY APPROPRIATIONS, &c.

The House having resolved itself into a committee of the whole on the bill making additional appropriations for the Military Service, and another for Fortificationsand

The bill for Fortifications being under consideration, Mr. HAMILTON, as Chairman of the Committee on Military Affairs, moved to insert in the bill the following amendment:

"For the establishment of a school of practice for the Light Artillery, $9,940.”

In support of the amendment

Mr. HAMILTON, observed, that he had moved the amendment by express direction from the Committee on Military Affairs, in consequence of a reference of the subject by the House to that committee. The communication of the President respecting it, was accompanied by a report from the Department of War, in which the utility and necessity of such a school as that mentioned in the amendment, were strongly urged. The original

H. of R.]

Military Appropriations.

[FEB. 8, 1825.

was held on his conduct, and it was pronounced an error in judgment. He wished to know whether the present sum would complete the work, and at what time, anđ what was its present situation.

estimate of the sum necessary to carry it into effect, as made by the officer at Fort Monroe, had been $31,000, But in that sum was included the purchase of land and expenses of the cavalry drill; for the sake of economy, the committee had dispensed with both these, and they Mr. McLANE replied to Mr. COCKE, and referred to now asked less than ten thousand dollars. This was to voluminous documents, which furnished all the details be applied to the purchase of fifty artillery horses, the requested by the gentleman from Tennessee. There was equipment of six pieces, and six caissons, forming to- every certainty that the sum now asked for would comgether what was called a division of artillery. He ear-plete the work. He accounted for the errors which had nestly and forcibly urged the usefulness of a system of happened in the estimates of the cost of public works by instruction in the management of Light Artillery, an arm the infancy of our system of engineering, and asked the of war which was found among the most efficient em- gentleman whether it was not common, even in buildployed in modern times. He referred to the exploits ing a house, that was to cost a certain sum, to find, beof Towson, and Archer, to the Battles of Bridgewater fore it was finished, it cost much more than was at first and Chippewa, to the French campaigns, and particu- contemplated? And whether it could be expected, that, larly to the battles of Austerlitz, Jena, and Marengo, as in an expenditure of $600,000, minute accuracy in the furnishing proof of its great effect, and concluded by estimates could always be attained? quoting a communication from the War Department, in which it is especially recommended.

The question being taken on this amendment, it was decided in the negative by a large majority.

Mr. SAUNDERS, of N. C. then moved to amend the bill by appropriating for a fort at Beaufort in North Carolina $30,000.

The original plan of the work, he said, had been varied. The officer who superintended its direction was inexperienced, and defects had taken place which must now be remedied. We have a report of the Engineer Department, and also an extensive estimate, with de. tails down to ten and twelve dollars, all which was very much at the service of the gentleman from Tennessee. After all, it would be found that the total expense of the work very little exceeded the first estimate.

Mr. COCKE moved to reduce the appropriation for the Indian Department from 95,000 to 75,000 dollars. Mr. McLANE replied, that the annual appropriation had not been less heretofore than $95,000. That sum had been always required by the Department, and always granted by the House. At the session before last, the gentleman from Tennessee had inquired of the De partment for detailed statements. A minute and extensive report had been made. The subject had been maturely deliberated. The House was satisfied, and had granted the $95,000. Last session, at the request of the same gentleman, it had been investigated again; the House again granted 95,000 dollars. At the present session, the Committee of Ways and Means had thought it unnecessary to refer to the Department for another statement. The ordinary documents of estimates, &c. were printed, and the gentleman might have access to them. It was easy for the gentleman to rise in his place and ask for the grounds of any estimate submitted, and to say he did not know the reason for this or for that expenditure. Nothing was easier. But he would submit it to the House whether a gentleman was entitled to do so without first showing that he himself had some knowledge of the subject, and assigning some reasons why the estimate was improper. The gentleman had said, the sum is large, and he does not know why it is required. But its necessity has been again and again explained to him.

Mr. COCKE remarked that he understood this to be a new fortification not proposed before. He thought it was better to finish those already begun than to commence new works. He did not know the necessity of the fort proposed, as there was no report on the subject from the War Department. Neither the Committee of Ways and Means, nor the Committee of Military Affairs, had recommended the measure. It had no other sanction than that of a member in his place. He knew that the waters on that coast were very shallow. He did not know that there were any interests there which peculiarly required protection, and, if there were, he did not know that this fort was calculated to protect them. Mr. SAUNDERS replied to the objections of the gen. tleman from Tennessee. He stated the importance of the port of Beaufort: not merely for its geographical situation, but as having been pointed out by the War Department, as a point which required defence. So important was it considered by that Department, that a Board of Engineers was directed to examine it, and make an estimate of the expense of fortifying it. If Congress then intended to go on with a general system of fortification, there could be no objection to the present measure. It was a part of the country which had received but little from the General Government. As to Wilmington, (for which place, also, he intended, if his present motion succeeded, to move an appropriation,) he knew that it was considered by the Government important to protect the trade there, as was proved by the fact, that a fort had formerly been erected at that place, but which was now in ruins. The reason why Mr. COCKE observed, in reply, that he should not have the measure had not been reported by the Commitee of made any remark on this subject, had he not retained Ways and Meaus, was, that the report from the Corps some recollection of the report made last year. He reof Engineers had not been received in time to be sub-membered that, at that time, there existed what was mitted to them; he had, therefore, offered it in his place. But he begged gentlemen to recollect that the fort was not to be erected in his district. He had advocated it simply on the ground of its utility.

The question was then taken on the amendment of Mr. SAUNDERS, and decided in the negative.

Mr. COCKE then observed, that the bill contained an appropriation for continuing the work at the Pea Patch, on the Delaware river. He was aware that there was a report from the Engineer on the subject, and that the House was told that the fort was in progress; so they were told many years since. And, after vast sums had been expended, it was discovered, on examination, that the officer who superintended the work had disobeyed his orders, departed from all the plans furnished him, and, in a word, had spoiled the fort. A court martial

called a Factory Department, and he had a distinct recollection that, among the expenses charged, was a considerable item for limes, lemons, London Particular, and Teneriffe. He presumed that these articles had since been dispensed with. He remembered also a charge of $1,000 for a blacksmith. The Committee of Ways and Means at that time assured the House that measures should be taken to lessen the contingent expenses of the Department, and that assurance led him to move the reduction he now proposed. It must be recollected that the present bill does not include the expense of the Indian Agent and all his Clerks. It was very easy for the Chairman of the Committee of Ways and Means, when proposing an appropriation to this House to say the Department asks for it, and that here is the letter from the Head of the Department, as a

warrant. But answers of this sort gave little satisfaction to his mind. He should never forget the London Particular.

The amendment was rejected.

After these bills were reported to the House

Mr. HAMILTON renewed his motion for making an appropriation for a school of practice for the Light Ärtillery, and earnestly pressed it upon the attention of

the House.

[Sen. & H. of R.

be made to the House of the grounds on which the item of appropriation to which he alluded had been introduced into that bill; but he had since discovered that be had misunderstood the honorable chairman, who had only engaged that those explanations should be given, if they were required by the House. Mr. F's absence yesterday had prevented him from asking the explanation. He referred to that clause of the bill which appropriates 20,000 dollars for arrearages under the treaty with the Creek Indians, of 1804, ratified in 1824, and, also, 1000 dollars for the annuity under said treaty, for the current year

Mr. ARCHER observed, in support of the amendment, that, when it had been offered in committee, by his friend from South Carolina, it had been voted down without any objection stated. He was confident this [Mr. FORSYTH was about to enter upon a full statement could have happened only from the House not consider- of the facts in relation to this subject, with the reasons ing with proper attention the object presented. When which compelled him to resist the appropriation, when compared with the object for which it was intended, the the Speaker suggested that, on account of the near ap. appropriation was moderate indeed. If we have any mili-proach of the hour at which the House would be obliged tary establishment at all, we ought to give it efficiency. to go into another business of great importance, the And if it was undeniably true. that, with respect to the honorable member from Georgia had better move to lay establishment generally, that this could only be done by the bill on the table, if he wished it farther amended. providing proper instruction, it was true a fortiori in re- Mr. FORSYTH accepted the suggestion of the Speaker, spect to artillery. and made the motion that the bill lie for the present on the table.]

What was that branch of our army if left without instruction, and what use was there of having artillery at all, and of appropriating for its support, if the men who composed it were wholly unqualified for their duty, from the want of means of instruction? He had said that the sum was moderate. He asked whether any sum could be considered too large with reference to the object. What is the sum asked? Only nine thousand dollars. How is it to be disbursed? In any new salaries, or any increase of pay? No; $7,000 of it was to be laid out in horses, which, in themselves, would be worth the money, besides furnishing opportunity for instruction, both in artillery discipline and in cavalry drill. The United States would get the value of its money, besides getting that which was invaluable. Could any one doubt the utility of the object? It was recommended by the President of the United States; it was recommended by the War Department; it was recommended by the committee, which is the appropriate organ of this House in relation to Military Affairs. It comes recommended by all who ought to know whether it is proper or not; and, with all this force before them, would the House refuse? Refuse to grant $9,000 when 7,000 of it was to be invested in property! He trusted not.

The question was the taken on the amendment proposed by Mr. HAMILTON, and decided in the negative-76 to 61.

And the bills were then ordered to a third reading.

The bill was ordered to lie on the table accordingly.
On motion of Mr. TAYLOR, it was

Ordered, That, when the members of the Senate appear, this day, in the Chamber of the House of Representatives, the President of the Senate shall be introduced by the Speaker to a seat in the Speaker's chair, and the Senators shall be invited to occupy the seats assigned them in front of the chair.

THE INVESTIGATING COMMITTEE.

that subject, made the following report:
Mr. P. P. BARBOUR, from the Select Committee on

The select committee, to which was referred the communication of the Speaker, of the 3d inst. report:

the duty imposed upon them by the House, they directThat, upon their first meeting, with a view to execute ed their chairman to address a letter to the Hon. GEORGE KREMER, informing him that they would be ready, at a or explanation he might have to offer, touching the particular time, therein stated, to receive any evidence charges referred to in the communication of the Speaker, of the 3d inst.; their chairman, in conformity with who replied that he would make a communication to this instruction, did address such a letter to Mr. KREMER, the committee; accordingly, he did send to them, through their chairman, a communication, which accompanies this report, marked A, in which he declines to appear before them, for either of the purposes mentioned in their letter, alleging that he could not do so, without appearing either as an accuser or a witness, both of which he protests against. In this posture of the case, the committee can take no further steps. They are aware that it is competent to the House to invest them with power to send for persons and papers, and by that means, to enable them to make any investigation which might be thought necessary; and if they knew any reason for such investigation, they would have asked to be clothed with the proper power; but not having, themselves, any such knowledge, they have felt it to be their duty only to lay before the House the communication which they have received.

A.—(MR. KREMER'S LETTER.)

GENTLEMEN: I have received your note of yesterday, in which you inform me that you will meet at 10 o'clock this morning, and will then be ready to receive any evidence, or explanation, I may have to offer, touching the charges referred to in the communication of the Speak. er, of the 3d inst. Placed under circumstances unprecedented, and which I believe not only interesting to my