Yeas.—Messrs. Anderson, Bayard, Champlin, Gaillard, German, Gilman, Goodrich, Gregg, Hillhouse, Horsey, Leib, Lloyd, Parker, Pickering, Smith of Maryland, Sumter, and Whiteside.
Nays.—Messrs. Bradley, Brent, Campbell, Clay, Condit, Crawford, Franklin, Giles, Lambert, Mathewson, Meigs, Pope, Smith of New York, Tait, and Turner.
National Bank.
Mr. Bayard, from the committee appointed on the subject the thirteenth instant, reported a bill making provision for the establishment of a National Bank; and the bill was read and passed to a second reading.
[The bill was for a new bank of 30 millions capital, the subscription for shares open to every citizen of the United States or of its Territories, to copartnerships composed of such citizens or body politic incorporated within the United States, to the amount of 1000 shares.]
Bank of the United States.
The President laid before the Senate the following report of the Secretary of the Treasury, made in pursuance of the resolution of the Senate of the 2d instant:
Treasury Department, April 3, 1810.
Sir: I have the honor to transmit a report, prepared in obedience to the resolution of the Senate of yesterday.
I have the honor to be, &c.,
ALBERT GALLATIN.
To the honorable the President of the Senate:
The Secretary of the Treasury, in obedience to the resolution of the Senate, of the 2d instant, respectfully reports—
That the statement annexed to the report made to the Senate on the 2d day of March, 1809, contained all the dividends made by the Bank of the United States, from its establishment to the date of the report, as stated to the Treasury by the bank.
That the annexed table, (A,) being a transcript of the above-mentioned statement, with the addition of the dividends made on the 1st day of July, 1809, and on the first day of January last, embraces not only the semi-annual dividends of 4 per cent., but also all the extra dividends which are within the knowledge of this Department, and which, it is believed, have ever been made by the bank; making, in the whole, an average of 8 13-36 per cent. a year.
That there remained to the credit of the bank, after payment of the dividend made on the first day of January last, a surplus of $409,410, consisting of two items, viz: $125,000, designated by the name of "General Bank Estate," intended as an offset against decay and presumed loss, in case of sale of the real estate of the bank—that estate having been paid for from the capital stock, and not from the profits of the bank; and $284,410, designated by the name of "Contingent Fund," intended in the first place to cover losses arising from bad debts, not yet actually lost; and the residue of which, if any, will be applicable to another extra dividend.
That the nominal profit resulting to the bank, from each of its offices of discount and deposit, could not be ascertained without an investigation of all the weekly returns made to this Department; and that there are no returns from which the actual loss sustained by each office can be known.
But, that the statement (B) shows the permanent capital given to each office of discount and deposit; the balance due in account current by the offices of the bank, (exclusive and in addition to the said permanent capital,) on the 27th day of March last; the amount of the notes actually discounted and due to the bank by the last returns, specifying the amount discounted at Philadelphia, and at each office respectively; and an estimate of the gross amount of the annual expenses and losses of the bank, including its several offices, by which it appears that the annual expenses, being about $125,000 a year, the ascertained losses must in the whole have amounted to about $35,000 a year.
All which is respectfully submitted.
ALBERT GALLATIN.
| No. | Date. | Rate p. ct. |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | July, 1792 | 4 |
| 2 | January, 1793 | 4 |
| 3 | July, " | 3-5/8[7] |
| 4 | January, 1794 | 3-7/8[7] |
| 5 | July, " | 4 |
| 6 | January, 1795 | 4 |
| 7 | July, " | 4 |
| 8 | January, 1796 | 4 |
| 9 | July, " | 4 |
| 10 | January, 1797 | 4 |
| 11 | July, " | 4 |
| 12 | January, 1798 | 5[8] |
| 13 | July, " | 4 |
| 14 | January, 1799 | 4 |
| 15 | July, " | 4 |
| 16 | January, 1800 | 4 |
| 17 | July, " | 4 |
| 18 | January, 1801 | 6[8] |
| 19 | July, " | 4 |
| 20 | January, 1802 | 4½[8] |
| 21 | July, " | 4½[8] |
| 22 | January, 1803 | 4½[8] |
| 23 | July, " | 4 |
| 24 | January, 1804 | 4½[8] |
| 25 | July, " | 4 |
| 26 | January, 1805 | 4 |
| 27 | July, " | 4 |
| 28 | January, 1806 | 4 |
| 29 | July, " | 4 |
| 30 | January, 1807 | 6[8] |
| 31 | July, " | 4 |
| 32 | January, 1808 | 4 |
| 33 | July, " | 4 |
| 34 | January, 1809 | 4 |
| 35 | July, " | 4 |
| 36 | January, 1810 | 4 |
| Cities, &c. | Capital. | Amt. of notes discounted | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Boston | $700,000 | $998,859 | |
| New York | 1,800,000 | 4,175,874 | |
| Baltimore | 600,000 | 1,349,550 | |
| Washington | 200,000 | 485,285 | |
| Norfolk | 600,000 | 880,170 | |
| Charleston | 600,000 | 1,409,916 | |
| Savannah | 500,000 | 1,054,113 | |
| New Orleans | 300,000 | 611,517 | |
| Philadelphia— | |||
| Balance due the bank, in account current, by the offices | $750,000 | ||
| Cap. res'd | 3,950,000 | ||
| 4,700,000 | |||
| $10,000,000 | |||
| Funded debt | — | 1,411,620 | |
| $16,949,497 | |||
Estimate of the expenses and losses of the Bank.
Six per cent, on $17,000,000, estimated as per above, as the amount usually loaned on interest, is, per annum, $1,020,000—to wit:
| Dividend of 8 13-36 per cent. a year, on ten millions of dollars actually paid to the stockholders, is, per annum | $836,111 |
| Undivided surplus on the 1st January, 1810, $409,410, divided by 18 years, would be equal to an annual dividend of | 22,745 |
| Leaving for the estimated annual amount of expenses and losses | 161,144 |
| Total | $1,020,000 |
The Mississippi River Pirate, Mason.
Mr. Clay presented the petition of Elisha Winters, stating that, in the years 1801, 1802, and 1803, the wilderness from Natchez to Kentucky, and the river Mississippi, was infested by a notorious gang of highway robbers, headed by a certain Samuel Mason, and that the petitioner was the means by which the said Mason was killed, two of his accomplices apprehended and executed, and the remainder of the banditti dispersed, and praying he may be allowed the reward offered for the apprehension of the said Mason by the President of the United States, or by the then Governor of the Mississippi Territory; and the petition was read, and referred to a select committee, to consider and report thereon; and Messrs. Clay, Whiteside, and Crawford, were appointed the committee.
The Senate resumed, as in Committee of the Whole, the bill for the establishment of a Quartermaster's department; and it was agreed that the further consideration thereof be postponed until to-morrow.
The Vice President being absent, the Senate proceeded to the election of a President pro tem., as the constitution provides; and the Hon. John Gaillard was elected.
Ordered, That the Secretary wait on the President of the United States, and acquaint him that the Senate have, in the absence of the Vice President, elected the Hon. John Gaillard, President of the Senate pro tempore.
Ordered, That the Secretary make a like communication to the House of Representatives.
National Bank.
The Senate resumed, as in Committee of the Whole, the bill making provision for the establishment of a National Bank.
On motion, by Mr. Hillhouse, to strike out the first section of the bill, the Senate was equally divided—yeas 15, nays 15, as follows:
Yeas.—Messrs. Brent, Champlin, German, Gilman, Goodrich, Hillhouse, Horsey, Lloyd, Meigs, Pickering, Pope, Reed, Smith of New York, Tait, and Whiteside.
Nays.—Messrs, Anderson, Bayard, Bradley, Clay, Condit, Crawford, Franklin, Gaillard, Giles, Gregg, Lambert, Leib, Smith of Maryland, Sumter, and Turner.
So the question was lost.
Territory of Orleans.
The Senate resumed, as in Committee of the Whole, the bill to enable the people of the Territory of Orleans to form a constitution and State government, and for the admission of such State into the Union on an equal footing with the original States, and for other purposes; and on motion, by Mr. Clay, to amend the bill, by adding at the end of the third section the following words:
"Provided further, That the said convention shall, by an article in the constitution so to be formed, irrevocable without the consent of the United States, provide, that, after the admission into the Union of the said Territory of Orleans as a State, the laws which such State may pass shall be promulgated, and its records of every description shall be preserved, and its written, judicial, and legislative proceedings conducted, in the language in which the laws and the written, judicial, and legislative proceedings of the United States are now published and conducted:"
It was determined in the affirmative—yeas 17, nays 12, as follows:
Yeas.—Messrs. Bayard, Campbell, Champlin, Clay, Giles, Gilman, Goodrich, Horsey, Lambert, Leib, Lloyd, Meigs, Pickering, Pope, Smith of Maryland, Smith of New York, and Turner.
Nays.—Messrs. Anderson, Bradley, Condit, Crawford, Franklin, Gaillard, German, Gregg, Hillhouse, Reed, Sumter, and Whiteside.
National Bank.
The Senate resumed, as in Committee of the Whole, the bill making provision for the establishment of a National Bank. And on motion, by Mr. Bayard, that the further consideration thereof be postponed until the first Monday in December next, it was determined in the affirmative—yeas 17, nays 14, as follows:
Yeas.—Messrs. Bayard, Bradley, Brent, Champlin, Crawford, German, Gilman, Goodrich, Hillhouse, Horsey, Lloyd, Pickering, Pope, Reed, Smith of New York, Sumter, and Turner.
Nays.—Messrs. Anderson, Clay, Condit, Franklin, Gaillard, Giles, Gregg, Lambert, Leib, Mathewson, Meigs, Robinson, Smith of Maryland, and Whiteside.
The Senate resumed, as in Committee of the Whole, the bill, entitled "An act providing for the sale of certain lands in the Indiana Territory, and for other purposes;" and having agreed to the amendments reported by the select committee, the President reported it to the House accordingly; and on the question, Shall this bill be read the third time, as amended? it was determined in the affirmative.
Mr. Gilman, from the committee, reported the bill allowing compensation to Robert Robinson correctly engrossed; and the bill was read the third time; and the blank having been filled with the words five hundred—
Resolved, That this bill pass, and that the title thereof be "An act allowing compensation to Robert Robinson."
The Senate resumed the motion made yesterday on the subject, which was amended and agreed to, as follows:
Resolved, That the Secretary of the Treasury be directed to lay before the Senate a statement of all claims which have been adjusted and allowed at the Treasury Department, in virtue of the law entitled "An act providing for the settlement of the claims of persons, under particular circumstances, barred by the limitations heretofore established;" and also, a statement of the balances standing in the books of the Treasury against the United States, which are barred by the statute of limitations, together with his opinion whether the said statute can be modified or repealed, as to that or any other description of claims, without subjecting the Government to imposition.
Mr. Clay gave notice that to-morrow he should ask leave to bring in a bill, supplementary to an act, entitled "An act for the punishment of certain crimes against the United States."
The bill entitled "An act authorizing a loan of money, for a sum not exceeding the amount of the principal of the public debt reimbursable during the year one thousand eight hundred and ten," was read the second time, and referred to a select committee, to consist of five members, to consider and report thereon, and Messrs. Smith of Maryland, Crawford, Lloyd, Franklin, and Hillhouse, were appointed the committee.
Territory of Orleans.
The Senate resumed, as in Committee of the Whole, the bill to enable the people of the Territory of Orleans to form a constitution and State government, and for the admission of such State into the Union on an equal footing with the original States, and for other purposes; together with the amendments reported thereto by the select committee. On motion, by Mr. Hillhouse, to add, at the end of the bill, the following words:
"Provided, That the several States shall assent thereto, or an amendment to the Constitution of the United States shall authorize Congress to admit said Territory of Orleans into the Union, on the footing of the original States:"
It was determined in the negative—yeas 8, nays 20, as follows:
Yeas.—Messrs. Champlin, German, Goodrich, Hillhouse, Horsey, Lloyd, Pickering, and Reed.
Nays.—Messrs. Anderson, Brent, Clay, Condit, Crawford, Franklin, Gaillard, Giles, Gilman, Gregg, Lambert, Leib, Mathewson, Meigs, Pope, Smith of Maryland, Sumter, Tait, Turner, and Whiteside.
And the report of the select committee having been agreed to, and the bill further amended, the President reported it to the House accordingly. On the question, Shall this bill be engrossed and read a third time as amended? it was determined in the affirmative—yeas 18, nays 9, as follows;
Yeas.—Messrs. Anderson, Brent, Clay, Condit, Crawford, Franklin, Gaillard, Giles, Gregg, Lambert, Lloyd, Mathewson, Meigs, Smith of Maryland, Sumter, Tait, Turner, and Whiteside.
Nays.—Messrs. Champlin, German, Gilman, Goodrich, Hillhouse, Horsey, Leib, Pickering, and Reed.
Barred Claims.
The President communicated the report of the Secretary for the Department of the Treasury, made in pursuance of the resolution of the Senate of the 26th instant, on the subject of claims barred by the statute of limitations; and the report was read, as follows:
Treasury Department, April 28, 1810.
Sir: I have the honor to transmit a report prepared in obedience to the resolution of the Senate, of the twenty-six instant. I have the honor to be, &c.,
ALBERT GALLATIN.
To the Honorable the President of the Senate:
The Secretary of the Treasury, in obedience to the resolution of the Senate, of the 26th instant, respectfully reports—
That it appears, by the letter from the Register of the Treasury, herewith transmitted, that the statement of all the claims adjusted and allowed, by virtue of the act, entitled "An act providing for the settlement of the claims of persons under particular circumstances, barred by the limitations heretofore established," cannot be completed before the day contemplated for the adjournment of Congress, but will be prepared so as to be laid before the Senate at the commencement of their next session.
That the statement (A) herewith transmitted, exhibits the amount of the balances standing on the books of the Treasury against the United States, which are barred by the statutes of limitation, and arranged under the following heads, viz:
| Loan Office certificates | $90,811 36 |
| Indents for interest on the public debt | 64,590 98 |
| Final settlement certificates | 23,873 24 |
| Commissioners' certificates | 4,304 83 |
| Army commissioners' do. | 46,468 97 |
| Credits given in lieu of army commissioners' certificates cancelled | 28,674 30 |
| Credits for pay of the army, for which no certificates were ever issued | 17,132 11 |
| Invalid pensions | 16,635 46 |
| Amounting together to | 292,491 25 |
That so far as relates to the said balances, which result altogether from accounts actually settled at the Treasury, the statute of limitation can be repealed without subjecting the Government to imposition; but that considering the length of time which has elapsed since the claims have been barred, and the little value on that account affixed to them, the repeal of the statute, unless properly guarded in that respect, may not generally benefit the rightful claimants.
And that with the exception of those balances, it is not believed that it would be safe to repeal the statute of limitation in relation to any other general description of claims; although there may be special cases in which, notwithstanding the lapse of time, the proper proofs and checks may still exist, so as to prevent any imposition on the public.
All which is respectfully submitted.
ALBERT GALLATIN.
Barred Claims.
Mr. Hillhouse, from the same committee, further reported as follows:
Resolved, That the Secretary for the Department of the Treasury report to the Senate, at their next meeting, the necessary provisions for guarding the Treasury of the United States from fraud and imposition on the removal of the statute of limitations, in relation to the following claims mentioned in his report of the 28th of April, 1810, viz:
1. Loan office certificates.
2. Indents for interest on the public debt.
3. Final settlement certificates.
4. Commissioners' certificates.
5. Army certificates.
6. Credits given in lieu of Army certificates cancelled.
7. Credits for the pay of the Army, for which no certificates were issued.
8. Invalid pension.
Also, how far the statute of limitations may with safety be removed, as to claims for personal services rendered in the Army of the United States, during the Revolutionary war, and the guard and checks necessary and proper to be adopted.
And the report was considered and agreed to.
Adjournment.
Mr. Crawford, from the joint committee, reported that they had waited on the President of the United States, who informed them that he had no further communication to make to the two Houses of Congress.
Ordered, That the Secretary notify the House of Representatives that the Senate, having finished the business before them, are about to adjourn.
The Secretary having performed that duty, the President adjourned the Senate without delay.
[7] Dividends falling short of the rate of 8 per cent. per annum.
[8] Including extra dividends.
This being the day appointed by law for the meeting of Congress, the following members of the House of Representatives appeared, and took their seats, to wit:
From New Hampshire—Daniel Blaisdell, and Nathaniel A. Haven.
From Massachusetts—Ezekiel Bacon, Richard Cutts, William Ely, Barzillai Gannett, Josiah Quincy, Sam'l Taggart, Charles Turner, jr., Jabez Upham, Joseph B. Varnum, (the Speaker,) and Laban Wheaton.
From Vermont—William Chamberlin, Martin Chittenden, Jonathan H. Hubbard, and Samuel Shaw.
From Rhode Island—Richard Jackson.
From Connecticut—Epaphroditus Champion, Samuel W. Dana, John Davenport, Jonathan O. Mosely, Timothy Pitkin, junior, Lewis B. Sturges, and Benjamin Tallmadge.
From New York—James Emott, Jonathan Fisk, Thomas R. Gold, Robert Le Roy Livingston, Peter B. Porter, Erastus Root, Ebenezer Sage, Thomas Sammons, John Thompson, and Killian K. Van Rensselaer.
From New Jersey—Adam Boyd, James Cox, William Helms, Jacob Hufty, Thomas Newbold, and Henry Southard.
From Pennsylvania—William Anderson, David Bard, Robert Brown, William Crawford, Aaron Lyle, William Milnor, John Porter, John Rea, Matthias Richards, John Smilie, George Smith, Samuel Smith, and Robert Whitehill.
From Maryland—Charles Goldsborough, John Montgomery, Nicholas R. Moore, Roger Nelson, and Archibald Van Horne.
From Virginia—Burwell Bassett, James Breckenridge, John Clopton, John Dawson, John W. Eppes, Thomas Gholson, junior, Peterson Goodwyn, John G. Jackson, Joseph Lewis, junior, John Love, Thomas Newton, John T. Roane, John Smith, and James Stephenson.
From North Carolina—Willis Alston, junior, James Cochran, William Kennedy, Nathaniel Macon, Archibald McBride, Joseph Pearson, Lemuel Sawyer, and Richard Stanford.
From South Carolina—Lemuel J. Alston, William Butler, Joseph Calhoun, Robert Marion, Thomas Moore, and John Taylor.
From Georgia—Howell Cobb, and George M. Troup.
From Ohio—Jeremiah Morrow.
From Kentucky—Joseph Desha, Benjamin Howard, Richard M. Johnson, and Samuel McKee.
From Tennessee—Pleasant M. Miller, John Rhea, and Robert Weakley.
From Mississippi Territory—George Poindexter.
From Indiana Territory—Jonathan Jennings.
From Orleans Territory—Julien Poydras.
Adam Seybert, returned to serve as a member of this House, for the State of Pennsylvania, in the room of Benjamin Say, resigned, appeared, produced his credentials, was qualified, and took his seat.
Jonathan Jennings, returned to serve as a Delegate from the Territory of Indiana, appeared, produced his credentials, was qualified, and took his seat.
A quorum, consisting of a majority of the whole number, being present, Mr. Goodwyn and Mr. Root were appointed a committee on the part of the House, jointly with such committee as may be appointed on the part of the Senate, to wait on the President of the United States, and inform him that a quorum of the two Houses is assembled, and ready to receive any communications he may be pleased to make to them.
Several other members, to wit: from New Hampshire, John C. Chamberlain and James Wilson; from Rhode Island, Elisha R. Potter; from Pennsylvania, William Findlay and Daniel Heister; from Virginia, Matthew Clay and Jacob Swoope; and from North Carolina, John Stanley, appeared, and took their seats in the House.
A message from the Senate informed the House that a quorum of the Senate is assembled, and ready to proceed to business. They have appointed a committee on their part, jointly with the committee appointed on the part of this House, to inform the President that a quorum of the two Houses is assembled, and ready to receive any communications that he may be pleased to make them.
The Speaker laid before the House a certificate of the election of Adam Seybert, to serve as a member for the State of Pennsylvania, in the room of Benjamin Say, resigned; which was read, and, together with the certificate of the election of Jonathan Jennings, the delegate from the Territory of Indiana, referred to the Committee of Elections.
Several other members, to wit: from New York, John Nicholson; from Maryland, John Brown; and from Virginia, Walter Jones, appeared, and took their seats in the House.
Several other members, to wit: from New Hampshire, William Hale; from Massachusetts, Gideon Gardner and Ezekiel Whitman; and from New York, Vincent Matthews, appeared, and took their seats in the House.
The Speaker laid before the House the following letter, which was read:
Respect for the House.
To the Speaker of the House of Representatives:
Sir: An occurrence having recently taken place between a member of the House of Representatives and myself, produced by circumstances not at all connected with his official duties or opinions, which from the time and place may be considered disrespectful to the House of Representatives, I take the liberty of tendering through you my most respectful declarations, that I am the last who would wilfully manifest a deficiency of that reverence which is due to the Representatives of my country, or that sacred regard which is also due to their privileges.
To yourself, sir, personally, I tender the assurances of my very great respect.
I. A. COLES.[9]
November 29, 1809.
[No order having been taken on it, the letter lies on the table of course.]
Two other members, to wit: from Virginia, Edwin Gray; and from North Carolina, Meshack Franklin, appeared, and took their seats in the House.
Navigation Laws.
Mr. Macon said he wished early to call the attention of the House to two motions, the object of which he deemed to be very important. The first of them had been formerly submitted to the House by a gentleman from Georgia, (Mr. Early) but never acted on, and afterwards by a gentleman from South Carolina, (Mr. D. R. Williams;) the other had been presented by Mr. Macon himself at the last session, but at so late a period that it had not been acted on. It appeared to Mr. Macon that these motions combined with one submitted at different times by a gentleman from Connecticut, (Mr. Dana,) would form something like a system. The object of the first motion he was about to submit, was to prohibit any foreign vessel from coming from any port or place to which the vessels of the United States could not go. Gentlemen would at once observe that there were many places whence vessels came to this country, to which we cannot go, and would perceive the extent of the motion. The other motion related to sea-letter vessels only. Mr. Macon said he wished to put them out of the nation, and to have no vessels belonging to the United States which were not perfectly American. He would have our vessels wholly American, or they should not at all partake of the character of American vessels.
After declaring that he considered his motions as calculated for permanent regulations, Mr. Macon submitted the following resolutions:
Resolved, That the Committee of Commerce and Manufactures be instructed to inquire into the expediency of prohibiting the entry of any vessel into the United States from any port or place to which a vessel of the United States is not admitted by permanent regulation of the Government owning such port or place by treaty.
Resolved, That the Committee of Commerce and Manufactures be instructed to inquire into the expediency of authorizing the registering anew of vessels built in the United States, which are owned in whole by citizens of the United States, any disability incurred by such vessel to the contrary notwithstanding; and also into the expediency of forbidding by law sea-letters or any custom-house documents being granted to vessels not registered or licensed according to law, or not owned by citizens of the United States, within a limited time after the passing of such a law.
Mr. Newton having seconded these motions, Mr. Macon moved to refer them to the Committee of Commerce and Manufactures.
Mr. Dana observed that these resolutions had in view merely an investigation by the Committee of Commerce and Manufactures into the subject of them. On such a question it was but necessary to ask whether the subject be of itself interesting, and whether or not the proposition bears on the face of it so much of probability and propriety that there could be no objection to it on the score of its being utterly inadmissible. Unless, therefore, the propositions were utterly inadmissible, if they related to a subject interesting to the nation in time of peace as well as of war, if they had a connection with one great branch of national policy, there could be no objection to have them investigated by a committee. Without expressing any opinion on the first proposition, which embraced a variety of important considerations, Mr. D. said that the motions were recommended to the House by their being founded on permanent principles, to which the nation may adhere in every alternative; and in addition to the attention due to them because they were of a permanent character and not merely temporary expedients, they might contribute to some of those measures of temporary policy deemed proper, and without a possibility of thwarting, might perhaps aid any project the Government might adopt. As to the second resolution, that he considered important in another point of view, as tending to encourage American manufactures. If there be any manufacture which requires great precision of science and experimental skill, any one which embraces more of the profound and elevated principles of science, and requires more dexterity in practical execution than any other, it is the constructing of ships. With these ideas, which Mr. Dana said were not applicable to the merits of the proposition, but to the question of reference, he should vote for referring them. He was extremely glad the motions had been brought forward, and particularly that they had been introduced by a gentleman so well qualified to sustain them, by his character and talents.
The motion for referring Mr. Macon's propositions was carried.
[The following gentlemen compose this committee: Messrs. Tallmadge, Clay, Butler, Rea of Pennsylvania, Weakley, Hale, Turner.]
7. Resolved, That so much of the Message of the President of the United States as relates to the finances of the United States, be referred to the Committee of Ways and Means.
8. Resolved, That so much of the Message of the President of the United States as relates to the fortifications of the ports and harbors of the United States, be referred to a select committee.
[This committee is composed of the following gentlemen: Messrs. Clopton, John Porter, Emott, McKim, Gardner, McBryde, and Witherspoon.]
Several other members to wit: from Maryland, Alexander McKim; from North Carolina, Thomas Kenan; from South Carolina, Robert Witherspoon; from Kentucky, Henry Crist; and from Georgia, William W. Bibb, appeared, and took their seats in the House.
Committee of Manufactures.
Mr. Sawyer asked leave to lay upon the table the following resolution, of a nature similar to one which he had proposed at the last session, which, from the shortness of the session, he presumed, rather than from any unfriendly disposition, never had been acted on:
Resolved, That a standing committee be appointed, to be called the Committee of Manufactures, whose duty it shall be to take into consideration all such petitions, matters, and things, touching manufactures, as shall be presented, or shall or may come in question and be referred to them by the House, and to report, from time to time, their opinion thereon.
Mr. S. said it was certainly too much to expect any one committee to do justice to two such important subjects, becoming daily more so, as those of commerce and manufactures. He wished to have employed on the subject of manufactures the undivided energies of the best talents of the House; he hoped that all the rays of patriotism and genius in the House would be directed to this subject as to a focal point at which they should all converge. How could one committee properly attend to the mass of business before the Committee of Commerce and Manufactures? The subject confided to them could not be acted on, and yet important matters were continually dropping into this gulf of oblivion. This committee, however, did all that could be expected of them; he did not believe that any member of it was hostile to manufactures; he could answer for the chairman, (Mr. Newton,) whom he knew to be friendly to manufactures, both from precept and example. It was because it was impossible for the committee to attend to all the business before it, that he offered the resolution.
Mr. S.'s motion lies on the table one day, of course, according to the rules of the House.
Violations of Neutral Rights.
Mr. Troup begged leave to submit to the consideration of the House several resolutions, which had for their object the vindication of the commercial rights of the United States against the belligerent nations of Europe. He submitted them at this time with less reluctance, because the introduction of them was in nowise inconsistent with the most friendly negotiation which might be pending with foreign Governments. It is high time, said Mr. T., in my opinion, that these commercial rights were either vindicated or abandoned. The remnant of commerce, which the joint operation of the belligerent decrees has left to us, is scarcely worth carrying on. To designate what this little is, would be no difficult matter, but it would be superfluous; every one who hears me understands it.
But, it would be well to inquire, on what principle the belligerents pretend to justify these commercial restrictions? The avowed principle is retaliation, but is it the true principle? Unquestionably not. And why? Because it is equally asserted by both belligerents. Both cannot be retaliators; one must be the aggressor, the other the retaliator. If this principle, then, be equally urged by both, who is to judge between them? If the alleged principle of retaliation be not the true one, what is? As respects France, the true principle of her decrees is to be sought in the policy of embarrassing England by excluding from the continent British merchandise; and as to Great Britain, the principle of her Orders in Council may be found in the consideration of her interest and her power. She avowedly contends that it is her interest to engross the commerce of the world; that she has the power to engross it, and, therefore, she will engross it.
But, what are the principles more specifically asserted by Great Britain? First, the right of blockade by proclamation; second, the right to turn your vessels into her ports to pay duty and take out a license. This right of blockading by proclamation is not a right growing out of a state of war; it is no belligerent right; it is a pretension, as applicable to a state of peace as to a state of war, and if we submit to it in a state of war, we must submit to it in a state of peace. The only principle of blockade which we recognize is that which gives to belligerents a right to turn from ports so closely invested as to make the entry of them dangerous, and after due warning, vessels bound to them. But the right asserted by Great Britain to blockade by a piece of parchment or paper, issued from her Council Chamber, a port or ports, a kingdom or kingdoms, a continent or continents, is a right no more relative to a state of war than to a state of peace; and, if we submit to the pretension in a state of war, we must equally submit to it in a state of peace. It is founded on the most arbitrary tyranny, it goes to the annihilation of your commerce. As to the other right, of forcing our vessels into her ports, to pay duty and take out license, this is equally applicable to a state of peace as to a state of war. We acknowledge the right of Great Britain, or any other nation, to shut her ports against us, provided there be no treaty stipulation to the contrary. But the right of Great Britain or of France to shut the ports of any other nation against us is a right no more appertaining to a belligerent than to a neutral. If we submit to it in war, we must equally submit in peace; and this right, like the other, is founded in the most arbitrary tyranny. What right has Britain to tyrannize on the ocean, and prescribe limits to our trade? She will not permit to us a trade which she cannot herself enjoy; she prohibits to us a trade which our Government permits, because it is her interest to monopolize it. It is equally our interest to monopolize, and, therefore, if you please, sir, we will prohibit the trade which her Government permits, and which it is our interest to monopolize.
If Great Britain can rightly prohibit our trade, because it is her interest to prohibit it, have we not the right to prohibit her trade for the same reason? If she, with right and justice, can stop and seize, and confiscate our vessels because they attempt a trade which she forbids, and only because she forbids it, cannot our Government do the same in relation to her trade? If she can turn our vessels into her ports to pay duty and take out license, what prohibits us from doing the same as to her vessels? England is a nation, so are we. England is independent, so are we. What prohibits us from doing to England what England does to us? Unquestionably nothing. To say that we have no right to do to England what England does to us, is to acknowledge our own inferiority; it is to acknowledge that she may demand without limitation, and that we are under obligation to submit without limitation.
I am aware that it may be objected to the resolutions that the adoption of them would lead to hostility: but the same objection is equally applicable to any resolution which would go to the vindication of our commercial rights. They ought not to lead to hostility; they are merely retaliatory. They follow the spirit of the British Orders in Council and French decrees, and therefore cannot be complained of by either power. There is a great and profitable commerce, and rapidly increasing, passing not indeed before our doors, but near enough to make the capture of vessels engaged in it convenient to us, which the resolutions have chiefly in view. I allude to the Brazil and Spanish Main trade.
Is it not matter of surprise that a commerce so profitable, so extensive, and so convenient, should have been permitted to a Government which permits no commerce to us but what her convenience and her interest suggest? Is it not strange that we should have suffered that Government to participate in a commerce which both our interest and our convenience stimulate us to engross? But, above all, is it not inexplicable that we should passively have suffered the monopoly of it by her, when we ourselves were willing and able to engross it? The House will perceive, on the face of the resolutions, that, as they regard France, they are equivalent to a war measure—neither by a war measure, nor by that which I have the honor to submit, can we come in contact with France; she has no commerce on the ocean. In relation to England it is short, infinitely short, of war; because by war her Continental Colonies would fall; her West India Islands would be distressed, and our privateers would cut up her commerce; but the resolutions propose merely to retort the evils of her own injustice, to do to her what, and no more than what, she has done to us. Reserving for another occasion any further remarks, I beg leave to read the resolutions to the House.
Mr. T. then read the following resolutions: