Chapter LVIII: Introduction (57)

_Ordered_, That the committee who prepared the Address wait on the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, and desire him to acquaint the Senate at what time and place it will be most convenient for him that it should be presented.

Mr. KING reported, from the committee, that they had waited on the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, and that he would receive the Address of the Senate to-morrow at 12 o'clock, at his own house.

SATURDAY, November 22.

The Senate waited on the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, and the VICE PRESIDENT, in their name, presented the Address agreed to on the 21st instant.

To which the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES was pleased to make the following reply:

_Gentlemen:_

Among the occasions which have been afforded for expressing
my sense of the zealous and steadfast co-operation of the
Senate, in the maintenance of Government, none has yet
occurred more forcibly demanding my unqualified
acknowledgments than the present.

Next to the consciousness of upright intentions, it is the
highest pleasure to be approved by the enlightened
Representatives of a free nation. With the satisfaction,
therefore, which arises from an unalterable attachment to
public order, do I learn, that the Senate discountenance
those proceedings, which would arrogate the direction of
our affairs, without any degree of authority derived from
the people.

It has been more than once the lot of our Government to be
thrown into new and delicate situations; and of these, the
insurrection has not been the least important. Having been
compelled at length to lay aside my repugnance to resort to
arms, I derive much happiness from being confirmed by your
judgment in the necessity of decisive measures, and from
the support of my fellow-citizens of the militia, who were
the patriotic instruments of that necessity.

With such demonstrations of affection for our constitution;
with an adequate organization of the militia; with the
establishment of necessary fortifications; with a
continuance of those judicious and spirited exertions which
have brought victory to our Western Army; with a due
attention to public credit and an unsullied honor towards
all nations; we may meet, under every assurance of success,
our enemies from within and from without.

G. WASHINGTON.

The Senate returned to their own Chamber, and then adjourned.

MONDAY, November 24.

JOHN RUTHERFORD, from New Jersey, attended.

WEDNESDAY, November 26.

JOHN HENRY, from Maryland, and JAMES ROSS, from Pennsylvania, severally attended.

FRIDAY, November 28.

STEPHEN R. BRADLEY, from Vermont, and CALEB STRONG, from Massachusetts, severally attended.

TUESDAY, December 9.

RICHARD POTTS, from Maryland, attended to-day.

THURSDAY, December 11.

FREDERICK FRELINGHUYSEN, from New Jersey, attended.

MONDAY, December 15.

STEPHEN MIX MITCHELL, from Connecticut, attended to-day.

MONDAY, December 29.

HENRY TAZEWELL, appointed a Senator by the State of Virginia, in the place of JOHN TAYLOR, resigned, produced his credentials, which were read, and the VICE PRESIDENT administered to him the oath required by law, and he took his seat in the Senate.

FRIDAY, February 20.

The VICE PRESIDENT being absent, the Senate proceeded to the election of a PRESIDENT _pro tempore_, as the constitution provides, and SAMUEL LIVERMORE was duly elected; who, declining the appointment,

The Senate proceeded to the election of HENRY TAZEWELL to that office.

_Ordered_, That the Secretary wait on the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, and notify him of the election of Mr. TAZEWELL to be PRESIDENT of the Senate _pro tempore_.

SATURDAY, February 28.

HENRY LATIMER, from the State of Delaware, in place of GEORGE READ, resigned, attended, and produced his credentials, which were read; and, the oath prescribed by law being administered, he took his seat in the Senate.

JAMES GUNN, from Georgia, attended.

TUESDAY, March 3.

Mr. BURR laid before the Senate a motion, as follows:

"_Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
two-thirds of both Houses concurring_, That the following
article be proposed to the Legislatures of the several
States, as an amendment to the Constitution of the United
States, which, when ratified by three-fourths of the said
Legislatures, shall be valid as part of the said
constitution, to wit:

"That the term for which the members of the Senate and
House of Representatives of the next Congress are or shall
be chosen shall expire on the first day of June next
following the third day of March, on which it would have
expired if this amendment to the constitution had not been
adopted."

_Ordered_, That this motion lie for consideration.

TUESDAY EVENING, March 3.

A message from the House of Representatives informed the Senate that the House, having finished the business of the session, are about to adjourn.

_Ordered_, That Messrs. IZARD and MORRIS be a committee, jointly, with such committee as the House of Representatives may appoint on their part, to wait on the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, and inform him that Congress is ready to adjourn without day, unless he may have any further communications to make.

_Ordered_, That the Secretary acquaint the House of Representatives therewith, and desire the appointment of a committee on their part.

A message from the House of Representatives informed the Senate that the House have appointed a joint committee on their part to wait on the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, and inform him that Congress is ready to adjourn.

Mr. IZARD reported, from the joint committee, that they had waited on the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, who informed them that he had no further communications to make to Congress during this session. Whereupon, it was

_Resolved_, That the Senate adjourn without day.

EXECUTIVE JOURNAL.

THE TENTH SESSION OF THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, CONVENED ON

MONDAY, JUNE 8, 1795.

MONDAY, June 8, 1795.

Pursuant to a call from the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, in a circular addressed to the several Senators, informing each that "certain matters touching the public good required that the Senate should be convened on the above day, at the Senate Chamber, in Philadelphia, then and there to receive and deliberate on such communications as he shall then make to them:" the Senate assembled accordingly.

PRESENT. JOHN ADAMS, Vice President of the United States and President of the Senate.

_From New Hampshire._--JOHN LANGDON and SAMUEL LIVERMORE.

_From Massachusetts._--CALEB STRONG and GEORGE CABOT.

_From Vermont._--MOSES ROBINSON.

From _Connecticut_.--OLIVER ELLSWORTH and JONATHAN TRUMBULL.

_From Rhode Island._--THEODORE FOSTER and WILLIAM BRADFORD.

_From New York._--RUFUS KING and ARRON BURR.

_From New Jersey._--JOHN RUTHERFORD.

_From Pennsylvania._--JAMES ROSS and WILLIAM BINGHAM.

_From Delaware._--HENRY LATIMER.

_From Maryland._--RICHARD POTTS.

_From Virginia._--HENRY TAZEWELL and STEVENS THOMSON MASON.

_From Kentucky._--JOHN BROWN and HUMPHREY MARSHALL.

_From North Carolina._--ALEXANDER MARTIN and TIMOTHY BLOODWORTH.

_From South Carolina._--JACOB READ.

_From Georgia._--JAMES JACKSON.

_Ordered_, That Mr. STRONG and Mr. LANGDON be a committee to wait on the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, and notify him that a quorum of the Senate is assembled, and ready to receive any communications he may be pleased to make.

Mr. STRONG reported, from the committee, that they had waited on the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, and that he informed them he would make some communications to the Senate immediately.

TUESDAY, June 9.

PIERCE BUTLER, from the State of South Carolina, and FREDERICK FRELINGHUYSEN, from the State of New Jersey, severally attended.

JAMES GUNN, from the State of Georgia, produced his credentials, and, the usual oath being administered, took his seat in the Senate.

FRIDAY, June 12.

JOHN HENRY, from the State of Maryland, produced his credentials, and, the usual oath being administered, he took his seat in the Senate.

SATURDAY, June 13.

ELIJAH PAINE, from the State of Vermont, produced his credentials, and the usual oath being administered, he took his seat in the Senate.

MONDAY, June 15.

JOHN VINING, from the State of Delaware, attended.

The Senate resumed the consideration of the Treaty, communicated by the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, with his Message of the 8th instant: and, after progress, the Senate adjourned.

WEDNESDAY, June 17.

The Senate resumed the consideration of the Treaty, communicated with the Message of the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, of the 8th instant, and after discussion on the remaining articles, a motion was made and seconded, that it he

"_Resolved_, (two-thirds of the Senate concurring therein,)
That they do consent to, and advise the President of the
United States, to ratify the Treaty of Amity, Commerce, and
Navigation, between His Britannic Majesty and the United
States of America, concluded at London, the 19th day of
November, 1794, on condition that there be added to the
said Treaty an article whereby it shall be agreed to
suspend the operation of so much of the 12th article as
respects the trade which his said Majesty thereby consents
may be carried on between the United States and his Islands
in the West Indies, in the manner, and on the terms and
conditions therein specified.

"And the Senate recommend to the President, to proceed,
without delay, to further friendly negotiations with His
Majesty, on the subject of the said trade, and of the terms
and conditions in question."

On motion, it was agreed, that this motion lie for consideration until to-morrow.[52]

MONDAY, June 22.

The VICE PRESIDENT laid before the Senate a letter from the Secretary for the Department of State, with a "list of the negroes, to which the correspondence between the Commander-in-chief of the American Army and Sir Guy Carleton relates;" which was read, and, with the document referred to, ordered to lie on the table.

WEDNESDAY, June 24.

_Deported Slaves of the Revolution._

A motion was made by Mr. GUNN, seconded by Mr. READ, as follows:

"Whereas it is alleged by divers American citizens, that
negroes, and other property, to a considerable amount, were
carried away, in contravention of the seventh article of
the Treaty of Peace between the United States and His
Britannic Majesty:

"_Resolved_, That the Senate recommend to the President of
the United States, to renew, by friendly negotiation with
his said Majesty, the claims of the American citizens, to
compensation for the negroes and other property, so alleged
to have been carried away; and in case the disagreement
that has hitherto existed, relative to the construction in
this behalf of the said article, cannot be removed by
candid and amicable discussions, that it be proposed, as a
measure calculated to cherish and confirm the good
understanding and friendship which it is desired may
prevail between the two countries, that commissioners be
appointed, in the manner directed by the sixth article of
the Treaty of Amity, Commerce, and Navigation, lately
concluded between the United States and his said Majesty,
with authority to ascertain and decide, as well the
interpretation of the said seventh article in this respect,
as likewise the amount of the losses sustained by the
alleged violation of the same.

"But the Senate are of opinion that the negotiation on this
subject should be distinct from, and subsequent to that
recommended by their act of the 24th instant, respecting
the trade and intercourse between the United States and his
said Majesty's islands in the West Indies."

And, after debate, it was agreed that this motion lie until to-morrow for consideration.

THURSDAY, June 25.

The motion made by Mr. GUNN, as last recited, and yesterday referred to this day for consideration, was resumed.

On motion to divide this motion, and to agree to all that is contained from the word "_whereas_," to the word "_same_," at the end of the first paragraph of the resolution inclusive, it passed in the affirmative--yeas 27, nay 1, as follows:

YEAS.--Messrs. Bingham, Bloodworth, Bradford, Brown, Burr,
Butler, Cabot, Ellsworth, Foster, Frelinghuysen, Gunn,
Jackson, King, Langdon, Latimer, Livermore, Marshall,
Martin, Paine, Potts, Read, Robinson, Boss, Rutherford,
Strong, Trumbull, and Vining.

Mr. Tazewell voted in the negative.[53]

The yeas and nays were required by one-fifth of the Senators present.

Those who voted in the affirmative, are--Messrs. Bingham,
Bradford, Butler, Cabot, Ellsworth, Foster, Frelinghuysen,
Gunn, King, Latimer, Livermore, Paine, Potts, Read, Ross,
Rutherford, Strong, Trumbull, and Vining.

These who voted in the negative, are--Messrs. Bloodworth,
Brown, Burr, Jackson, Langdon, Marshall, Martin, Mason,
Robinson, and Tazewell.

Yeas 19, nays 10. So the question of reconsideration was lost, there not being two-thirds of the Senators present in the affirmative.

On motion, by Mr. RUTHERFORD, for the question on the resolution as amended, to wit:

"Whereas, it is alleged by divers American citizens, that
negroes and other property, to a considerable amount, were
carried away in contravention of the 7th article of the
Treaty of Peace between the United States and His Britannic
Majesty:

"_Resolved_, That the Senate recommend to the PRESIDENT OF
THE UNITED STATES to renew, by friendly negotiation with
his said Majesty, the claims of the American citizens to
compensation for the negroes and other property so alleged
to have been carried away; and in case the disagreement,
that has hitherto existed relative to the construction in
this behalf of the said article, cannot be removed by
candid and amicable discussions, that it be proposed, as a
measure calculated to cherish and confirm the good
understanding and friendship which it is desired may
prevail between the two countries, that commissioners be
appointed in the manner directed by the 6th article of the
Treaty of Amity, Commerce, and Navigation lately concluded
between the United States and his said Majesty, with
authority to ascertain and decide, as well the
interpretation of the said 7th article, in this respect, as
likewise the amount of the losses sustained by the alleged
violation of the same."

It passed in the negative--yeas 14, nays 15, as follows:

YEAS.--Messrs. Bloodworth, Brown, Butler, Burr, Gunn,
Jackson, Langdon, Marshall, Martin, Mason, Paine, Read,
Robinson, and Tazewell.

NAYS.--Messrs. Bingham, Bradford, Cabot, Ellsworth, Foster,
Frelinghuysen, King, Latimer, Livermore, Potts, Ross,
Rutherford, Strong, Trumbull, and Vining.

FRIDAY, June 26.

Mr. CABOT reported that the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES had no further communications to make to the Senate, than his hearty wishes that, in a speedy meeting with their friends, they may enjoy every felicity.

On motion,

_Ordered_, That there be paid by the Secretary of the Senate, out of the moneys appropriated for the contingent expenses of the Senate, to James Mathers, Doorkeeper, three dollars per day, and to Cornelius Maxwell, assistant Doorkeeper, two dollars per day, as compensation for their respective attendance during this special session of the Senate, over and above their stated allowance.

On motion, the Senate adjourned without day.

Attest:

SAM. A. OTIS, _Secretary_.

THIRD CONGRESS.--SECOND SESSION.

PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES

IN

THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

MONDAY, November 3, 1794.

The following members appeared, and took their seats, to wit:

_From New Hampshire._--NICHOLAS GILMAN, JEREMIAH SMITH, and PAINE WINGATE.

_From Massachusetts._--FISHER AMES, DAVID COBB, HENRY DEARBORN, DWIGHT FOSTER, BENJAMIN GOODHUE, SAMUEL HOLTEN, GEORGE THATCHER, PELEG WADSWORTH, and ARTEMAS WARD.

_From Connecticut._--JOSHUA COIT, AMASA LEARNED, ZEPHANIAH SWIFT, URIAH TRACY, and JONATHAN TRUMBULL.

_From Vermont._--ISRAEL SMITH.

_From New York._--THEODORUS BAILEY, PHILIP VAN CORTLANDT, and JOHN WATTS.

_From New Jersey._--JOHN BEATTY and ELIAS BOUDINOT.

_From Pennsylvania._--THOMAS HARTLEY, JOHN WILKES KITTERA, FREDERICK A. MUHLENBERG, (Speaker,) and PETER MUHLENBERG.

_From Maryland._--GABRIEL CHRISTIE and GEORGE DENT.

_From Virginia._--ISAAC COLES, SAMUEL GRIFFIN, JOHN HEATH, JOSEPH NEVILLE, ANTHONY NEW, JOSIAH PARKER, and ROBERT RUTHERFORD.

_From Kentucky._--CHRISTOPHER GREENUP.

_From North Carolina._--THOMAS BLOUNT, WILLIAM JOHNSTON DAWSON, NATHANIEL MACON, and ALEXANDER MEBANE.

_From South Carolina._--WILLIAM SMITH.

_From Georgia._--ABRAHAM BALDWIN.

A quorum of the whole number not being present, the House adjourned until to-morrow.

TUESDAY, November 4.

Several other members, to wit: from Rhode Island, FRANCIS MALBONE; from New York, HENRY GLENN, JAMES GORDON, and JOHN E. VAN ALLEN; from New Jersey, JONATHAN DAYTON; from Pennsylvania, THOMAS FITZSIMONS; from Delaware, HENRY LATIMER; from Maryland, WILLIAM VANS MURRAY; from Virginia, GEORGE HANCOCK, RICHARD BLAND LEE, JAMES MADISON, ANDREW MOORE, FRANCIS PRESTON, and FRANCIS WALKER; and from North Carolina, MATTHEW LOCKE, appeared, and took their seats in the House.

And a quorum, consisting of a majority of the whole number, being present,

_Ordered_, That a message be sent to the Senate, to inform them that a quorum of this House is assembled, and ready to proceed to business; and that the Clerk of this House do go with said message.

WEDNESDAY, November 5.

Several other members, to wit: from New Hampshire, JOHN S. SHERBURNE; from Massachusetts, WILLIAM LYMAN; from Connecticut, JAMES HILLHOUSE; from Vermont, NATHANIEL NILES; from New York, EZEKIEL GILBERT; from Maryland, WILLIAM HINDMAN; from Virginia, THOMAS CLAIBORNE; and from Georgia, THOMAS P. CARNES, appeared, and took their seats in the House.

Notice was received that the Senate had not yet been able to form a quorum.

Upon this, Mr. DAYTON moved that a committee shall be appointed to examine the business left unfinished last session, and report to the House. He saw no reason for losing time by waiting for the Senate.

Mr. GOODHUE objected to the motion as improper.

Mr. DAYTON challenged the gentleman to point out wherein the impropriety consisted. For two or three weeks the House of Representatives would have full employment, while the Senate, in reality, had none. He was positive as to the legality and expediency of proceeding.

The SPEAKER put the question, and the ayes and noes were equal, each being twenty-five.

The SPEAKER then informed the House that, as a quorum of their number was not present, it would be requisite to adjourn.

The House rose immediately, after adjourning till to-morrow.

THURSDAY, November 6.

Two other members, to wit: from Massachusetts, PELEG COFFIN, and from Virginia, JOHN NICHOLAS, appeared, and took their seats in the House.

FRIDAY, November 7.

Several other members, to wit: from Pennsylvania, JAMES ARMSTRONG and WILLIAM MONTGOMERY; from Virginia, WILLIAM B. GILES; from North Carolina, JOSEPH WINSTON; and from South Carolina, JOHN HUNTER, appeared, and took their seats in the House.

On motion,

_Resolved_, That a Standing Committee of Elections be appointed, whose duty it shall be to examine and report upon the certificates of election, or other credentials of the members returned to serve in this House, and to take into their consideration all such matters as shall or may come in question, and be referred to them by the House, touching returns and elections, and to report their proceedings with their opinion thereupon, to the House.

And a committee was appointed of Mr. DAYTON, Mr. HILLHOUSE, Mr. SHERBURNE, Mr. DENT, Mr. LEE, Mr. MACON, and Mr. HUNTER.

_Ordered_, That the letter from the Governor of Maryland, together with the return of the election of Gabriel Duvall, to serve as one of the members of this House for the said State, in the room of JOHN FRANCIS MERCER, who has resigned his seat, which was laid before the House at the last session, be referred to the said Committee of Elections.

MONDAY, November 10.

Several other members, to wit: from New York, THOMAS TREDWELL; from New Jersey, LAMBERT CADWALADER; from Pennsylvania, JOHN SMILIE; from North Carolina, WILLIAM BARRY GROVE and JOSEPH MCDOWELL; and from South Carolina, RICHARD WINN, appeared, and took their seats in the House.

The SPEAKER informed the House that the Senate had not yet been able to make a quorum. Fifteen members only appeared. One more was necessary.

TUESDAY, November 11.

Two other members, to wit: from Massachusetts, SHEARJASHUB BOURNE, and from New York, PETER VAN GAASBECK, appeared, and took their seats in the House.

The SPEAKER informed the House that one Senator was yet wanting to the making of a quorum. [The Senate consists of thirty members, of whom only fifteen have yet (Tuesday) made their appearance; of consequence, a majority is wanting. The VICE PRESIDENT has, it is true, arrived, but he is not, strictly speaking, a Senator. He does not give a vote in questions that come before the Senate, unless the voices on a division are equal.]

The SPEAKER laid before the House a letter from James White, enclosing the credentials of his appointment as a Representative of the territory of the United States, south of the river Ohio, in the Congress of the United States, according to the ordinance of Congress of the thirteenth of July, one thousand seven hundred and eighty-seven; which were read, and ordered to be referred to Mr. BALDWIN, Mr. GILBERT, Mr. WALKER, Mr. SWIFT, and Mr. JEREMIAH SMITH, with instructions to examine the matter thereof, and report the same, with their opinion thereupon, to the House.

WEDNESDAY, November 12.

Another member, to wit, CARTER B. HARRISON, from Virginia, appeared, and took his seat in the House.

THURSDAY, November 13.

Two other members, to wit: ANDREW GREGG and DANIEL HEISTER, from Pennsylvania, appeared, and took their seats in the House.

FRIDAY, November 14.

Several other members, to wit: from Massachusetts, SAMUEL DEXTER; from Virginia, ABRAHAM VENABLE; and from Kentucky, ALEXANDER D. ORR, appeared, and took their seats in the House.

MONDAY, November 17.

Two other members, to wit: from Rhode Island, BENJAMIN BOURNE, and from South Carolina, ANDREW PICKENS, appeared, and took their seats in the House.

_Delegate south of the Ohio._

The House resolved itself into a Committee of the whole House on the report of the committee to whom was referred the letter from JAMES WHITE, together with the credentials of his appointment as a Representative of the territory of the United States south of the river Ohio.

Mr. SWIFT objected to complying with the report of the committee. He thought that it could not be carried into execution, because it involved inconsistencies. If the object of the law referred to, was to admit this person to debate, and not to vote, that was unconstitutional. He was, by that law, to be a member of Congress; but the House of Representatives are not Congress, and, therefore, this person may equally vote in the House of Representatives and in the Senate; while, at the same time, he may interrupt the PRESIDENT consenting to a bill, by giving his advice. The constitution has made no provision for such a member as this person is intended to be. If we can admit a delegate to Congress or a member of the House of Representatives, we may with equal propriety admit a stranger from any quarter of the world. We may as well admit the gallery, or a foreign Minister, as this person from the territory south-west of the Ohio. At this rate, we may very soon overturn the constitution. If this person has any proper title to a seat, it must be in the Senate; it could not be in the House of Representatives, who were not delegates. The Senate, perhaps, might be called such. His election was nearer the mode of theirs, than that of this House.

Mr. SMITH (of South Carolina) had no difficulty in declaring that the gentleman was fully qualified to take a seat in that House, by the terms of an express compact with the people. He was convinced that the Representatives have a right to admit those whom they regard as lawfully entitled to a seat in the House, for the purpose of debating. They may admit the Secretary of State, if they consider it as expedient. If this gentleman had applied to the Senate, that body also were authorized to admit him, if they thought it lawful. Under the old constitution, he would have been a member _sui generis_. He does not claim a right of voting, but of speaking only; and when the affairs of the South-western Territory were agitated in the Senate, he had a right, in his (Mr. S.'s) judgment, to speak and debate in that House also. Mr. S. wished that there had been previously settled another part of this business, viz: by whom the delegate was to be paid for his attendance. It may be a future question, also, whether he is to be dismissed when the galleries are cleared?

Mr. GILES was not prepared to speak on the subject. On the score of expediency, his present opinion was, that the delegate from the south-west of the Ohio should be admitted. He had no objection to the motion of the member from Maryland, (Mr. MURRAY,) for the committee rising, but he would never consent to it for the sake of consulting the Senate. He would agree to it, for the sake of further deliberation among themselves. If the House chose to consult the _gallery_--a resource for information that he should never wish to see adopted--they had a right to consult it, or to ask advice from any other quarter, notwithstanding the assertion of the gentleman from Connecticut.

Mr. DEXTER said, he thought the obstacle should be got over by a formal act of the Legislature. He was clear that the House had a right to consult or admit to the privilege of debating, any individual whom they thought proper. They might, for instance, admit an advocate to plead; in a particular case; but that was entirely a different matter from allowing him to give a vote on the question before the House. Mr. D. declared that he would vote against the report, as it now stands, not because he thought the gentleman from the South-western Territory unentitled to a seat, but because he regarded an act of the whole Legislature as a requisite for his introduction.

It was now moved that the committee should rise, and report the resolution of the select committee.

Mr. W. SMITH differed from Mr. DEXTER. He thought the House of Representatives was, in itself, perfectly competent to settle the point. He was determined that they ought not to consult the Senate upon the matter. It would be extremely improper to let the Senate interfere. He again adverted to his former position, that the House may, if it sees proper, introduce the Secretary of State to a privilege of being consulted, or any other person who may be thought suitable. But he would never submit to yield the privileges of the House to the Executive. They ought to decide their elections on their own authority, and on no occasion send to inquire of the Senate if such an amendment ought to be admitted. Mr. S. considered the gentleman (Mr. WHITE) as expressly within the present constitution. He trusted that the committee would not rise, under any such idea as consulting the Senate; but, if they at present rise, that it would be merely for the sake of obtaining further information.

Mr. MURRAY.--If we could have foreseen this case, I am sure that we should have had a joint committee of privileges from both Houses, as judges. The situation of the gentleman refers to both, and therefore the Senate ought to be consulted on this head. Perhaps he is entitled to a seat in both Houses.

Mr. MCDOWELL objected, that an act of the Legislature would never, practically, answer the purpose. The session would be next to ending, before such a law would be passed. In the mean time, the interest of the people south-west of the Ohio is agitated in a question, and their delegate is condemned to silence. The members generally admit, in substance, that he ought to be received into this House. He wished, therefore, that they would take a vote on the resolution of the select committee. He would object altogether to the proposal of the member from Maryland, for an act of the Legislature, or any consultation with, the Senate. Mr. MCD. was for admitting the member to his seat.

Mr. BOUDINOT observed, that it was universally agreed that the old law for accepting such a member as a delegate of Congress, cannot be executed in its full sense. The gentleman ought, in his opinion, to go where members elected by Legislatures went, that is to say, to the Senate. There was no pretence for his admission among the Representatives of the people. If he had any right, it must be in the other House. He thought this a very important question, and that it deserved more consideration than it had yet received. Mr. B. was not prepared to vote; but, if he was forced to give his voice at present, he should be for remitting the gentleman to the Senate. He thought that there should be an act of the whole Legislature. He should vote for the committee rising.

Mr. DAYTON said, that he should vote against the motion of the Maryland member, for the rising of the committee. He was against the object of this motion. He agreed entirely with the report of the select committee for receiving the south-western member immediately, as he had a right to a seat, founded on an original compact, which gave it to him. He objected to any concurrence of the Senate being asked. As to consulting persons out of doors, the House had a right to call Heads of Departments to give their opinions on any particular subject, if they thought proper. Mr. D. mentioned some cases of this nature, where such an expedient had been used.

Mr. GILES mentioned one reason against the committee rising, which was, that the House had no other business before it. He then read an amendment to the resolution of the select committee, as a middle course, that would embrace the ideas of all parties.

Mr. DEXTER repeated some of his former reasons for preferring an act of the Legislature.

The question was called for, and put by the Chairman, Shall the committee now rise, and report progress? It was decided in the negative--yeas 38, nays 39.

The question was then put on the resolution, as given by the committee. Mr. GILES again proposed his amendment. This was, that after the word "debating," in the resolution, there should be added, "upon any question touching the rights and interests of people in the territory of the United States south-west of the Ohio." The object was to narrow the power of the delegate.

Mr. SMILIE was for his being admitted to deliberate on every subject, or none at all.

Mr. GILES declared that he was very well pleased with the resolution, as it originally stood. He had only suggested this amendment that he might get the resolution through the House. He therefore withdrew his motion.

Mr. BALDWIN did not see that the question was of much importance. When a member was permitted to speak, but forbidden to vote, his situation was, no doubt, infinitely higher than that of strangers in the gallery, that of an advocate allowed to plead at the bar of the House, or that of a printer who came only to take notes; but still it was extremely short of the situation of a member of Congress. This would be more especially the case, if his right of debating was restricted to the affairs of the North-west and South-west Territory. Mr. B. could see nothing in the new constitution that made an exclusion of the delegate from the south-west of the Ohio. This privilege had been solemnly promised to those people, upon three different occasions. When they belonged to the State of South Carolina, they sent a Representative, Mr. SEVIER, to Congress; and they separated into a new State, under the promise of this privilege. But now, we have made a discovery, that these laws cannot be put into execution. It is a great pity that we had not made this discovery sooner. Mr. B. rejected all idea of referring this matter to the Senate. When the latter had any question of that kind, that concerned themselves, they would, no doubt, judge for themselves, and that just as properly as the House of Representatives. As to the pay of this gentleman, that might be an after question. He was clear that there at present existed no law which could make out that. The House may hereafter, if they see fit, pass a law respecting it. But, in the mean time, Mr. B. was satisfied that these people had a claim for a delegate, which could not be got rid of by the House.

Mr. SWIFT thought that it would be better to erect these people into a new State, and then the privilege would be of some real use to them. He was still of opinion that the constitution admits of no such delegate as this person is intended to be. He is a new kind of character, unknown to it. This person is _sui generis_. If the constitution knows any thing about him, then take him; if not, reject him. As to taking advice from the gallery, Mr. S. seemed to think he had been misunderstood. To admit a person within the bar for the purpose of consulting him, was a quite different thing from permitting the gallery, like this person, to come and take a permanent seat among the members, for the purpose of regularly debating. Mr. S. never meant to debar the House from taking information wherever they could find it.

Mr. MURRAY was concerned that he found himself obliged to vote against the resolution of the Committee of the Whole. He still hoped that the gentleman would have a seat, but that the Senate would first be consulted.

Mr. WINGATE moved an amendment to take the resolution, by adopting these words, "to a seat in Congress, as a delegate to Congress."

Mr. MADISON said, that the resolution, as passed by the select committee, was so properly expressed, that he did not believe it could admit of any amendment or alteration whatever.

The Committee of the whole House then divided on the resolution, when there appeared a very large majority in favor of reporting it as it first stood, and consequently for admitting Mr. WHITE as a delegate. The committee then rose.

TUESDAY, November 18.

Another member, to wit, THEODORE SEDGWICK, from Massachusetts, appeared, and took his seat in the House.

_Delegate south of the Ohio._

The House proceeded to consider the report of the committee on the letter from JAMES WHITE, enclosing the credentials of his appointment as a Representative of the territory of the United States south of the river Ohio; to which the Committee of the whole House reported no amendment. Whereupon, the said report being again read at the Clerk's table, was, on the question put thereupon, agreed to by the House, as follows:

"That, by the ordinance for the government of the territory
of the United States north-west of the river Ohio, section
nine, it is provided, "that, so soon as there shall be five
thousand free male inhabitants of full age in the district,
upon giving proof thereof to the Governor, they shall
receive authority to elect Representatives to represent
them in a General Assembly;" and by the 12th section of the
Ordinance, "as soon as a Legislature shall be formed in the
District, the Council and House, assembled in one room,
shall have authority, by joint ballot, to elect a delegate
to Congress, who shall have a seat in Congress, with a
right of debating but not of voting, during this temporary
government." Full effect is given to this Ordinance by act
of Congress, August 7, 1789.

"That, by the Deed of Cession of the territory south of the
river Ohio, to the United States, in the fourth article, it
is also provided 'that the inhabitants of the said
territory shall enjoy all the privileges, benefits, and
advantages, set forth in the Ordinance of the late Congress
for the government of the Western Territory; that is to
say, Congress shall assume the government of the said
territory, which they shall execute in a manner similar to
that which they support in the territory west of the Ohio,
and shall never bar or deprive them of any privilege which
the people in the territory west of the Ohio enjoy.'

"The cession, on these conditions, was accepted by act of
Congress, on the 2d of April, 1790.

"By an act passed the 26th of May, 1790, for the government
of the territory of the United States south of the river
Ohio, it is enacted, 'that the inhabitants shall enjoy all
the privileges, benefits, and advantages, set forth in the
Ordinance of the late Congress for the government of the
territory of the United States north-west of the river
Ohio. And the government of the said territory south of the
river Ohio, shall be similar to that which is now exercised
in the territory north-west of the river Ohio; except so
far as is otherwise provided in the conditions expressed in
an act of Congress of the present session, entitled 'An act
to accept a cession of the claim of the State of North
Carolina to a certain district of Western Territory.' The
committee are of opinion that James White has been duly
elected as delegate from the territory of the United States
south of the Ohio, on the terms of the foregoing acts; they
therefore submit the following resolution:

"_Resolved_, that James White be admitted to a seat in this
House as a delegate from the territory of the United States
south of the river Ohio, with a right of debating but not
of voting."

Mr. MADISON said, that in new cases there often arose a difficulty by applying old names to new things. The proper definition of Mr. WHITE is to be found in the laws and rules of the constitution. He is not a member of Congress, therefore, and so cannot be directed to take an oath, unless he chooses to do it voluntarily.

Mr. MURRAY moved that Mr. WHITE should be required to take the oath.

Mr. W. SMITH observed, that the constitution only required members and the Clerk to take the oath. The gentleman was not a member. It does not even appear for what number of years he is elected. In fact he is no more than an envoy to Congress. Instead of being called delegate to Congress, had he been plainly called an envoy, the difficulty would have vanished. He is not a Representative from, but an officer deputed by the people of the Western Territory. It is very improper to call on this gentleman to take such an oath, any more than any civil officer in the State of Pennsylvania. Mr. S. did not consider him as coming even within the Post Office law, (viz: for franking letters.) He is not entitled to pay, unless a law shall be passed for that end.

Mr. GILES agreed with the gentleman who spoke last as to the impropriety of demanding an oath.

Mr. LYMAN was for it.

Mr. DAYTON was against the oath. Call him what you will, a member, a delegate, or, if you please, a _nondescript_. It would be wrong to accept his oath, even if he should offer it. He is not a member. He cannot vote, which is the essential part. It is said that he can argue, and by that means influence the votes of the House. But so also a printer may be said to argue and influence, when he comes to this House, takes notes, and prints them in the newspapers.

Mr. BOUDINOT.--As the House had set out on a wrong principle, it was natural that, in their subsequent progress they should wander further and further from the point. But, as the House had now given their decision, he acquiesced in it. It was, however, a strange kind of thing to have a gentleman here arguing, who was not bound by an oath. He never could reconcile it.

Several other members spoke.

The House divided on the question, "Shall the delegate take an oath as a member?" Ayes 32, noes 42--majority against the motion, 10.

_Ordered_, That a committee be appointed to bring in a bill extending the privilege of franking to JAMES WHITE, the delegate from the South-western Territory, and making provision for his compensation; and that Mr. WILLIAM SMITH, Mr. THATCHER, and Mr. MACON, be the said committee.

WEDNESDAY, November 19.

Another member, to wit, THOMAS SCOTT, from Pennsylvania, appeared, and took his seat in the House.

_Ordered_, That a message be sent to the Senate to inform them that this House is now ready to attend them in receiving the communication from the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, agreeably to his notification to both Houses yesterday; and that the Clerk of this House do go with the said message.

The Senate attended and took seats in the House; when, both Houses being assembled, the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES came into the Representatives' Chamber, and delivered his Address to them. (For which see Proceedings of the Senate.)

The PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES then withdrew and the two Houses separated.

_Ordered_, that the Speech of the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES to both Houses be committed to a Committee of the whole House to-morrow.

THURSDAY, November 20.

Another member, to wit, WILLIAM FINDLAY, from Pennsylvania, appeared, and took his seat in the House.

MONDAY, November 24.

_Answer to the President's Speech._[54]

Mr. NICHOLAS then rose in defence of Mr. MADISON's amendment. He thought the House should not bow so much to the Executive as to approve of his proceedings without knowing what they are. Gentlemen say that they do not mean an implicit approbation. Why, then, hazard words that infer it? He would go as far in thanking the PRESIDENT as any person with propriety could go.

Mr. SEDGWICK insisted that the amendment of the member from Connecticut (Mr. HILLHOUSE) was preferable to the other. The PRESIDENT has said that his policy in regard to foreign nations is founded on justice. We approve of that. He recites his motives. They are also approved. Where, then, is the danger of expressing a general approbation? Would it be proper to give an approbation that cannot be appropriate, and that has no definite meaning? Mr. S. was far from designing to approve, explicitly or implicitly, what the House were not acquainted with. He only intended to convey a general sentiment of approbation; and he saw nothing more than this in the amendment of the gentleman from Connecticut.

Mr. HILLHOUSE never designed indiscriminate approbation; nor had he any secret meaning couched under the words of his amendment. When he had any thing to say to the House, he came honestly and told them in plain words what he would be at. He meant to express his applause of pacific and equitable measures. As to the question so often referred to, (the embassy of Mr. Jay,) he solemnly declared that it never was in his mind to express any thing about it. It would come before another body.

Mr. MADISON imagined that, in his motion as now worded, every person might see substantial approbation.

Mr. AMES.--Jealousy may become habitual as well as confidence. Nothing but a habit of jealousy could have found any thing of a secret in this verbal distinction of _your_ policy instead of _a_ policy. The distinction was trifling, but, if there must be one, he preferred the amendment of Mr. HILLHOUSE. His reasons for this preference were so minute that they, perhaps, had little more value than what his imagination chose to give them. In the mean time, nobody will suppose that we do not approve of the policy of the PRESIDENT in preferring pacific measures, because the system of peace is now preferred all over the Continent of America.

Mr. DAYTON rose to make a reply to "remarks so illiberal."

Mr. AMES here rose again and said that the gentleman certainly could not mean him.

I mean _that_ gentleman, Mr. SPEAKER, said Mr. DAYTON, pointing to Mr. AMES. He has accused me of "habits of jealousy." To this charge Mr. D. rejoined with some warmth. He again declared that he never would pledge himself to approve of the mission of Mr. Jay, till he should learn what were that gentleman's instructions. He meant to draw this line of distinction, to give approbation of general principles, but not of particular measures. The former he considered as implied in the amendment of Mr. MADISON, the latter in that of Mr. HILLHOUSE.

Mr. VANS MURRAY considered the dispute as resting on the words _a_ policy and _your_ policy. He would not give explicit approbation to particular measures, but he approved the general principles on which the PRESIDENT preferred a pacific system.

Mr. GILES.--It is admitted on all sides of the House, that we approve the general principles, but will not pledge ourselves to approve the particular means. It is best, then, to adopt the least equivocal words. Mr. G. allowed that there was but little difference, yet he should vote for the amendment of Mr. MADISON as it stood.

Mr. DEXTER, in opposition to the sentiments of the gentleman who had last sat down, would vote for "_your_ policy," instead of "_a_ policy." The latter made the sentence an abstract proposition. The words "_your_ policy," made it a personal application. The omission of the word _your_ tended to an implication of censure. If an abstract proposition was the whole meaning intended to be expressed, that meaning might as well be put into any other place as into an Address to the PRESIDENT. He did not see the use of it. Praise (said Mr. D.) is the only reward which a person receives in a Republican Government; or at least, it is the greatest reward; and if withheld where due, the effect must be pernicious. Here it would be of more particular impropriety to withhold praise, when all our constituents approve the pacific policy of the PRESIDENT. It would have been a matter of little consequence at first, whether "_a_ policy" or "_your_ policy" had been adopted, for every reader would have understood it as an approbation of the PRESIDENT. But now, after such a debate, if we scruple at the word _your_, all the world will conclude that we mean an implied censure.

Mr. BOUDINOT said that he adopted the word _your_ as unequivocal. He had no meaning but what was open and candid. By adopting the amendment the House would make that language explicit, which was at present, at least in some degree, ambiguous.

Mr. TRACY pronounced an elegant panegyric on the character and conduct of the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, whom no man admired more sincerely than he did, though he could not speak thus from the honor of enjoying a personal acquaintance. He recommended to Mr. MADISON rather to withdraw his motion of amendment altogether than bring it forward at such an expense of the good temper of the House. The present session had commenced with good auspices, and much cordiality, and he would be extremely sorry to disturb its tranquillity.

Mr. MADISON said that he felt sensibly the force of the remarks made by the gentleman who was last up. In consequence of these remarks, he should be happy to withdraw his amendment. This was accordingly done.

It was then proposed that the Committee of the whole House should rise, and report the draft of the Address as originally given in by the special committee, with the additional amendment that had been proposed by Mr. DAYTON, and adopted.

Mr. FITZSIMONS then rose and said, that it would seem somewhat incongruous for the House to present an Address to the PRESIDENT which omitted all notice of so very important an article in his Speech as that referring to the self-created societies. Mr. F. then read an amendment, which gave rise to a very interesting debate. The amendment was in these words:

"As part of this subject, we cannot withhold our
reprobation of the self-created societies, which have risen
up in some parts of the Union, misrepresenting the conduct
of the Government, and disturbing the operation of the
laws, and which, by deceiving and inflaming the ignorant
and the weak, may naturally be supposed to have stimulated
and urged the insurrection."

These are "institutions, not strictly unlawful, yet not less fatal to good order and true liberty; and reprehensible in the degree that our system of government approaches to perfect political freedom."

Mr. GILES stated at large his sentiments as to this expression in the Speech of the PRESIDENT about self-created societies. The tone of that passage in the Speech had made a great deal of noise without doors, and it was likely to produce a considerable agitation within doors. [Here a motion was made for the rising of the committee.] Mr. G. did not wish to press himself upon the attention of the committee, but if they were disposed to hear him, he was prepared to proceed.

Mr. SEDGWICK objected to the rising of the committee. The House had been often entertained and informed by the ingenuity of that gentleman, who was now prepared to address them.

Mr. W. SMITH considered it as opposite to the practice of the House for a member to move that a committee should rise, at the very time when gentlemen had declared themselves ready to deliver their sentiments.

[It was repeatedly inquired from the Chair, by whom this motion was made. No answer was given and it seemed to be the unanimous wish of the House that Mr. GILES should proceed, which he did.] Mr. G. began by declaring that, when he saw, or thought he saw, the House of Representatives about to erect itself into an office of censorship, he could not sit silent. He did not rise with the hope of making proselytes, but he trusted that the fiat of no person in America should ever be taken for truth, implicitly, and without evidence.

Mr. GILES next entered into an encomium of some length on the public services and personal character of the PRESIDENT. He vindicated himself from any want of respect or esteem towards him. He then entered into an examination of the propriety of the expression employed by the PRESIDENT, with regard to self-created societies. Mr. G. said, that there was not an individual in America, who might not come under the charge of being a member of some one or other self-created society. Associations of this kind, religious, political, and philosophical, were to be found in every quarter of the Continent. The Baptists and Methodists, for example, might be termed self-created societies. The people called the Friends, were of the same kind. Every pulpit in the United States might be included in this vote of censure, since, from every one of them, upon occasion, instructions had been delivered, not only for the eternal welfare, but likewise for the temporal happiness of the people. There had been other societies in Pennsylvania for several purposes. The venerable Franklin had been at the head of one, entitled a society for political information. They had criminated the conduct of the Governor of this State and of the Governors of other States, yet they were not prosecuted or disturbed. There was, if he mistook not, once a society in this State, for the purpose of opposing or subverting the existing constitution. They also were unmolested. If the House are to censure the Democratic societies, they might do the same by the Cincinnati Society. It is out of the way of the Legislature to attempt checking or restraining public opinion. If the self-created societies act contrary to law, they are unprotected, and let the law pursue them. That a man is a member of one of these societies will not protect him from an accusation for treason, if the charge is well founded. If the charge is not well founded, if the societies, in their proceedings, keep within the verge of the law, Mr. G. would be glad to learn what was to be the sequel? If the House undertake to censure particular classes of men, who can tell where they will stop? Perhaps it may be advisable to commence moral philosophers, and compose a new system of ethics for the citizens of America. In that case, there would be many other subjects for censure, as well as the self-created societies. Land-jobbing, for example, has been in various instances brought to such a pass that it might be defined swindling on a broad scale. Paper money, also, would be a subject of very tolerable fertility for the censure of a moralist. Mr. G. proceeded to enumerate other particulars on this head, and again insisted on the sufficiency of the existing laws for the punishment of every existing abuse. He observed, that gentlemen were sent to this House, not for the purpose of passing indiscriminate votes of censure, but to legislate only. By adopting the amendment of Mr. FITZSIMONS, the House would only produce recrimination on the part of the societies, and raise them into much more importance than they possibly could have acquired if they had not been distinguished by a vote of censure from that House. Gentlemen were interfering with a delicate right, and they would be much wiser to let the Democratic societies alone. Did the House imagine that their censure, like the wand of a magician, would lay a spell on these people? It would be quite the contrary, and the recrimination of the societies would develope the propriety of having meddled with them at all. One thing ought never to be forgotten, that if these people acted wrong, the law was open to punish them; and if they did not, they would care very little for a vote of that House. Why all this particular deviation from the common line of business to pass random votes of censure? The American mind was too enlightened to bear the interposition of this House, to assist either in their contemplations or conclusions on this subject. Members are not sent here to deal out applauses or censures in this way. Mr. G. rejected all aiming at a restraint on the opinions of private persons. As to the societies themselves, Mr. G. personally had nothing to do with them, nor was he acquainted with any of the persons concerned in their original organization.