Chapter LXVII: Introduction (66)

He has told the Legislature that he wishes to co-operate, to preserve unimpaired the blessings we enjoy. Does the House believe this? then is it wrong to express their confidence?

He believed, he said, that the efforts made to destroy the character of this first of men, instead of producing the mischief intended, would effect the contrary; and he also expressed his belief that the tide of his popularity at the present moment flowed with unusual strength.

It has been intimated, he observed, that sanctioning the vote of confidence, contemplated in the clause of the Address under consideration, would implicate an approbation of a late measure of the Executive, and would preclude the possibility of a free opinion when that measure might come under the consideration of the House. He declared, upon his honor, that he had no intention that the vote now contemplated should have that effect. He did not conceive, that the vote of undiminished confidence, which he now pressed, involved an approbation of all the measures of the Executive; it did not exclude the idea of fallibility; for what man is infallible? It is only implied, according to his conception, an approbation of the general tenor of the conduct of the Executive. When the House express their confidence in a public officer, they cannot mean that they believe him infallible, but only that his character, grounded on his general conduct, receives their approbation.

If, when the Chief Magistrate is attacked in the manner the PRESIDENT has been attacked, he is left to be overwhelmed with unmerited abuse; what man with talents to be useful, a reputation to be injured, or feelings to be wounded--what man will hazard all to serve an ungrateful country? It will render the station of Chief Magistrate sought only by mercenaries. If confidence is denied to the Executive, it will only create vacancies in the high offices of Government to be filled by those harpies who prey upon the vitals of the State.

Another consideration, he said, should have an influence on this occasion. The fame of the Chief Magistrate's character has filled the whole world; the Americans are particularly distinguished as a people for their uniform attachment towards him. If, at this time of day, they indirectly declare their want of confidence in that man, they will justify the malignant predictions which have been uttered against our system of Government.

These considerations, he said, had weighed on his mind. If the motion for striking out prevailed, he declared it would distress him beyond any circumstance that had occurred to him during his public life, especially at this period, and under the present circumstances of affairs. He should consider the prevalence of this motion as tantamount to a declaration, that the House and their constituents did not feel their confidence in the PRESIDENT unimpaired.

Mr. LIVINGSTON lamented the situation which the drafted Address reduced the House to; but he could not give his assent to it as it stood; he should vote for striking out the word "undiminished," if a question on it should be urged. He did not conceive himself called to a seat in the House to express opinions, much less the opinions of others, but to make laws. He felt so much the delicacy of the situation which the wording of the Address had placed the House in, that he wished the dilemma of a vote might be avoided. The gentleman last up also lamented the situation, and justly observed, that striking out the word was tantamount to a declaration that the confidence reposed in the PRESIDENT was diminished. But he begged to remind him that it was the framers of the Address, and he was one of them, that involved the House in this disagreeable situation.

He declared himself so young in the parliamentary proceedings, as not exactly to know how to avoid a question on the present motion. He declared he was not prepared to say what the opinion of his constituents concerning the PRESIDENT was. The confidence of many of them he knew was shaken; that of others was increased.

He moved, if in order, that the committee should rise, and the Address be recommitted.

This was carried, and Messrs. FREEMAN and BALDWIN added to the committee.

Adjourned.

WEDNESDAY, December 16.

THOMAS CLAIBORNE, from Virginia, appeared, produced his credentials, was qualified, and took his seat.

_Address to the President._

Mr. MADISON, from the committee to whom had been recommitted the draft of the Address in answer to the PRESIDENT's Speech, brought in a report. The clause now added consisted of a modification of the clause objected to yesterday. On motion, the House went into a Committee of the Whole, Mr. MUHLENBERG in the chair. The amendment was unanimously agreed to. Mr. GILES then moved an amendment in the third line of the last paragraph. It was thus: for "the several interesting subjects which you recommended to our consideration will receive every degree of _it_," read of _attention_. The committee then rose, and the House agreed to the report.

It was then moved and agreed to, that the SPEAKER, attended by the House, do present the address, as amended, to the PRESIDENT, and that a committee should be appointed to wait on the PRESIDENT, to know where and when he will be ready to receive the Address of the House.

The same gentlemen, viz: Mr. MADISON, Mr. SEDGWICK, and Mr. SITGREAVES, who had been first appointed to draft the Address, were named for waiting on the PRESIDENT.

The committee that had been appointed to wait on the PRESIDENT, returned with notice that he would be ready to receive their Address, at his own house to-morrow at 12 o'clock.

The House then adjourned.

THURSDAY, December 17.

WADE HAMPTON, from South Carolina, and JOHN HATHORN, from New York, appeared, produced their credentials, were qualified, and took their seats.

_Address to the President._

At twelve o'clock, the SPEAKER, attended by the House, waited upon the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, and delivered to him the following Address, in answer to his Speech to both Houses at the opening of the session:

SIR: As the Representatives of the people of the United
States, we cannot but participate in the strongest
sensibility to every blessing which they enjoy, and
cheerfully join with you in profound gratitude to the
Author of all Good for the numerous and extraordinary
blessings which He has conferred on our favored country.

A final and formal termination of the distressing war which
has ravaged our North-western frontier, will be an event
which must afford satisfaction proportioned to the anxiety
with which it has long been sought; and in the adjustment
of the terms, we perceive the true policy of making them
satisfactory to the Indians as well as to the United
States, as the best basis of a durable tranquillity. The
disposition of such of the Southern tribes as had also
heretofore annoyed our frontier, is another prospect in our
situation so important to the interest and happiness of the
United States, that it is much to be lamented that any
clouds should be thrown over it, more especially by
excesses on the part of our own citizens.

While our population is advancing with a celerity which
exceeds the most sanguine calculations--while every part of
the United States displays indications of rapid and various
improvement--while we are in the enjoyment of protection
and security, by mild and wholesome laws, administered by
Governments founded on the genuine principles of rational
liberty, a secure foundation will be laid for accelerating,
maturing, and establishing the prosperity of our country,
if by treaty and amicable negotiation, all those causes of
external discord which heretofore menaced our tranquillity
shall be extinguished, on terms compatible with our
national rights and honor, with our constitution and great
commercial interests.

Among the various circumstances in our internal situation,
none can be viewed with more satisfaction and exultation,
than that the late scene of disorder and insurrection has
been completely restored to the enjoyment of order and
repose. Such a triumph of reason and of law is worthy of
the free Government under which it happened, and was justly
to be hoped from the enlightened and patriotic spirit which
pervades and actuates the people of the United States.

In contemplating that spectacle of national happiness which
our country exhibits, and of which you, sir, have been
pleased to make an interesting summary, permit us to
acknowledge and declare the very great share which your
zealous and faithful services have contributed to it, and
to express the affectionate attachment which we feel for
your character.

The several interesting subjects which you recommend to our
consideration, will receive every degree of attention which
is due to them. And whilst we feel the obligation of
temperance and mutual indulgence in all our discussions, we
trust and pray that the result to the happiness and welfare
of our country may correspond with the pure affection we
bear to it.

To the foregoing Address, the PRESIDENT was pleased to make the following reply:

GENTLEMEN: Coming as you do from all parts of the United
States, I receive great satisfaction from the concurrence
of your testimony in the justness of the interesting
summary of our national happiness, which, as the result of
my inquiries, I presented to your view. The sentiments we
have mutually expressed of profound gratitude to the source
of these numerous blessings--the Author of all Good--are
pledges of our obligations to unite our sincere and zealous
endeavors, as the instruments of Divine Providence, to
preserve and perpetuate them.

Accept, gentlemen, my thanks for your declaration, that to
my agency you ascribe the enjoyment of a great share of
these benefits. So far as my services contribute to the
happiness of my country, the acknowledgment of my
fellow-citizens, and their affectionate attachment, will
ever prove an abundant reward. G. WASHINGTON.

TUESDAY, December 22.

NATHANIEL SMITH, from Connecticut, appeared, was qualified, and took his seat in the House.

THURSDAY, December 24.

CHRISTOPHER GREENUP, from Kentucky, appeared, was qualified, and took his seat.

MONDAY, December 28.

ANDREW GREGG, from Pennsylvania, appeared, produced his credentials, was qualified, and took his seat.

_Robert Randall--Case of Bribery._

Mr. SMITH, of South Carolina, requested the attention of the House, for a moment, to a subject of a very delicate nature. He understood that a memorial was, this morning, to be presented from some individuals, applying for a grant of a large tract of Western territory, and as the House had referred all such applications to the committee for bringing in the Land Office Bill, of which he was Chairman; and, as it was probable that the memorial, about to be presented, would be disposed of in the same manner, he conceived it a duty incumbent upon him to disclose to the House, at this time, some circumstances which had come to his knowledge. Mr. SMITH then said that, on Tuesday evening last, a person of the name of Randall called on him, requesting an hour of confidential conversation. In the interview which took place, Randall made a communication to the following effect: He intended to present a memorial, on the Monday following, to Congress, for a grant of all the Western lands lying between Lakes Michigan, Erie, and Huron, to the amount of about twenty millions of acres. He, and his associates, some of whom were Canada merchants, who had great influence over the Indians, proposed to form a company, and to undertake the extinction of the Indian title, provided Congress would cede to them the fee-simple of the land. The property would be divided into forty shares, twenty-four of which should be reserved for such members of Congress as might favor the scheme, and might be inclined to come into it, after the adjournment of Congress, on the same terms as the original associates. Randall himself had the disposal of twelve shares, for members from the Southern States, and a colleague of his, a like number for those of the Eastern States. A certain number of shares were to be the property of those Canada merchants, who had an unbounded influence over the Indians occupying those lands, and who would, if this plan succeeded, pacify those Indians, who were the most hostile to the United States; that Gen. Wayne's treaty was a mere delusion, and that, without the co-operation of those influential persons, the United States would never have peace in that quarter. Mr. SMITH said that he communicated this overture, the next morning, to Mr. MURRAY, one of the members from Maryland, requesting his advice how to proceed on so delicate an occasion; that Mr. MURRAY recommended a disclosure to Mr. HENRY, of the Senate, and that, on a consultation with those gentlemen, it was resolved that it was Mr. SMITH's duty to make an immediate communication of the matter to the PRESIDENT, which was accordingly done.

Mr. MURRAY rose next. He had received an application of the same nature, but having already heard of the proposal, "I was," said he, "in a state of preparation, and my virtue had not such a shock to encounter, as that of the gentleman last up." Mr. M. corroborated what Mr. SMITH had said as to the communication of this affair to himself. He added, that he had advised Mr. SMITH to give Randall another meeting, for the purpose of developing his schemes and expectations more fully. Mr. M. said that Mr. SMITH informed him on Wednesday morning; next day, in the morning, he informed Mr. HENRY, of the Senate. Mr. SMITH, on that day, informed the PRESIDENT. On that day (Thursday,) Mr. RANDALL was introduced to him, and asked an interview at his lodging; he gave him an appointment, at five in the afternoon. Mr. HENRY and he were together when Randall came in. Randall talked about the policy of extinguishing the Indian title to the Peninsula formed by Lakes Erie, Huron, and Michigan, containing about eighteen or twenty millions of acres of very good land; and talked in terms that he might have employed from a pulpit. He did not make any corrupt overtures, till Mr. M. had carried him into his own apartment. There Randall opened his proposals, as had been before mentioned by Mr. SMITH, observing that if Congress would sell this land to him and his company, they intended to divide it into forty or forty-one shares. Twenty-four shares were to be appropriated to such members of Congress as chose to support the memorial, which would be presented on Monday. The members were to have their shares upon the same terms on which his company should obtain the land. The Company would give five hundred thousand, or perhaps a million of dollars: but on Mr. M.'s apparent acquiescence in his views, he said that the shares would be given to the members who advocated the measure, if they pleased to accept them, after they returned to their homes. Mr. M. started a difficulty about the embarrassment of land speculations, for which he, personally, had no genius; and then Randall instantly turned out the cat, and told him that if _he_ did not choose the share of land, he should have cash in hand for his share. Mr. SMITH and Mr. MURRAY had resolved to disclose this to the House, lest some innocent member might offer a memorial and become liable to suspicion. Randall had hinted that larger proportions would be assigned to the more active members, and lesser ones for the small fish.

The SPEAKER then rose, and expressed a wish that some gentleman would move for an order to apprehend Randall. Upon this, Mr. SMITH again rose, and said that a warrant to this effect had yesterday been issued by the PRESIDENT, and to support which Mr. S. had made oath before a magistrate to the particulars above mentioned. He hoped that by this time the person was taken.

Mr. GILES next rose, and observed that an application from the same Mr. Randall had been made to himself. Besides a repetition of some particulars already stated, he told Mr. G. that he had already secured thirty or forty members of this House, but he wanted to secure three other members, if Mr. G. recollected right. He added, that he had already secured a majority of the Senate. When this proposal was first made, which Mr. G. thought was about ten days ago, a member from New-York (Mr. LIVINGSTON) was present. Randall had even gone so far as to say, that a written agreement was drawn out, and subscribed by a number of Eastern members, and he wished Mr. G. to extend another obligation of the same kind for the Southern members; the purport of which paper was understood to be, that the members who voted in support of the disposal of the lands, were to be secured in a stipulated share of them, without having their names mentioned in the deed. Mr. G. was solicitous to learn the names of the members who had already entered into the negotiation, but Randall assured him, that, from motives of delicacy, he durst not communicate any of the names. Mr. G. then desired a sight of the agreement, that he might be able to comprehend its meaning, before he should attempt to draw any similar paper. The man called a second time, and, as Mr. G. conceived, about four days ago, but had never produced the deed or any draft of it. Mr. G. had already communicated the proposal to several members, and, in particular, to the SPEAKER.

The SPEAKER (Mr. DAYTON) mentioned, that Mr. GILES had, some time ago, informed him of the proposal. He replied, that if an opportunity offered, he would take care to select a committee consisting of members sure to detect the guilty, if any such could exist; adding that he expected the House to believe that he would not have used such words, but on so extraordinary an occasion.

Mr. CHRISTIE said, that he was the person who had introduced Randall to Mr. SMITH and Mr. MURRAY. He had long known him, as a respectable man. Randall had mentioned to Mr. C. in general, that it was a landed speculation, and hinted that he, Mr. C., might accept of a share. In reply, Mr. C. had assured him that he could not possibly have a concern in any such transaction. Randall had not, to Mr. C., insinuated that any undue advantage would accrue to members supporting the intended purchase.

Mr. BUCK, a member from Vermont, mentioned that a person of the name of Whitney, who appears to have been an associate with Randall, had called upon him in the country with a proposal of this kind.

Mr. MADISON said, that the person referred to had also called upon him, and told him of his having waited upon many members, and, among the rest, upon the SPEAKER. Mr. MADISON said, that the conversation was rather short, owing, perhaps, to the coldness with which the advances of Mr. Randall were received. Mr. MADISON had already learned, through his friend from Virginia (Mr. GILES,) the state in which the business was. He did not wish to alarm the person by too much abruptness, and, at the same time, he did not wish to give himself any unnecessary trouble about it, as he understood that it would be properly managed without his interference.

TUESDAY, December 29.

_Case of Randall and Whitney._

A return was made by Mr. JOSEPH WHEATON, Sergeant-at-Arms to the House of Representatives. Mr. WHEATON stated that, agreeably to the order from the SPEAKER, he had taken into custody the bodies of Robert Randall and Charles Whitney, and kept them at the disposal of the House.

Mr. W. SMITH moved, that a Committee of Privileges, consisting of seven members, should be appointed, and instructed to consider and report with respect to the proper mode of proceeding in this case as to Robert Randall, and that the said committee shall have leave to sit immediately.

It was likewise moved that the name of Charles Whitney should be comprehended in the resolution, because he also was taken into custody. The resolution, as amended, was agreed to. Mr. BALDWIN, Mr. W. SMITH, Mr. MURRAY, Mr. COIT, Mr. GILES, Mr. LIVINGSTON, and Mr. GOODHUE, were named for a committee.

Randall was now brought in, by Mr. WHEATON, Sergeant-at-Arms, and the City Marshal. That part of the journals which refers to his conduct was read to him.

The SPEAKER then interrogated the prisoner, whether these charges were true or false? Randall replied that he was not prepared to answer. He hoped that time would be given him. The SPEAKER asked what time he wanted? He could not positively tell; perhaps till the day after to-morrow.

Mr. W. SMITH was disposed to give him the time required.

Mr. BLOUNT said, that he felt for his own dignity as a member of the House, and for the dignity of the House. To suffer the prisoner to go away from the bar till he had said guilty, or not guilty, when thirty or forty members are positively charged with such conduct, and we suffer the culprit to withdraw, without obliging him to explain, will excite public suspicion that guilt is here.

Randall was then ordered to withdraw, till the discussion should be over.

Mr. RUTHERFORD was for making him say yes or no, directly, as to the guilt. If he wants to have time for pleading any thing in mitigation of his punishment, that is a quite different affair. But the honor of the House was concerned in making him give an immediate answer to the queries now put.

Mr. HILLHOUSE was for bringing Randall forward directly. He ought not to be allowed time to think of an answer.

Mr. HARPER felt as much as any man for the dignity of the House, but this would not induce him to proceed in a hurry. Mr. H. enlarged on the danger of indulging passion on this subject. It would be wrong to force the prisoner to answer unprepared. What if he refuses to answer at all? Confession amounts, in this case, to conviction. He was for granting indulgence.

Mr. VENABLE felt as much as any man for the dignity of the House. At the same time, he felt himself above suspicion, and the House above it. He would not wish to trample on the rights of an individual. He saw no danger that could arise to the House from a short delay. He referred to what Mr. HARPER had said about the hardship of making any man convict himself.

Mr. CLAIBORNE was also against hurrying the prisoner. He recommended that coolness and moderation should distinguish the proceedings of the House.

The question was then put, whether the prisoner should be obliged to answer immediately. Ayes 42, noes 48.

It was then moved, by Mr. W. SMITH, that he should be allowed till twelve o'clock, to-morrow.

Mr. BLOUNT proposed the yeas and nays on the latter question. A member observed that they should rather have been put on the one immediately preceding. The motion was supported only by four or five members. A fifth part of the House are requisite for calling the yeas and nays.

Mr. BLOUNT then laid on the table a long resolution. It was, in substance, that before Randall was recommitted, he should be interrogated as to who were the thirty or forty members that had been gained to the scheme.

Mr. HARPER thought it extraordinary to bring a culprit before the House for contempt of it, and then encourage him to criminate members. He should ever protest against persons being brought to the bar for that purpose. He therefore moved to strike out from the resolution proposed by Mr. BLOUNT, the words: "And if you did, who are the members whom you considered as so secured; and what were your reasons for thinking them so secured?" This was the last clause of an interrogatory which Mr. BLOUNT proposed putting to Randall.

Mr. BLOUNT declared that he had never meant bringing an accuser to the bar, or propounding a question that should bring forth an accusation.

Mr. HARPER replied.

Mr. BLOUNT then modified his resolution, by striking out the exceptionable words; to which Mr. HARPER then agreed.

Mr. MURRAY called upon gentlemen by their sensibility to personal dignity, and the character of the House, to arrest the motion. Its tendency certainly was to place the honor of the House, or of a very great part of it, in the power of a man of whose profligacy of principle there could now be no doubt. Will you, he observed, permit, nay, invite him, whom you arraign at the bar of this House, to be a public accuser? Will you adopt a charge against him, which is in its nature an imputation that however lightly and wickedly made, will implicate perhaps innocent men? These men, to rescue their own reputations, will be obliged to risk their characters, on the weight of their veracity, by denying this man's charge in the face of a world but too prone to suspect. By this motion, Randall's assertion to the gentleman from Virginia, (Mr. GILES,) the only member who has mentioned it, is to be alleged against Randall as an offence. That Randall said to the gentleman that there were thirty or forty members secured, he had no doubt; but he believed the fact to be that Randall was both deceived himself and attempted to deceive the gentleman. Why, said Mr. M., the fellow told me that those thirty members were secured. Mr. M. had not thought proper to state that circumstance, because he did not so much consider it as a fact material to the detection of Randall's guilt, as it was one which, if mentioned, might possibly afford to malice an opportunity of affixing a stigma to any thirty or forty names at which personal enmity might point. No public good could result from such a disclosure; for the assertion of such a man as Randall could not, among men of honor, be deemed a sufficient ground of suspicion; and yet the malice of the world, or the rancor of personal enemies, might attach suspicion and infamy to almost the whole House, from the indefiniteness of the charge. When Randall informed him, on Thursday night, that there were thirty members who would support his measures, he had felt in the very conduct which he then was himself pursuing to detect Randall, to arrest his scheme, a principle of candor towards others, which taught him that other gentlemen to whom Randall had communicated his scheme confidentially, were probably determined as honestly as himself to crush the infamous plot against the honor of the House. He knew that he who would be wicked enough to attempt seduction, might be weak enough to use this intelligence artfully, for the purpose of leading him the more readily to accept terms of infamy; because the object was painted as easily attainable, and that Randall might wish to diminish all qualms, by exhibiting a pretended group of accomplices whose company would at least diminish the appearance of singularity. I entertained, said Mr. M., no suspicion of any man--I knew Randall to be a corrupt man from his offers to myself--I therefore placed all his intelligence to the score of flimsy art: I knew that such a man was not to be fully believed, where his interest was to magnify his success. I drew favorable auspices with respect to the corps to which I belong, from another piece of intelligence of his, which was, that he communicated to some members, one of whom he had named, and whom I knew to be a man of honor, in what he called the _general way_. This general way was a display of the sounder part of his scheme merely, and not the corrupt; consisting in developing the advantages which would result to the Union in the disposal of their lands, provided the harmony of the Indians could be secured. In this view of his plan he gave the subject an attitude far from unimposing; and I conceived that, as in proportion to the numbers engaged confidentially he must know that the hazard of detection increased, he would not communicate the corrupt view as long as he found the more honest part of the policy might appear to strike any gentleman as a measure useful to his country; I therefore did not believe Randall, in the sense he evidently intended; therefore, sir, I did not feel myself at liberty to mention the assertion which I conceived to be unavailing as a circumstance necessary to the example I wished to make, but which, if communicated, I thought might cast a stain, by the mystery that enveloped it, upon a body whose character ought to be held sacred to the confidence of the country. My duty was to bring Randall's attempt to corrupt unequivocally into light, not by repeating all the arts which he excited to corrupt; nor by exhibiting them in a way that might wound the feelings of men of honor, who, if charged even personally by Randall, would have no refuge from odium but in their characters and counter-assertion: this, though always conclusive with those who personally know them, is not a protection to minds of sensibility against the stings of calumny. The voice of fame is not composed from the voice of men of honor.

Mr. HILLHOUSE was convinced that there was not a gentleman in the House, whose character rested on so slender a foundation, as to be affected by any thing that this man could say. He felt no anxiety for the reputation of the House, for he knew that it was not in the smallest danger. The resolution went merely to make Randall confess that he had said so and so. It implied nothing to affect members. A man covered with infamy making such charges could not expect credit, or obtain it from any body. Mr. HILLHOUSE was, for these reasons, in favor of the resolution for interrogating Randall.

The resolution was now read, as follows:

"_Resolved_, That it be made a charge against the said
Robert Randall, that he declared to a member of this House,
that a number consisting of not less than thirty members of
this House had engaged to support his memorial."

Randall was then brought to the bar. The resolution was read to him, and he was informed that he must answer it to-morrow, at 12 o'clock.

A motion for adjourning was then made. Ayes, 26; so it was lost.

It was next moved and agreed, that Whitney should be brought to the bar. The SPEAKER then said, Is this the prisoner? Answered, Yes. What is your name? Charles Whitney. What is your usual place of residence? Vermont. What are you? I was bred to the farming business. Do you know one Robert Randall? Yes. The Clerk will read to you the charge that has occasioned your being brought here. The charge, as stated in the journal of the House, was then read to the prisoner. He was next interrogated by the SPEAKER, as follows: Are you guilty, or not guilty? Not guilty. Are you ready to speak in your defence? I am ready to tell every thing. Are you prepared to do so just now? Yes. Whitney then stated that he was connected with Randall in a plan for the purchase of eighteen or twenty millions of acres of land, lying between the Lakes Erie, Huron, and Michigan. He had come to town on the design of presenting a petition to Congress, but had no knowledge of any improper kind of applications. Randall had several times called upon him at his lodgings, at the Green Tree, in North Fourth street. He considered the scheme to be of probable advantage, and a handsome thing to the United States as well as to the prisoner himself, who repeatedly observed that he would not have engaged in it, but with a view partly to his own interest. He had wished to engage influential characters in the business. He was then asked what associates he had. He answered, Colonel Pepune and Mr. Jones, of the State of Massachusetts; and Mr. Ebenezer Allen, of Vermont. He also, upon a query from the SPEAKER, mentioned the name of another person, which was not distinctly heard. He was asked if the partners meant to divide the land into forty shares. He answered forty-one; but this was only in speculation. They had only a rough idea of the extent of the land, which was inhabited by the Wyandots, and was of a very good soil. The land was to be divided among the proprietors. The prisoner knew, in general, from Randall, that he called on Mr. SMITH, and other members; but was not privy to, nor suspected any unbecoming overtures. He was then asked the names of the associates at Detroit. He mentioned Mr. Erskine, Mr. Robertson, Mr. Innes, Mr. Pattison, and Mr. Erskine, junior. He said that some of them were Indian traders, to a considerable extent. He had called at Mr. BUCK's, of Vermont, (a member of the House,) as he was riding by his house. He knew him to be a gentleman of character whose name would add credit to the business. He had told him that there were several other persons intending to be concerned, and that, if it was consistent with his situation as a member of Congress, he would be glad to have him engaged, but at the same time carefully noticed that this proposal was conditionally made, and only if it was proper. He was asked what Mr. Erskine was. He is called Judge Erskine, but whether he is now a judge, or only was one in some other part of the country, at a former period, the prisoner cannot tell. You say that you came to Philadelphia about a month ago. Why were you so long in presenting your petition? He had a bad cold, and had been sick, and wanted to make a personal explanation to the members before bringing the affair before the House. Have you got any new associates in this city? None. Mr. LIVINGSTON then proposed a question, Whether any of the shares had been left unappropriated by your associates and you? Answer: It was at his own option to dispose of shares as he pleased. He was asked if he could produce any written agreement between himself and his associates. He believed that he could, and that it would do him no harm to do so. It was at the Green Tree. But, as a matter of candor, he requested time to consider whether the production of it could hurt him or not. This ended the examination.

Mr. W. SMITH then made a motion, consisting of three points, that Whitney should be ordered to re-appear at the bar, at twelve o'clock, to-morrow; that he should be ordered to produce the bond; and that, till to-morrow, he should be remanded to the custody of the City Marshal. It was likewise recommended that, till to-morrow, the two prisoners be kept in separate apartments.

Mr. GOODHUE requested that Whitney might be ordered to withdraw; which was done. He then related that the prisoner had made an application to him at different times. Mr. GOODHUE told him that he knew very little of the Western country; he had always lived on the sea-coast, and land jobbing was quite out of his line. Whitney did not make any corrupt proposals to him. He believed that it was because he was very averse to wasting time in speaking at all on the matter.

Mr. SEDGWICK said that, as no direct charge of corruption had been made against Whitney, he apprehended it would be improper to detain him as a prisoner. It might be considered as a wanton act of arbitrary power.

Mr. BUCK then rose, and said that he had not yesterday told the whole of what passed between him and Whitney. Mr. BUCK had received offers plain enough to be understood. He might either have land, or money in lieu of it.

Mr. SEDGWICK said, that he had now no opposition to the resolutions; which were carried.

WEDNESDAY, December 30.

JOHN PAGE, from Virginia, appeared, was qualified, and took his seat.

_Case of Randall and Whitney._

Mr. W. SMITH moved an amendment of the journal to this effect, that the said Charles Whitney had made overtures to Mr. BUCK, to this purpose, that he should have a share in the lands to be purchased, or in money.

Mr. NICHOLAS objected to the motion. The reading of the journal was called for. It was read.

Mr. SEDGWICK said, that the original charge against the man was complete and full. He thought the amendment unnecessary.

A petition was then presented from Randall requesting that he might be indulged with a reasonable time to make his defence, and with counsel.

Mr. W. SMITH was very ready to allow the prisoner counsel for his defence, but, in so doing, he wished it to be understood, not as a matter of right but of favor. He was apprehensive that gentlemen in proceeding from one step to another, would at last reason away the privileges of the House altogether. His friend from Massachusetts (Mr. SEDGWICK) had quoted the clause of the constitution which gave a right to have counsel in all trials for crimes; but it did not apply to this case, any more than the clause which immediately followed it, declaring that all trials for crimes should be by a jury of the vicinage, and after presentment by a grand jury. The present inquiry was of a special and peculiar nature, resulting from the rights and privileges which belonged to every Legislative institution, and without which such institution could not exist. As every jurisdiction had certain powers necessary for its preservation, so the Legislature possessed certain privileges incident to its nature, and essential for its very existence. This is called in England the parliamentary law; and as from that law are derived the usages and proceedings of the several State Legislatures, so will the proceedings of this House be generally guided by the long-established usages of the State Legislatures. There would be a manifest absurdity in conforming the proceedings in this case to the ordinary proceedings at law in jury trials, for the House, instead of being able to protect itself, would be altogether dependent on the other branches of the Government, and in every case of aggression be obliged to send the offenders to the civil magistrate. If there was any weight in such reasoning as had been heard, then the House would have to tread back all the unconstitutional steps they had been taking, and to discharge, without delay, both the prisoners; for the arrest by the Sergeant-at-Arms, under the SPEAKER's warrant, was only justifiable on the ground he had mentioned, namely, the inherent and indispensable power of self-preservation. That the House possessed power to arrest had not been denied; but the power of commitment was incident to that of arrest, and if it possessed both these high powers, it must of consequence possess the necessary incident of trial or inquiry, in regulating which the House was only to be governed by its own wisdom and discretion. On this occasion Mr. S. said he felt, as he trusted every member did, a proper respect for the rights of individuals brought to the bar, as well as for those of the House, and he hoped that their conduct would be marked with discretion and temper; but, willing as he was to grant the prayer of the petitioner, he could not suffer the argument which had been relied on, to pass unanswered. This was the first instance, since the organization of this Government, in which it had been found necessary to resort to this high prerogative; it was right, therefore, that the principles on which it was founded should be well understood, and that the privileges of the House should stand unimpaired.

Mr. SEDGWICK moved that the prayer of the petition should be granted, and that Randall be allowed till to-morrow, to be heard at the bar.

The petition was again read.

Mr. CHRISTIE had known Randall for many years, and had never heard of any thing against him before. He had lately been at Detroit, and Mr. C. believed that he had been injured by keeping bad company. He was not the first man in the country who had been corrupted by British influence and British company. He moved that Randall should be allowed till to-morrow at twelve o'clock. This was negatived.

The SPEAKER then said, that, if agreeable to the House, he would send for Randall, and inquire what time he wanted. This was done; Randall came in, and asked till Saturday, but as the House does not sit on Saturday, Friday was appointed.

The bond or agreement between the intended purchasers of the land was then read. It was dated at Detroit, the 26th of September last. Allen, Whitney, and Randall, were to have the disposal of 36 shares out of 41.

THURSDAY, December 31.

RICHARD WINN, from South Carolina, appeared, was qualified, and took his seat.

_Case of Randall and Whitney._

Mr. BALDWIN, the chairman of the Committee of Privileges, reported, in part, on the subject of the further proceedings to be had in the case of R. Randall and C. Whitney, in substance as follows:

1. That a further hearing of R. Randall should be held at the bar; that the information given by members against the said Randall be reduced to writing, signed by the informants respectively, and entered at large on the journals; that the said information should be read to the prisoner, and he be asked by the SPEAKER what he had to say in his defence. If the prisoner should desire to produce any parole evidence to exculpate himself, the same shall be heard at the bar, and the Judge of the District of Pennsylvania be requested to attend to administer an oath or affirmation to the witnesses on the part of the prisoner; that the SPEAKER shall put all questions to the witnesses. When any debate should arise, that the prisoner and his counsel be directed to withdraw; and, when he has concluded his defence and withdrawn, that the sense of the House be taken on the guilt or innocence of the prisoners, respectively.

Mr. MADISON was of opinion that no citizen can be punished without the solemnity of an oath to the fact. Of consequence, it is needful to the information of members, if the punishment of a fellow-citizen is implicated. Perhaps it may be urged that members, having taken an oath to support the constitution, this supersedes the necessity of an oath in the present case.

Mr. GALLATIN thought it reasonable that members should be liable to be questioned upon oath. That there was no precedent for it, had little weight. There are many absurdities in the law of nations which gentlemen would not wish to introduce here.

Mr. SWIFT was against the members being subject to this regulation. The case was quite novel to him. But this was, at first view, his way of thinking. Suppose that some person in the gallery were to commit an insult on the House, before the whole members, would it be necessary that they should all swear to the offence before proceeding to punish it? This Mr. S. regarded as a parallel case.

Mr. THATCHER made a distinction when an offence had been committed in presence of the whole House, and when committed out of their view. In the former case, there could not be any use for evidence being sworn, because the whole House had the testimony of their senses. It was different when the circumstances occurred in another place; and Mr. T. was convinced that the charge ought to be sworn to. The passage under amendment was in these words: "That it should be reduced to writing;" and the dispute was about adding the words, "and sworn to." Mr. T., though for examining the members on oath as to the charge against Randall, was opposed to the amendment as useless, because the members must, in his opinion, be sworn when Randall is brought to the bar. The mere declaration of a prosecutor, not under oath, and of a defendant in the same situation, is equally exceptionable. A phrase had been repeatedly used which Mr. T. did not understand. It was said that a member was entitled "to stand up in his place" and give information so and so. With the meaning of this expression Mr. T. was unacquainted, nor did he know any law which authorized the imprisonment of a fellow-citizen on a mere charge unsupported by oath. He did not see the use of the amendment, but he was clearly satisfied that members ought to be examined and sworn touching their accusations, as well as any other persons.

Mr. NICHOLAS was not, in this instance, for departing from the principles of common law. Instead of supporting the dignity of the House, about which so much has been spoken, he was afraid that, by arrogating too much on the side of privilege, they might lessen their dignity. He declared, upon his honor, that he thought the gentlemen concerned should, for their own sakes, insist on being cross-examined by the prisoner and his counsel. To be cross-examined implies no reflection on a witness. The imperfection of human nature requires such a precaution, and were Mr. N. a party, he would insist on being cross-examined. The proposed amendment would narrow the business too much. It would be better to lay it aside, and let the members be, as above proposed, subject to cross-examination from the prisoner.

Mr. MADISON said, that when Randall came to the bar he would possibly save all this trouble, by confessing his guilt, and casting himself on the mercy of the House. He mentioned an anecdote of a judge who had been publicly insulted. He informed his brethren of the bench, and, on his complaint, the offender was apprehended. When he was brought before the court the oath was administered to the judge. Mr. M. related this story to show the propriety of every accusation being sworn to, whatever may be the rank or situation of the accuser.

MONDAY, January 4.

_Presentation of the Flag of France._

The SPEAKER informed the House, that a Message was ready to be delivered to the House, of a nature calculated to give the most pleasing satisfaction to every American breast. He suggested to the House, and the citizens in the galleries, the propriety of not suffering the fervor of enthusiasm to infringe on the dignity of the Representative Councils of the United States. He recommended that a respectful silence should be observed, as most compatible with the true dignity of the House, and the honor of the magnanimous Republic that was the subject of the Message.

The PRESIDENT's Secretary was then introduced, with an American officer bearing the Standard of the French Republic,[62] sent by the Committee of Public Safety, Organ of the National Convention, as a token of friendship to the United States. The Secretary presented a Message in writing from the PRESIDENT, with sundry papers accompanying it, to the SPEAKER, by whom they were read as follows:

_Gentlemen of the Senate, and of the House of
Representatives:_

A letter from the Minister Plenipotentiary of the French
Republic, received on the 22d of the last month, covered an
Address, dated the 21st of October, 1794, from the
Committee of Public Safety to the Representatives of the
United States in Congress; and also informed me that he was
instructed by the committee to present to the United States
the Colors of France. I therefore proposed to receive them
last Friday, the first day of the new year, a day of
general joy and congratulation. On that day the Minister of
the French Republic delivered the Colors, with an Address,
to which I returned an answer. By the latter, the House
will see that I have informed the Minister that the Colors
will be deposited with the archives of the United States.
But it seemed to me proper previously to exhibit to the two
Houses of Congress these evidences of the continued
friendship of the French Republic, together with the
sentiments expressed by me on the occasion in behalf of the
United States. They are herewith communicated.

G. WASHINGTON.

UNITED STATES, _January 4, 1796_.

[TRANSLATION.]

The Representatives of the French People, composing the
Committee of Public Safety of the National Convention,
charged by the laws of the 7th Fructidor, with the
direction of Foreign Relations, to the Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled:

_Citizens Representatives:_ The connections which nature,
reciprocal events, and a happy concurrence of
circumstances, have formed between two free nations, cannot
but be indissoluble. You have strengthened those sacred
ties by the declarations, which the Minister
Plenipotentiary of the United States has made, in your
name, to the National Convention, and to the French people.
They have been received with rapture by a nation who know
how to appreciate every testimony which the United States
have given to them of their affection. The Colors of both
nations, united in the centre of the National Convention,
will be an everlasting evidence of the part which the
United States have taken in the success of the French
Republic.

You were the first defenders of the rights of man in
another hemisphere. Strengthened by your example, and
endowed with an invincible energy, the French people have
vanquished that tyranny, which, during so many centuries of
ignorance, superstition, and baseness, had enchained a
generous nation.

Soon did the people of the United States perceive that
every victory of ours strengthened their independence and
happiness. They were deeply affected at our momentary
misfortunes, occasioned by treasons purchased by English
gold. They have celebrated with rapture the successes of
our brave armies.

None of these sympathetic emotions have escaped the
sensibility of the French nation. They have all served to
cement the most intimate and solid union that has ever
existed between two nations.

The citizen ADET, who will reside near your Government in
quality of Minister Plenipotentiary of the French Republic,
is specially instructed to tighten these bands of
fraternity and mutual benevolence. We hope that he may
fulfil this principal object of his mission, by a conduct
worthy of the confidence of both nations, and of the
reputation which his patriotism and virtues have acquired
him.

An analogy of political principles; the natural relations
of commerce and industry; the efforts and immense
sacrifices of both nations in the defence of liberty and
equality; the blood which they have spilled together; their
avowed hatred for despots; the moderation of their
political views; the disinterestedness of their councils;
and especially, the success of the vows which they have
made in presence of the Supreme Being, to be free or die;
all combine to render indestructible the connections which
they have formed.

Doubt it not, citizens, we shall finally destroy the
combination of tyrants. You, by the picture of prosperity,
which, in your vast countries, has succeeded to a bloody
struggle of eight years; we, by the enthusiasm which glows
in the breast of every Frenchman. Astonished nations, too
long the dupes of perfidious Kings, Nobles, and Priests,
will eventually recover their rights, and the human race
will owe to the American and French nations their
regeneration and a lasting peace.

Paris, 30th Vindemaire, 3d year of the French Republic, one
and indivisible.

The Members of the Committee of Public Safety.

J. S. B. DELMAS,
MERLIN (of Douai) &c.

OCTOBER 21, 1794.

* * * * *

[TRANSLATION.]

_Mr. President:_ I come to acquit myself of a duty very
dear to my heart; I come to deposit in your hands and in
the midst of a people justly renowned for their courage and
their love of liberty, the symbol of the triumphs and of
the enfranchisement of my nation.

When she broke her chains; when she proclaimed the
imprescriptible rights of man; when, in a terrible war, she
sealed with her blood the covenant she had made with
Liberty, her own happiness was not alone the object of her
glorious efforts; her views extended also to all free
people. She saw their interests blended with her own, and
doubly rejoiced in her victories, which, in assuring to her
the enjoyment of her rights, became to them new guarantees
of their independence.

These sentiments which animated the French nation from the
dawn of their revolution, have acquired new strength since
the foundation of the Republic. France, at that time, by
the form of its Government, assimilated to, or rather
identified with, free people, saw in them only friends and
brothers. Long accustomed to regard the American people as
her most faithful allies, she has sought to draw closer the
ties already formed in the fields of America, under the
auspices of victory, over the ruins of tyranny.

The National Convention, the organ of the will of the
French nation, have more than once expressed their
sentiments to the American people; but above all, these
burst forth on that august day, when the Minister of the
United States presented to the National Representation the
Colors of his country. Desiring never to lose recollections
as dear to Frenchmen as they must be to Americans, the
Convention ordered that these Colors should be placed in
the hall of their sittings. They had experienced sensations
too agreeable not to cause them to be partaken of by their
allies, and decreed that, to them, the National Colors
should be presented.