Chapter IV: Front Matter (4)
As to the words "freest and most enlightened," which were more immediately the subject of discussion, he did not object against them on the ground of fact, but he considered the expression as resolving itself into a question of decorum and delicacy, the rules of which appeared to him to be violated, in their ascribing to themselves such a superlative preference, however true, in a comparison with every other people. The amendment of the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. CHRISTIE) very much softened the terms and rendered them more palatable.
Mr. KITCHELL thought we had given a very good proof that we are not the most enlightened people in the world, by this discussion; and if we declare to the world that we are, that declaration will be a still more glaring proof. It appeared to him quite unnecessary; he thought it spending a great deal of time to no purpose; it was not important enough for that waste of time, when the session was to be so short; he therefore wished the question to be put.
Mr. SITGREAVES agreed that a very useless and improper latitude had been assumed in the discussion, and he thought that a few moments would not be misspent in recalling the attention of the committee to the real question before them. The assertion that we are the freest and most enlightened nation in the world was found fault with, and while some gentlemen moved to strike it out altogether, others proposed to qualify it in different ways. Mr. S. believed that, in any modification of the expression, the criticism was, in itself, extremely unimportant; and if, as some gentlemen had treated it, it was a mere question of decorum, he should feel perfectly indifferent whether it was rejected or retained. But when he heard one member deny that we are the most free, and another that we are enlightened; and most especially when he heard that the expression was contended to be improper in relation to the acts and the administration of the Government, he confessed it did appear to him to be of some consequence not to part with the expression, lest, by doing so, the House should give countenance to these objections. For his own part, he believed the proposition to be true; he conceived the word "enlightened," as applicable to political illumination; and not to our rank in arts, sciences, or literature; and he considered the sentence as equivalent to an assertion that we enjoy the most enlightened system of political freedom extant. In this view of it, he thought it literally true; and, if true, he could not discern the indecorum of declaring so on the present occasion. He was strongly impressed with the propriety of the idea which he had suggested yesterday, that this should be considered as an act of intercourse purely domestic, an expression of self-gratulation on our superior happiness, which, by the forms of society, ought not to be noticed by any other nation. We may be deemed, without too bold a figure, to be speaking in soliloquy; and to listen to what we say would be no better than eavesdropping: the indecorum would rest with those who overhear us, and not with ourselves. It could not be denied that such a belief of the superiority of our political situation ought to be cherished among us. If we did not believe it, we should take shame to ourselves, because our Government is the work of our own hands. If the belief that we are free and enlightened is valuable, the expression of it is also valuable, because it tends to preserve us so; it is a sentiment which we cannot dwell upon too much.
But, he contended, the propriety of this or any other expression could not be justly estimated by considering it in the abstract--it ought to be viewed in its application and use. We are about to lose the services of the PRESIDENT, who is admitted on all hands to have been a useful and patriotic officer. The House of Representatives are desirous that he should take with him to his honorable retirement the only reward which the nature and spirit of our political institutions admit of--the approbation of his country. It will surely be admitted that we ought to give to the expression of this approbation all the value of which it is susceptible; and it is obvious, from the slightest perusal of this paragraph in the Address, that the words in question give to it all its force and energy, and that without them, it would be an unmeaning compliment. The spectacle of a nation, neither free nor enlightened, offering to its first Magistrate the tribute of approbation and applause, would neither be "novel nor interesting," since the days of history are stained with numberless instances of prostituted praise and courtly adulation; but when it is the voluntary homage of a free and enlightened people, offered with sincerity to an illustrious fellow-citizen, it is truly a precious reward for patriotic labors. Those who object to this expression, therefore, ought to move to strike out the whole paragraph. To reject the words would totally defeat the intended compliment; to qualify them would spoil it. Mr. S., therefore, wished to retain them as they were reported.
Mr. THATCHER said, he did not think the object of the present question of much consequence, nor did he care much about it; however, he would wish to see the members more unanimous on the subject; he would, therefore, propose an amendment, which he thought would have some tendency towards it, which was to leave out the superlative, and let the passage read, "The spectacle of a free and enlightened nation."
Mr. HENDERSON commended the ingenuity of the last motion, as he thought it would more concentrate the ideas of the members. He would vote for it.
Mr. CHRISTIE's motion was then put, and negatived.
Mr. THATCHER's motion was put, and passed in the affirmative.
Mr. LIVINGSTON then moved to strike out the words from the next paragraph, "Wise, firm, and patriotic Administration," and insert in their place, "Your wisdom, firmness, and patriotism has been." He could not say that all the acts of the Administration had been wise and firm; but he would say, that he believed the wisdom, firmness, and patriotism of the PRESIDENT had been signally conducive to the success of the present form of government. He was willing to give him every mark of respect possible, but he believed some of his public acts of late rendered the present motion necessary.
Mr. W. SMITH opposed the amendment, as he thought the gentleman who proposed it conceived the words to imply more than was meant by them--they are not meant to include every act of the Executive. He thought that the Administration in general had been wise, firm, and patriotic; that the wisdom and firmness of the PRESIDENT had been conducive to the success of the present form of government. Had not the words been put in the reported Address, he thought it would not have been of consequence whether they were ever inserted; but the difference is very great. Now they are inserted, they are made public, and, to erase them now, and substitute words in any manner deficient in sentiment to them, would be to carry censure and not respect. That the Administration of that valuable man had been wise and conducive to the good of this country, will not admit of a doubt; and for us to rob him of that honor which is his due, would be insult. And any thing short of the words in the Address he thought would not carry a proper mark of respect.
Mr. GILES observed, that he thought the Administration had been very deficient in wisdom. Many gentlemen, he said, were very particularly opposed to the British Treaty and to the great emission of transferable paper. Could it then be supposed these gentlemen could, in this instance, so change their opinion? The gentleman last up had said, that because the words were in the reported Address they ought not to be struck out. He thought that the House had now as much power to act as though the committee had made no report. He thought they ought not in any way to be influenced by the report of the select committee, but act as though they had to form the Address themselves. He believed that the PRESIDENT possessed both wisdom and firmness. He was willing to compliment the PRESIDENT as much as possible in his personal character, but he could not think it applicable to his Administration. He thought the amendment proposed would meet his concurrence, and he hoped it would be agreed to.
Mr. GILBERT hoped and presumed that the motion of his colleague would not obtain. He understood that the House addressed the PRESIDENT in answer to his Speech, always as a public man, and not in his private capacity. How extraordinary, then, will it appear in this House to refer only to his private conduct! It is, in substance, complimenting him as a private man, while the very words reprobate him in his public station. We are now to address him as PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. We may tell him of his wisdom and his firmness, but what of all that unless we connect it with his Administration?
Mr. ISAAC SMITH.--The sin of ingratitude is worse than the sin of witchcraft; and we shall damn ourselves to everlasting fame if we withhold the mighty tribute due to the excellent man whom we pretend to address. Posterity, throughout all future generations, will cry out shame on us. Our sons will blush that their fathers were his foes. If excess were possible on this occasion, it would be a glorious fault, and worth a dozen of little, sneaking, frigid virtues. I abhor a grudging bankrupt payment, where the debtor is much more benefited than the creditor. The gentleman from Virginia misrepresents his own constituents--I am sure he does all the rest of the Union. On the present occasion we ought not to consult our own little feelings and sensibilities. We should speak with the heart and in the voice of millions, and then we should speak warm and loud. What! "Damn with faint praise:" and suppress or freeze the warm, energetic, grateful sensations of almost every honest heart from Maine to Tennessee! I will not do it! Every line shall burn! This is a left-handed way of adoring the people.
Mr. DAYTON (the Speaker) said, the motion then before them was of great importance, and every man who thought favorably of the PRESIDENT's Administration should there make a stand. For, if the words were struck out, it would convey an idea to the world that it was the opinion of that House that the Administration of the PRESIDENT had neither been wise nor patriotic. Gentlemen might very well concur in the Address in its present form, who did not think that every single act of the PRESIDENT had been wise and firm, since it was his Administration in general which was referred to, and not each individual act. He hoped, therefore, the amendment offered would be decidedly opposed, and that the words proposed to be struck out would be retained.
Mr. GALLATIN thought the words objected to were conceived to mean more than they really did mean by gentlemen who supported the present motion; nor could he conceive how the words "firmness and patriotism," proposed to be inserted, could apply to any thing but the public character of the PRESIDENT. On the first view of the Address, Mr. G. said, he thought with the gentlemen from New York and Virginia, and it was not without considerable hesitation that he brought himself to agree to this part of the Address. He found, however, on further examination, that they did not go so far as he at first thought they did. Had they approved of every measure of the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, he should have voted against them. But, in the first place, he would observe, that his Administration did not include Legislative acts; so that whatever evils had arisen from the funding or banking systems were not to be charged to the PRESIDENT. They did not mean to pay compliments to themselves but to the PRESIDENT: therefore, the words in question related only to the Administration of the PRESIDENT alone, and not to those officers of State which had been supposed by some gentlemen. The first question was, then, whether that Administration had been marked with wisdom, firmness, and patriotism? And, he would briefly say, so far as related to the internal situation of the country, it had borne these marks. He did not recollect any instance where he could say here was any want of wisdom, or there of firmness or patriotism. If they proceeded to foreign affairs, a great number of members were found (he for one) who wished that certain acts had not taken place; and, if he thought, in giving approbation to this Address, he was approving of these measures, he would certainly vote against it. But, as the gentlemen from South Carolina and New Jersey (Mr. SMITH and the SPEAKER) had observed, as the approbation went to the Administration in toto, it had respect to no particular act. Nor did he believe the literal sense of the words would apply to the business of the late treaty. [He read the words.] The most clear meaning of these words related to the present Government and constitution; and the word "success" could apply to those parts of the Administration only which had had time to be matured. He did not believe that at the present period it could be said that the Treaty with Great Britain had been successful, and, therefore, could not be included within the meaning of the expression. Not meaning to pledge an approbation of that act, and not conceiving that the sentence could have such a meaning, he would vote against the proposed amendment, and for the original.
The question was put on the amendment and negatived. The committee then rose, reported the Address with the amendments, when the House took them up, and having gone through them--
On the question being about to be put on the answer as amended, Mr. BLOUNT wished the yeas and nays might be taken, that posterity might see that he did not consent to the Address.
The main question being put, it was resolved in the affirmative--yeas 67, nays 12, as follows:
YEAS.--Fisher Ames, Theodorus Bailey, Abraham Baldwin,
David Bard, Theophilus Bradbury, Nathan Bryan, Gabriel
Christie, Thomas Claiborne, John Clopton, Joshua Coit,
William Cooper, William Craik, James Davenport, Henry
Dearborn, George Dent, George Ege, Abiel Foster, Dwight
Foster, Jesse Franklin, Nathaniel Freeman, jr., Albert
Gallatin, Ezekiel Gilbert, James Gillespie, Nicholas
Gilman, Henry Glenn, Chauncey Goodrich, Andrew Gregg, Roger
Griswold, William B. Grove, Robert Goodloe Harper, Carter
B. Harrison, Thomas Hartley, Jonathan N. Havens, John
Heath, Thomas Henderson, William Hindman, George Jackson,
Aaron Kitchell, Samuel Lyman, James Madison, Francis
Malbone, Andrew Moore, Frederick A. Muhlenberg, John
Nicholas, John Page, Josiah Parker, John Patton, John Read,
John Richards, Samuel Sewall, John S. Sherburne, Samuel
Sitgreaves, Nathaniel Smith, Israel Smith, Isaac Smith,
William Smith, Richard Sprigg, jr., William Strudwick, John
Swanwick, Zephaniah Swift, George Thatcher, Mark Thompson,
John E. Van Allen, Philip Van Cortlandt, Joseph B. Varnum,
Peleg Wadsworth, and John Williams.
NAYS.--Thomas Blount, Isaac Coles, William B. Giles,
Christopher Greenup, James Holland, Andrew Jackson, Edward
Livingston, Matthew Locke, William Lyman, Samuel Maclay,
Nathaniel Macon, and Abraham Venable.
_Resolved_, That the SPEAKER, attended by the House, do present the said Address; and that Mr. AMES, Mr. MADISON, and Mr. SITGREAVES, be a committee to wait on the PRESIDENT to know when and where it will be convenient for him to receive the same.
FRIDAY, December 16.
Mr. AMES, from the committee appointed to wait on the PRESIDENT to know when and where he would receive the answer of this House to his Address, reported that he had appointed to receive it at his house this day at two o'clock.
_Address to the President._
The SPEAKER informed the House that the hour was nearly at hand, which the PRESIDENT had appointed for receiving the Address of the House, in answer to his Speech. The members, in a body, accordingly waited upon the PRESIDENT, at his house; and the SPEAKER pronounced the following Address:
"SIR: The House of Representatives have attended to your
communication respecting the state of our country, with all
the sensibility that the contemplation of the subject and a
sense of duty can inspire.
"We are gratified by the information, that measures
calculated to ensure a continuance of the friendship of the
Indians, and to maintain the tranquillity of the Western
frontier, have been adopted; and we indulge the hope that
these, by impressing the Indian tribes with more correct
conceptions of the justice, as well as power of the United
States, will be attended with success.
"While we notice, with satisfaction, the steps that you
have taken, in pursuance of the late treaties with several
foreign nations, the liberation of our citizens, who were
prisoners at Algiers, is a subject of peculiar
felicitation. We shall cheerfully co-operate in any further
measures that shall appear, on consideration, to be
requisite.
"We have ever concurred with you in the most sincere and
uniform disposition to preserve our neutral relations
inviolate; and it is, of course, with anxiety and deep
regret we hear that any interruption of our harmony with
the French Republic has occurred; for we feel with you, and
with our constituents, the cordial and unabated wish to
maintain a perfectly friendly understanding with that
nation. Your endeavors to fulfil that wish, and by all
honorable means to preserve peace and to restore that
harmony and affection, which have heretofore so happily
subsisted between the French Republic and the United
States, cannot fail, therefore, to interest our attention.
And while we participate in the full reliance you have
expressed on the patriotism, self-respect, and fortitude of
our countrymen, we cherish the pleasing hope that a mutual
spirit of justice and moderation will ensure the success of
your perseverance.
"The various subjects of your communication will,
respectively, meet with the attention that is due to their
importance.
"When we advert to the internal situation of the United
States, we deem it equally natural and becoming to compare
the present period with that immediately antecedent to the
operation of the Government, and to contrast it with the
calamities in which the state of war still involves several
of the European nations, as the reflections deduced from
both tend to justify as well as to excite a warmer
admiration of our free constitution, and to exalt our minds
to a more fervent and grateful sense of piety towards
Almighty God for the beneficence of His providence, by
which its Administration has been hitherto so remarkably
distinguished.
"And while we entertain a grateful conviction that your
wise, firm, and patriotic Administration has been signally
conducive to the success of the present form of government,
we cannot forbear to express the deep sensations of regret
with which we contemplate your intended retirement from
office.
"As no other suitable occasion may occur, we cannot suffer
the present to pass without attempting to disclose some of
the emotions which it cannot fail to awaken.
"The gratitude and admiration of your countrymen are still
drawn to the recollection of those resplendent virtues and
talents which were so eminently instrumental to the
achievement of the Revolution, and of which that glorious
event will ever be the memorial. Your obedience to the
voice of duty and your country, when you quitted
reluctantly, a second time, the retreat you had chosen, and
first accepted the Presidency, afforded a new proof of the
devotedness of your zeal in its service, and an earnest of
the patriotism and success which have characterized your
Administration. As the grateful confidence of the citizens
in the virtues of their Chief Magistrate has essentially
contributed to that success, we persuade ourselves that the
millions whom we represent, participate with us in the
anxious solicitude of the present occasion.
"Yet we cannot be unmindful that your moderation and
magnanimity, twice displayed by retiring from your exalted
stations, afford examples no less rare and instructive to
mankind, than valuable to a Republic.
"Although we are sensible that this event, of itself,
completes the lustre of a character already conspicuously
unrivalled by the coincidence of virtue, talents, success,
and public estimation; yet we conceive we owe it to you,
sir, and still more emphatically to ourselves and to our
nation, (of the language of whose hearts we presume to
think ourselves at this moment the faithful interpreters,)
to express the sentiments with which it is contemplated.
"The spectacle of a free and enlightened nation offering,
by its Representatives, the tribute of unfeigned
approbation to its first citizen, however novel and
interesting it may be, derives all its lustre (a lustre
which accident or enthusiasm could not bestow, and which
adulation would tarnish) from the transcendent merit of
which it is the voluntary testimony.
"May you long enjoy that liberty which is so dear to you,
and to which your name will ever be so dear; may your own
virtues and a nation's prayers obtain the happiest sunshine
for the decline of your days and the choicest of future
blessings. For our country's sake, for the sake of
Republican liberty, it is our earnest wish that your
example may be the guide of your successors; and thus,
after being the ornament and safeguard of the present age,
become the patrimony of our descendants."
To which the PRESIDENT made the following Reply:
"GENTLEMEN: To a citizen whose views were unambitious, who
preferred the shade and tranquillity of private life, to
the splendor and solicitude of elevated stations, and whom
the voice of duty and his country could alone have drawn
from his chosen retreat, no reward for his public services
can be so grateful as public approbation, accompanied by a
consciousness that to render those services useful to that
country has been his single aim: and when this approbation
is expressed by the Representatives of a free and enlighted
nation, the reward will admit of no addition. Receive,
gentlemen, my sincere and affectionate thanks for this
signal testimony that my services have been acceptable and
useful to my country. The strong confidence of my
fellow-citizens, while it animated all my actions, ensured
their zealous co-operation, which rendered those services
successful. The virtue and wisdom of my successors, joined
with the patriotism and intelligence of the citizens who
compose the other branches of Government, I firmly trust,
will lead them to the adoption of measures which, by the
beneficence of Providence, will give stability to our
system of Government, add to its success, and secure to
ourselves and to posterity that liberty which is to all of
us so dear.
"While I acknowledge, with pleasure, the sincere and
uniform disposition of the House of Representatives to
preserve our neutral relations inviolate, and, with them,
deeply regret any degree of interruption of our good
understanding with the French Republic, I beg you,
gentlemen, to rest assured that my endeavors will be
earnest and unceasing, by all honorable means, to preserve
peace, and to restore that harmony and affection which have
heretofore so happily subsisted between our two nations;
and with you, I cherish the pleasing hope that a mutual
spirit of justice and moderation will crown those endeavors
with success.
"I shall cheerfully concur in the beneficial measures which
your deliberations shall mature on the various subjects
demanding your attention. And while directing your labors
to advance the real interests of our country, you receive
its blessings; with perfect sincerity my individual wishes
will be offered for your present and future felicity.
"G. WASHINGTON."
The members then returned to the House, and having resumed their places, the SPEAKER presented a copy of the PRESIDENT's Answer to the Clerk; which he read.
MONDAY, December 19.
JOHN HATHORN, from New York, and JOHN MILLEDGE, from Georgia, appeared and took their seats.
A new member, to wit, ELISHA R. POTTER, from Rhode Island, in the place of BENJAMIN BOURNE, resigned, appeared, produced his credentials, was qualified, and took his seat in the House.
MONDAY, December 26.
_National University._
Mr. HARPER moved the order of the day, for the House to go into a committee on the establishment of a National University. The House accordingly formed itself into a committee--Mr. COIT in the chair.
When the report was read, Mr. MACON said there was the word "appropriation" in the report. He did not recollect any having been made for that purpose. He wished to know what was meant?
Mr. CRAIK said, authority was given for the PRESIDENT to appropriate about twenty acres of land for the erection of this building; this he supposed to be what was meant.
Mr. NICHOLAS said, that some time or other the institution of a Seminary in this District may be of use, but at present, and in the manner contemplated in this report, it would not do. If carried into effect thus, it will sometime need an appropriation. We are now, said Mr. N., going into the subject, but we know not to what lengths it may carry us; we do not know where it will end. He did not think the time had arrived to incorporate a company for building a National University. It would be taking money from those districts of country which can do for themselves, and would receive no benefit from this institution. It would be inconvenient and inconsistent for people living at a considerable distance to send their children to this University; besides, he thought, the further children are from home, by being less under the eye of their parents, the more their morals would be injured. If it be a National University, it must be for the use of the nation. It will then be necessary to open funds for the purpose of its support. It is recommended by the PRESIDENT, it is true; but this is no argument why we should precipitate the business: it is the last time he will have an opportunity to address this House, and it being an object he should like to see encouraged when it was practicable, he took that opportunity to express it. We are not now in a situation to forward its establishment. It may be done at some time, but Mr. N. thought it would be many years first. That district of country would be many years before it could encourage the hope of such a plan prospering. He thought gentlemen from other parts of the Union would not say they wanted it for their youth. He thought if the House once entered into the subject, the responsibility would fall on it to keep up the institution.
Mr. HARPER said, it did not appear to him that the gentleman last up had attended sufficiently to this report, for he seemed to be much mistaken as to its principle. There was nothing in it that contemplated pledging the United States to find funds for its support; nor was it the object of the report to establish a National University. He agreed with the gentleman, that we were not arrived at a period for such an institution. But gentlemen would see that the object of the commissioners was not to establish a National University or obtain money from the United States, but their direct object was, to be incorporated, so as to be enabled to receive such legacies and donations as may be presented to the institution, and hold it in trust for that purpose. The PRESIDENT had already given nineteen acres of land, and signified his intention to give fifty shares in the Potomac canal whenever there was proper authority to receive endowments. It appears that there is no authority at present. The memorial goes no further than to authorize them to receive such benefactions as may be made, and hold them in trust. How far, then, this went towards involving this House in its support, he should leave the good sense of gentlemen to judge. Mr. H. thought the amount of this memorial could not have any evil tendency, but it may have a good one; for which reason he hoped it would be agreed to.
Mr. BALDWIN did not know any thing, according to his present views, which could be injurious in the report. At present it seemed favorable to him. He had two principal ideas in his mind, which made it appear so; if neither of which was cleared up otherwise, he should vote for it. The first thing he should ask was, Is such a thing desirable? And then, Is there a Seminary so near the spot contemplated, as to make it hostile in this House to encourage this University? He believed there was none that this will injure, but that an establishment like this would be very agreeable in that District. If it was desirable, who could undertake it, who encourage it, like this House? They could not do it themselves. If, then, the step is a proper one, it can never be too soon to commence it, although it may be many years before it may be wanted. The objection may be, that it would be wrong to incorporate a Literary Society; but we have frequent instances of incorporation, and nothing can prove it improper, since no pecuniary aid is required, no grant of money is asked. If it was, I should, like the gentleman before me, (Mr. NICHOLAS,) disapprove of it, but not now seeing reason to object, I shall vote for the report.
Mr. CRAIK.--After the caution the committee had observed in forming their report, to prevent objections, I am sorry they should be charged with things they do not in the least merit. If the report contemplated the raising a fund for the support of this institution from the United States, there might have been some ground for gentlemen's objections; but, as there is not the most distant view of such a thing, I am surprised to hear it objected to. I did not expect it from that gentleman, (Mr. NICHOLAS.) I did not expect to hear him say, that institutions of this kind were not wanted there; it might have come better from gentlemen residing in more distant parts of the United States.
If this subject was now before the House, sir, I should not be against proving, at this time, that it is the duty of the United States to establish a University, and that the sooner it was done the better. But, as this is not the case, as we are only asked to permit its encouragement, by allowing these people to receive benefactions, how can we refuse? Shall we shut the door against individual benevolence? There are appropriations already made to this institution. There is a fund now of fifty shares in the canal, which is now valuable and increasing in value daily. I think the situation for this purpose very good; and the probable increase of the city of Washington will induce many persons to benevolence for this purpose. I know of no situation more central, and believe there is no place of the kind in its neighborhood; and from an established knowledge it would be a very useful and desirable institution, shall vote for it.
Mr. W. LYMAN.--As far as I can understand, the land which is now to be appropriated for this University is the property of the United States. Does not this look as though the United States are to patronize and support the establishment? If we take this step, I shall very much wonder if our next is not to be called upon to produce money. I do not expect much from the liberality of individuals; and can it be expected that people from the remote parts of the United States will send their children to this Seminary? Surely not; and consequently their money will be lost. It will be a natural source of discontent to them to pay their money merely for others to obtain the advantage. It may be very good for people thereabout, but remote parts cannot derive the least advantage from the institution. We are going quite too fast into this business, without attending to probable consequences.
I think it would have been more proper, if these people had only wanted this power, for them to have applied to the State Legislature of Maryland; it would be more to their interest and duty to encourage a Seminary if one is wanted in that place. They have sufficient power vested in them to encourage all such laudable undertakings. For us to encourage this would be to do injury, instead of having a number of schools planted in various parts, they are now all to centre in one; and the people are to neglect all to support this one; as others would become very weak.
I flatter myself to have as liberal sentiments on such institutions as other gentlemen, but I do sincerely think small academies are as useful as this institution for a University. The large institutions are generally out of the reach of people in general, and of the middling class in particular. These small academies have produced many eminent literary characters in the country. If it should be necessary at any time to form a Seminary for the use of that District, Congress would not refuse its encouragement; but to draw money for a National University I hope they never will agree. But gentlemen say this is not asked; true it is not at this time, but there is that in the principle that will most certainly lead to it.
Mr. DAYTON (the Speaker) said, if it should ever be the policy of the United States to establish a National University, he was of opinion this was an improper time for making the decision. He did not believe the committee who made the report meant to do more than had been stated; but the effect, he said, would be what he predicted; this measure would be looked upon as an entering wedge, and they should hereafter be told they must go through with it. If gentlemen were prepared to sanction an institution of this kind they would of course do it; he was not prepared to vote for the measure, but should give it his negative.
Mr. NICHOLAS said he had not been convinced by the observations of gentlemen who had spoken in favor of this report that all the mischiefs would not follow this measure which he before predicted. He inquired into the purpose of establishing a National University. The PRESIDENT had said (and the commissioners after him) it was to establish a uniformity of principles and manners throughout the Union. This, he believed, could not be effected by any institution. If, said he, you incorporate men to build a University, are you not pledging yourselves to make up any deficiency? and, as the building must be commensurate with the object, they would have an enormous empty house continually calling upon them for contributions to its support. Whatever moderation had been observed in framing this report, Mr. N. said it was like many others which came before them: it was so covered as not to show half the mischiefs which would attend it. If a plan of education was wanted for that District, let members from that part of the country say so, and he would be ready to afford them every necessary assistance; but he would not think of going into the scheme of a National University.
The district of country from whence it came might stand in great need of seminaries of learning, as had been hinted by the gentleman from Maryland, (Mr. CRAIK,) but their ignorance must continue until they were sensible of their want of instruction. He believed there was no Federal quality in knowledge, and no Federal aid was necessary to the spreading of it. Every district of country was competent to provide for the education of its own citizens, and he should not give his countenance to the national plan proposed, because the expense would be enormous, and because he did not think it would be attended with any good effect, but with much evil.
If a University is wanted for the use of that District, or any other part, Mr. N. said he would give it all the encouragement possible, but he could not agree to go to such great lengths--lengths which were not yet explored.
Mr. R. SPRIGG considered the report before them as of a very harmless nature. The PRESIDENT, he said, had appropriated land upon which to erect the University in question. They were not called upon to sanction that appropriation. His power to give it was full and ample. The thing was done, and he had promised a future donation. The apprehensions of the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. NICHOLAS) seemed to arise from his conceiving they were about to sanction a National University, such as had been recommended by the PRESIDENT. If this were the case, although the Representative of that District, he should not give his vote in support of the measure. On the contrary, he said, they were called upon merely to authorize proper persons to receive donations for a University. What sort of institution this should be, would be for the future consideration of Congress. Mr. S. said he should always be ready to give his support to every measure which had a tendency to spread knowledge throughout the United States, as he believed the progress of knowledge and liberty would accompany each other. The gentleman from Virginia seemed to think this institution would only benefit a small circle. He did not think the State of Maryland would be much benefited by it, as they had already two good universities; but he thought it doing no more than justice to the owners of property in the Federal City that this institution should be encouraged. What was asked of them would not commit them at all for any thing further, and it would be a mean of turning the attention of the people to the support of an institution of this kind. For these reasons, he hoped the House would agree to the report.
Mr. LIVINGSTON said he had thought, like the gentleman last up, that there was nothing in it but what was perfectly harmless, until, recurring to the law for establishing the permanent seat of Government, that something more might be intended than the eye could at first discover. Mr. L. said, he turned the thing a variety of ways in his mind, and could not account for some of its obscurities. If nothing was intended but a mere incorporation, why not apply to the State that could incorporate such a body? Something further seemed to be intended: public patronage was wanted to support this institution. They were called upon, at a moment's notice, to give their encouragement to this National Institution. It is true, they were called upon from very respectable authority. They were not called upon to appropriate the public funds to this purpose; but how far the commissioners are justifiable in laying out public lands for that purpose, he knew not. He had not the law itself at hand, but he was doubtful about the just disposal of it, if in this manner. This land was for public use. The use of this land was to erect buildings on for the benefit of Congress; and if these commissioners had power to appropriate it for building a National University on, they had the same power to give it or make use of it for any other purpose. Such institutions are not public, but private concerns.
This, said Mr. L., I view as the effects of the resolution, were it to be adopted; but I would not be thought as in the least reflecting on the motives of the gentleman who brought it forward. I believe it will operate (as a gentleman has justly said) as an "entering-wedge;" and at some future time we shall be told, we must go on--now we have encouraged its institution, we must support it. We shall hear more about it at a future day. Gentlemen tell you, sir, that nothing is intended, but merely to permit its institution. Why cannot they obtain this power which is asked of us of the State where it is wanted? The laws there will permit it, and, most likely, it could be obtained. If this report is agreed to, the time will arrive when this institution will pretend to a just claim on this House for its support; and the reasons they will then urge will have a force which will not be easily repelled.
Mr. MADISON said he was very far from considering, with some gentlemen, that this is a question of right or policy. These ideas are not comprehended in the present question. It is not whether Congress ought to interpose in behalf of this institution or not; it is whether Congress will encourage an establishment which is to be supported entirely independent of them. He did not consider it would ask a single farthing from us, nor that it would pledge Congress to endow the establishment with any support. The State of Virginia thought proper, during the war, to present the PRESIDENT with fifty shares in the Potomac canal, in consideration of his services, which he refused accepting for his own use. He has now offered to give it to this Seminary.[4] Some other individuals have likewise destined part of their land for its support, and other benefactions may be expected. The amount of this motion before the committee is whether we will grant power and security to persons to receive such donations in trust for the institution? He conceived it only in this simple point of view, and he thought if it was worthy of patronage, it ought to be from the United States.
The gentleman from New York (Mr. LIVINGSTON) seems to say it is not necessary for Congress to interpose, as the laws of Maryland allow that Legislature power to do it, and they are the most proper. Congress has the sole jurisdiction over that District: it is not with the power of that Legislature. Their power in that District could only operate by virtue of a grant from the United States; although it is necessary, until that District becomes the permanent seat of Government, the laws of Maryland should be in force there. This being the situation, the commissioners applied to Congress to give them the power to receive benefactions.
Another thing which gentlemen had objected to, is its being called a National University. The report does not call it so; it calls it "A University in the District of Columbia;" which, he thought, was materially different. Congress may form regulations for institutions which may be very good, and yet, not be viewed as national institutions. It was in this qualified light (for he wished not to consider it a burden on the nation) he meant to vote for the report.
Mr. SPRIGGS said it had been inquired why the Legislature of Maryland could not have granted the commissioners what they now pray for? He answered that they could make no law for that District which should extend beyond the time at which the seat of Government was to be removed there. He mentioned some instances that had taken place while he was a member of that Legislature. This, he said, accounted for the application of the commissioners to Congress.
On motion, the committee rose, and had leave to sit again.
TUESDAY, December 27.
DEMPSEY BURGES, from North Carolina, appeared, and took his seat.
_National University._
The order of the day was called for on the report of the committee to whom was referred the memorial of the commissioners of the Federal City, and that part of the PRESIDENT's Speech, which referred to the establishment of a National University. The House accordingly resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole on that subject, when the resolution, reported by the select committee, having been read, no gentleman rising on the subject, the Chairman inquired if the committee were ready for the question, and on being answered in the affirmative, the question was put and negatived by a great majority.
The committee rose, and the Chairman reported their disagreement with the select committee.
The House then took up the subject.
Mr. MURRAY rose, expressing his great surprise at the unexpected decision on the question in the committee. He was very much surprised to see the committee so changed, no opposition, and yet the report so quickly negatived; surely gentlemen must have mistaken the question. It is matter of regret such an important subject should have so little consideration. The language of the report is perfectly moderate and just. The gentleman from Virginia, yesterday, gave us to understand that this institution was to draw its support from the National Treasury; but on examining the report I can find no such idea held out or intended; and also he told us this was a National University. The gentleman's observations are grounded in mistake, or it was effected by an imagination of evils, of which there could not be the most distant apprehension. If we refer to the memorial of the commissioners we shall see they ask no money from Congress; they only ask you to erect a number of gentlemen into a corporate capacity to enable them to receive donations from those who are well disposed towards instituting a useful Seminary in that District; this is no more than they have a right to expect from Congress, and is the duty of Congress to grant. Yet the determination of the Committee of the whole House has been carried against this very desirable and reasonable request. I would again repeat that the language of the memorial is only to enable them to support a seminary of learning in that place, and not a single shilling is asked from the nation. They only want a medium to act upon--an act of incorporation.
The PRESIDENT has generously signified his intention to make a valuable benefaction, not less than £5000 sterling, and the wise and good in all parts of the United States would probably follow his example, particularly in that neighborhood, if Congress would put them in a way to receive it; a building would then be begun and some advances made towards the execution of the institution, in proportion to the fund. Instead of allowing this to be the case, every possible view has been given unfavorable to the plan, and every possible supposition formed, though without grounds, which could tend to blast it. The ideas of gentlemen have been inferred that a large empty house would arise;--that it would draw from the United States funds for its support. It may be possible, but it is no way probable. Is it not more probable that these gentlemen, knowing they cannot expect national support, will keep themselves within the bounds of their funds, if they mean to carry on the institution? Certainly this seems most consistent with the wisdom and prudence of men in that capacity. Nothing is asked of the public in the report of the select committee:--nothing they have a right to ask. I therefore hope, as the request is perfectly reasonable, gentlemen will not be too hasty to oppose such a measure without due consideration.
Mr. CRAIK.--I must confess I feel as much surprised as my colleague on the decision which has just been given in the Committee of the Whole. Some gentlemen who opposed the report yesterday conceived there was some secret poison lurking within it--some dangerous principle not to be discovered on its face, which would some time produce baneful influences--this has been insinuated though not directly said. If so it must come there by accident, or of itself, which those gentlemen must allow if they will give themselves the trouble to examine the true principle of it, and give it a just decision. When we examine the materials of which this report has been formed, viz: the PRESIDENT's communication on this subject in his Speech, and the memorial of the commissioners;--we should be led by those gentlemen to believe, that this, which is the groundwork of the report, is connected to convey something which may extend further than it seems to carry its object; this perhaps is the secret poison hinted at. Were I in the situation of the PRESIDENT, I am free to confess, had I studied my own feelings and the great use of the institution, I should have recommended it. It has been justly said, that the PRESIDENT, from the impulsive importance of it, has taken this opportunity--this last opportunity to recommend it. He has recommended it with earnestness; which gives an additional proof of his sincere regard for the welfare of his country. I hope this will not be conceived in favor of the idea suggested. The commissioners seemed to have anticipated the objections which have been made to a National University, and have purposely avoided inserting it in their memorial. They have cherished similar ideas which I have, of the eligibility of such an institution, but foreseeing that plan would not be approved, they have relinquished that, and only requested incorporation to enable them to act in trust for the institution. They do not call upon this House to put their hand into the Public Treasury; they seem to have possessed somewhat of the prophetic, to see the necessity of forming their memorial so little objectionable; and yet there is supposed to be danger in this simple request.
Gentlemen have supposed a responsibility, a peculiar obligation to support it, would be attached to the United States, were they to give this privilege. As well might it be said that Congress, by allowing a bridge to be built, or a road to be cut, would incur the expense, or if it could not otherwise be done for want of money in the applicants, would be engaged to do it for them at the national expense. If there are objections of force in one instance they will apply to the other. If this is denied it proves that District to be wretched outcasts, being denied a request the most reasonable, natural, and just that can be contemplated. Many of the objections urged, indeed most of them, against the admission of this report, do not go so much to the exclusion of the measure, as to the danger of Legislative interference. Gentlemen say, if we move in it--if we put our hands at all to it, we pledge ourselves to effect it. If this is the situation with the people of Columbia, the year 1800 will be a woful year to them; this is an unhappy presage of the jurisdiction to be exercised on that country. If it is inexpedient for that District to have a Seminary of Learning, let gentlemen who could state it with truth, come forward and say so. If the objections of gentlemen are not grounded on the danger of this House pledging itself to support the institution nor on the inexpediency of such a thing in that District, I am at a loss, for my soul, to conceive on what ground their objections are formed. I was surprised yesterday to hear the opposition come from the quarter it did; and am equally surprised to find such an opposition now. In my view there is a very great want of Seminaries of Learning in that District.
If we take a view on the south side of the Potomac, for a considerable extent of country, there is no institution to answer any desirable purpose. There is the greatest probability of a rapid increase in the population. Is it not reasonable, then, that an institution of this kind should be established in that place? And if reasonable at all, are we to wait till the period arrives when the country is thickly inhabited before we commence a building and project the plan? I have long thought that in this young country such a thing was necessary. It should be now begun, to grow up with its growth and strengthen with its strength. We should now lay the corner-stone--the foundation to build upon. Though such a Seminary cannot be established now, it may fifty years hence; and it can never be too soon to commence a good institution. We are not called upon to travel into the fields of speculation for the purpose of finding funds to support this plan; there are funds which present themselves to view. We only want a grant to secure the benefactions in prospect. The PRESIDENT has employed a handsome benefaction for this purpose; and I much wonder that gentlemen from that part of the Union should oppose measures that would only encourage its reception. When I take a view of the extent of country which lies much in want of a Seminary, I feel surprised that such measures towards its growth should be denied.
Comments
Log in to leave a comment.
Abridgment of the Debates of Congress, from 1789 to 1856, Vol. 2 (of 16)Chapter IV: Front Matter (4)
0%36 min left in chapter