Chapter XIX: Front Matter (19)

But I have one further objection to this bill, viz: that by it you do permit trade with French trading vessels, thus. There is no prohibition to the furnishing supplies to French vessels. The French vessels, going to sea, go armed and under the authority of their Government; and coming into the ports of this country may be supplied with any thing they wish without an infraction of the letter of the law. Let any public armed vessel come into the waters of the United States, and they may purchase whatever they please. There is no law to prohibit it, nor any authority placed in the Government of the United States to prevent them from purchasing. The state of the case now is, that your vessels shall not be cleared out to carry any thing to France, but your boats and every thing that sails may be employed to carry provisions to French armed ships in your harbors, and they may be completely loaded. If this be the intention of gentlemen, I have nothing further to say; if it be not their intention, they will have in this case, as they have had in others, a very great experience of the disadvantages of undertaking to chop up law.

From these general views of the subject, sir, I am opposed to the passage of the law.

Messrs. PITKIN and QUINCY stated their reasons for voting against the bill.

And on the question, "Shall the bill pass?" it was decided in the affirmative--yeas 72, nays 15, as follows:

YEAS.--Lemuel J. Alston, Willis Alston, jr., William Anderson,
Ezekiel Bacon, William W. Bibb, Adam Boyd, John Brown, Robert
Brown, William A. Burwell, Joseph Calhoun, John Campbell,
Howell Cobb, James Cochran, Orchard Cook, James Cox, Richard
Cutts, John Dawson, Joseph Desha, James Emott, J. W. Eppes,
William Findlay, Jonathan Fisk, Gideon Gardner, Thomas Gholson,
jr., Peterson Goodwyn, Thomas R. Gold, Daniel Heister, William
Helms, Jacob Hufty, Robert Jenkins, Richard M. Johnson, William
Kennedy, Herman Knickerbacker, Robert Le Roy Livingston,
John Love, Matthew Lyon, Aaron Lyle, Robert Marion, Vincent
Matthews, Samuel McKee, William Milnor, John Montgomery,
Nicholas R. Moore, Thomas Newton, Joseph Pearson, John Porter,
Peter B. Porter, Josiah Quincy, John Rea, of Pennsylvania,
John Rhea of Tennessee, Matthias Richards, John Roane, Ebenezer
Sage, Thomas Sammons, Daniel Sheffey, John Smilie, George
Smith, Samuel Smith, Henry Southard, John Stanley, James
Stephenson, Jacob Swoope, John Thompson, Uri Tracy, Nicholas
Van Dyke, Archibald Van Horne, Robert Weakley, Laban Wheaton,
Robert Whitehill, Ezekiel Whitman, Robert Witherspoon, and
Richard Wynn.

NAYS.--Daniel Blaisdell, John C. Chamberlain, S. W. Dana, John
Davenport, jr., William Ely, William Hale, Nathaniel A. Haven,
James Holland, Jonathan H. Hubbard, Edward St. Loe Livermore,
Nathaniel Macon, Timothy Pitkin, jr., John Ross, Richard
Stanford, and John Taylor.

Absent, 54 members.

WEDNESDAY, June 28.

_Emigrants from Cuba._

On motion of Mr. MARION, the House resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole on the bill for the remission of certain fines and penalties.

[This bill provides for the remission of penalties incurred by the captains and owners of vessels which have been compelled to take on board emigrants from Cuba, with their slaves, the landing of the latter in the United States having, under present laws, forfeited the vessels and cargoes and fined the persons concerned.]

Mr. MARION observed that he had, a day or two ago, presented petitions from persons bringing in slaves, amongst which were some documents, one of which was the opinion of the district court of South Carolina, by which it appeared that, if the bill passed in the present shape, no relief would be afforded by it; for, it had not appeared on the trial that the _slaves_ were forcibly expelled from the island, though the _owners_ were. He therefore moved an amendment to include slaves owned by persons who were expelled from the island.--Motion agreed to without opposition.

Mr. M. then moved to add a proviso: "_And provided, also_, that such slaves shall have been brought in at the same time as their owners, respectively."--Agreed to.

Mr. ROSS observed that a former act on the subject of the importation of slaves said, that it should not be lawful to bring into the United States any negro, mulatto, or person of color, with intention to sell the same or hold them as slaves. The present case appeared to him to be one in direct violation of that law. Under the act of 1807, it had become the duty of the court to examine whether it was the intention of the parties to infringe or violate the laws. After a fair examination by a court, under a desire to relieve those interested, and a failure of every attempt to show that they were compelled to take on board these slaves, was the House about to sit in judgment and reverse the decision? Mr. R. said that provision was also made in the bill as to slaves that may hereafter arrive in the United States, giving a power to the President of the United States, at his discretion, to set aside the law. What reason could there be for enacting this law, if the principles of the law of 1807 were correct? If it was intended, by a side blow, to repeal that law, he had rather see it done at once; and not, whilst in appearance we had such a law, to give the President a dispensing power over it. It was said that the persons concerned in bringing them in were distressed. How distressed? Only because they could not prove they were compelled to bring them into the country. Mr. R. said he did not wish to irritate the feelings of gentlemen from any portion of the Union, but he was sorry to see a bill introduced to unsettle what he conceived to be a valuable provision, enacted some sessions ago.

Mr. NEWTON said he felt as much repugnance as the gentleman from Pennsylvania to touch that law; but, if the gentleman would consider that this was a case of a peculiar nature, attended with singular circumstances, he would withdraw his objection. And he verily believed, that had the Legislature foreseen what had taken place, they would certainly have inserted a provision to meet the case which had occurred. Let it be recollected, said he, that the unfortunate Frenchmen driven on our coast, were some time ago driven from St. Domingo, and were obliged to take shelter at Cuba. Since the commencement of the war in Spain, Cuba has almost witnessed the same scenes as St. Domingo. These people were forced to leave the island in distress, and take what portion of property they could collect. They could not go to France, because no vessels of that country were permitted to touch at the island of Cuba, neither could they go to the French islands in the West Indies. There was no country open to them but America. The American captains, then, were forced to take the French on board, and with them, a few body servants; and, under the former law, these vessels are seized, and liable to forfeiture, our merchants to suffer the loss of vessel and cargo, and the poor emigrants to lose all their little property. Let it be recollected that the law of 1807 does not interfere with the State rights on the subject. This bill only goes so far as to remit all fines and penalties incurred by the captains of vessels, and release the property which would otherwise be condemned, and relieve the perfectly innocent merchants who would otherwise suffer. Let us say to these unfortunates, as Dido to Æneas, when he was exiled from Troy: "I have suffered misfortune myself, and therefore know how to extend the hand of relief to others."

Mr. MARION said that if the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. ROSS) thought that he had a wish or intention to increase the number of slaves, he was much mistaken. The laws of South Carolina prohibited the bringing these slaves, or any other, into the State; yet they had been brought there, and the persons bringing them there must give security that they would have them carried out of the State. Now, by the non-intercourse law, the State was prevented from sending them away; they would, of course, remain here till the law permitted them to be sent off, for they could go nowhere but to France and her dependencies, France being at war with all the rest of the world. Mr. M. said that there were several captains now in jail under sentence of court for having brought those people into the country; he submitted to the House whether, under the circumstances of the case, the captains had not good reason to suppose that they would not be subject to the penalty of the law. The law prohibiting the importation of slaves was of a highly penal nature, and different from all other laws of that nature, having no clause in it giving a power of remission of penalties; and this bill was guarded in such a manner that no evil could arise.

Mr. MACON said it was certainly true that the Southern country wanted no more slaves. The sole object of the bill was to get them away. However desirous the people might be to hold that property, there could be no fear of their wanting them from the West Indies.

Mr. MONTGOMERY said it was peculiarly necessary to pass this bill to get rid of the immense number of slaves brought into New Orleans; for every one must know that they were not wanted there. They were too numerous to continue there, and this bill was intended to make provision for their exportation.

Mr. NEWTON produced a letter from the collector of New Orleans on this subject.

Mr. TAYLOR said it never could have been the intention or spirit of the law of 1807 to increase our population in free blacks. It was not to set free the people of this description that the law had been passed, but to prevent them from being brought here at all. For even in Pennsylvania he had no doubt the gentleman would be content to have no further population of this sort. Mr. T. said that he knew that in the Southern States there was an extreme aversion to receiving an additional free black population. The intent of this bill, so far from being in hostility to the law quoted by the gentleman from Pennsylvania, was in furtherance of it. It was to remove them out of the country.

Mr. ROSS said that it was strange that the House should have a bill before it contemplating the removal of a certain description of persons out of the country, when nothing of the kind appeared on the face of it. If that was its intention, there should be a condition that the persons bringing in these slaves should carry them out again.

Mr. NEWTON observed that unless this law passed, the inevitable consequence must be that the negroes must remain here. He did not want them, they brought principles which it was known would not promote our interest or happiness.

The committee then rose and reported the bill.

Mr. NEWTON moved a new section for the relief of Foster and Girard, of New York, whose ship had been forfeited under the law prohibiting the importation of slaves.--Agreed to.

And the bill was ordered to a third reading, and subsequently passed without opposition.

_Evening Session._

Mr. ROOT reported that the committee had waited on the President according to order, who was pleased to say that he had no further communications to make.

About nine o'clock, all the bills having been enrolled and signed, a motion was made to adjourn, and carried; and the SPEAKER, after wishing the members of the House a pleasant journey home, and a happy meeting with their friends, adjourned the House to the fourth Monday in November next.

FOOTNOTES:

[6] LIST OF REPRESENTATIVES.

_New Hampshire._--Daniel Blaisdell, John C. Chamberlain, William Hale, Nathaniel A. Haven, James Wilson.

_Massachusetts._--Ezekiel Bacon, William Baylies, Richard Cutts, Orchard Cook, William Ely, Gideon Gardner, Barzillai Gannett, Edward St. Loe Livermore, Benjamin Pickman, jr., Josiah Quincy, Ebenezer Seaver, Samuel Taggart, William Stedman, Jabez Upham, Joseph B. Varnum, Laban Wheaton, Ezekiel Whitman.

_Rhode Island._--Richard Jackson, jr., Elisha E. Potter.

_Connecticut._--Epaphroditus Champion, Samuel W. Dana, John Davenport, Jonathan O. Mosely, Timothy Pitkin, jr., Lewis B. Sturges, Benjamin Tallmadge.

_Vermont._--William Chamberlin, Martin Chittenden, Jonathan H. Hubbard, Samuel Shaw.

_New York._--James Emott, Jonathan Fisk, Barent Gardenier, Thomas E. Gold, Herman Knickerbacker, Robert Le Roy Livingston, Vincent Matthews, John Nicholson, Gurdon S. Mumford, Peter B. Porter, Ebenezer Sage, Thomas Sammons, Erastus Root, John Thompson, Uri Tracy, Killian K. Van Rensselaer.

_Pennsylvania._--William Anderson, David Bard, Robert Brown, William Crawford, William Findlay, Daniel Heister, Robert Jenkins, Aaron Lyle, William Milnor, John Porter, John Rea, Benjamin Say, Matthias Richards, John Ross, George Smith, Samuel Smith, John Smilie, Robert Whitehill.

_New Jersey._--Adam Boyd, James Cox, William Helms, Jacob Hufty, Thomas Newbold, Henry Southard.

_Delaware._--Nicholas Van Dyke.

_Maryland._--John Brown, John Campbell, Charles Goldsborough, Philip Barton Key, Alexander McKim, John Montgomery, Nicholas R. Moore, Roger Nelson, Archibald Van Horne.

_Virginia._--Burwell Bassett, James Breckenridge, William A. Burwell, Matthew Clay, John Dawson, John W. Eppes, Thomas Gholson, jr., Peterson Goodwyn, Edwin Gray, John G. Jackson, Walter Jones, Joseph Lewis, jr., John Love, Thomas Newton, Wilson Carey Nicholas, John Randolph, John Roane, Daniel Sheffey, John Smith, James Stephenson, Jacob Swoope.

_North Carolina._--Willis Alston, jr., James Cochran, Meshack Franklin, James Holland, Thomas Kenan, William Kennedy, Archibald McBride, Nathaniel Macon, Joseph Pearson, Lemuel Sawyer, Richard Stanford, John Stanley.

_South Carolina._--Lemuel J. Alston, William Butler, Joseph Calhoun, Robert Marion, Thomas Moore, John Taylor, Robert Witherspoon, Richard Wynn.

_Georgia._--William W. Bibb, Howell Cobb, Dennis Smelt, George W. Troup.

_Kentucky._--Henry Crist, Joseph Desha, Benjamin Howard, Richard M. Johnson, Matthew Lyon, Samuel McKee.

_Tennessee._--Pleasant M. Miller, John Rhea, Robert Weakley.

_Ohio._--Jeremiah Morrow.

_Mississippi Territory._--George Poindexter.

_Orleans Territory._--Julian Poydras.

ELEVENTH CONGRESS--SECOND SESSION.

BEGUN AT THE CITY OF WASHINGTON, NOVEMBER 27, 1809.

PROCEEDINGS IN THE SENATE.

MONDAY, November 27, 1809.

Conformably to the act passed at the last session, entitled "An act to fix the time for the next meeting of Congress," the second session of the eleventh Congress commenced this day; and the Senate assembled, in their Chamber, at the city of Washington.

PRESENT:

NICHOLAS GILMAN, from New Hampshire.

TIMOTHY PICKERING, from Massachusetts.

CHAUNCEY GOODRICH, from Connecticut.

STEPHEN R. BRADLEY and JONATHAN ROBINSON,
from Vermont.

JOHN LAMBERT, from New Jersey.

ANDREW GREGG and MICHAEL LEIB, from
Pennsylvania.

WILLIAM B. GILES, from Virginia.

JAMES TURNER, from North Carolina.

THOMAS SUMTER and JOHN GAILLARD, from
South Carolina.

BUCKNER THRUSTON and JOHN POPE, from
Kentucky.

RETURN JONATHAN MEIGS and STANLEY GRISWOLD,
from Ohio.

The number of Senators present not being sufficient to constitute a quorum, the Senate adjourned to 11 o'clock to-morrow morning.

TUESDAY, November 28.

The Senate assembled--present as yesterday; and OBADIAH GERMAN, from the State of New York; JAMES HILLHOUSE, from the State of Connecticut; ELISHA MATHEWSON, from the State of Rhode Island; and NAHUM PARKER, from the State of New Hampshire, severally attended.

ANDREW GREGG, President _pro tempore_, resumed the chair.

The PRESIDENT communicated a letter from the Surveyor of the Public Buildings, stating the difficulties that have prevented the entire completion of the permanent Senate Chamber; which letter was read.

_Ordered_, That the Secretary acquaint the House of Representatives that a quorum of the Senate is assembled, and ready to attend to business.

_Ordered_, That Messrs. GILMAN and GAILLARD be a committee on the part of the Senate, together with such committee as may be appointed by the House of Representatives on their part, to wait on the President of the United States, and notify him that a quorum of the two Houses is assembled, and ready to receive any communications that he may be pleased to make to them.

_Ordered_, That the Secretary acquaint the House of Representatives therewith.

A message from the House of Representatives informed the Senate that the House have appointed a committee, on their part, jointly with such committee as may be appointed on the part of the Senate, to wait on the President of the United States, and notify him that a quorum of the two Houses is assembled, and ready to receive any communications that he may be pleased to make to them.

_Resolved_, That James Mathers, Sergeant-at-Arms and Doorkeeper to the Senate, be, and he is hereby, authorized to employ one assistant and two horses, for the purpose of performing such services as are usually required by the Doorkeeper to the Senate; and that the sum of twenty-eight dollars be allowed him weekly for that purpose, to commence with, and remain during the session, and for twenty days after.

Mr. GILMAN reported, from the joint committee, that they had waited on the President of the United States, agreeably to order, and that the President of the United States informed the committee that he would make a communication to the two Houses to-morrow, at 12 o'clock.

WEDNESDAY, November 29.

JAMES LLOYD, from the State of Massachusetts, attended.

_President's Message._

The following Message was received from the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES:

_Fellow-citizens of the Senate, and of the House of
Representatives_:

At the period of our last meeting, I had the satisfaction
of communicating an adjustment with one of the principal
belligerent nations, highly important in itself, and still more
so, as presaging a more extended accommodation. It is with deep
concern I am now to inform you, that the favorable prospect
has been overclouded by a refusal of the British Government to
abide by the act of its Minister Plenipotentiary, and by its
ensuing policy towards the United States, as seen through the
communications of the Minister sent to replace him.

Whatever pleas may be urged for a disavowal of engagements
formed by diplomatic functionaries, in cases where, by the
terms of the engagements, a mutual ratification is reserved;
or where notice at the time may have been given of a departure
from instructions; or, in extraordinary cases, essentially
violating the principles of equity; a disavowal could not have
been apprehended in a case where no such notice or violation
existed; where no such ratification was reserved; and, more
especially, where, as is now in proof, an engagement, to be
executed, without any such ratification, was contemplated by
the instructions given, and where it had, with good faith, been
carried into immediate execution on the part of the United
States.

These considerations not having restrained the British
Government from disavowing the arrangement, by virtue of
which its orders in council were to be revoked, and the event
authorizing the renewal of commercial intercourse having thus
not taken place, it necessarily became a question of equal
urgency and importance, whether the act prohibiting that
intercourse was not to be considered as remaining in legal
force. This question being, after due deliberation, determined
in the affirmative, a proclamation to that effect was issued.
It could not but happen, however, that a return to this state
of things, from that which had followed an execution of the
arrangement by the United States, would involve difficulties.
With a view to diminish these as much as possible, the
instructions from the Secretary of the Treasury, now laid
before you, were transmitted to the collectors of the several
ports. If, in permitting British vessels to depart without
giving bonds not to proceed to their own ports, it should
appear that the tenor of legal authority has not been strictly
pursued, it is to be ascribed to the anxious desire which was
felt, that no individuals should be injured by so unforeseen
an occurrence: and I rely on the regard of Congress for the
equitable interests of our own citizens, to adopt whatever
further provisions may be found requisite for a general
remission of penalties involuntarily incurred.

The recall of the disavowed Minister having been followed by
the appointment of a successor, hopes were indulged that the
new mission would contribute to alleviate the disappointment
which had been produced, and to remove the causes which had so
long embarrassed the good understanding of the two nations.
It could not be doubted that it would at least be charged
with conciliatory explanations of the step which had been
taken, and with proposals to be substituted for the rejected
arrangement. Reasonable and universal as this expectation
was, it also has not been fulfilled. From the first official
disclosures of the new Minister, it was found that he had
received no authority to enter into explanations relative to
either branch of the arrangement disavowed, nor any authority
to substitute proposals, as to that branch which concerned the
British orders in council. And, finally, that his proposals
with respect to the other branch, the attack on the frigate
Chesapeake, were founded on a presumption, repeatedly declared
to be inadmissible by the United States, that the first step
towards adjustment was due from them; the proposals, at the
same time, omitting even a reference to the officer answerable
for the murderous aggression, and asserting a claim not less
contrary to the British laws and British practice, than to the
principles and obligations of the United States.

The correspondence between the Department of State and this
Minister will show how unessentially the features presented
in its commencement have been varied in its progress. It
will show, also, that, forgetting the respect due to all
governments, he did not refrain from imputations on this, which
required that no further communications should be received
from him. The necessity of this step will be made known to His
Britannic Majesty, through the Minister Plenipotentiary of the
United States in London. And it would indicate a want of the
confidence due to a Government which so well understands and
exacts what becomes foreign Ministers near it, not to infer
that the misconduct of its own Representative will be viewed in
the same light in which it has been regarded here. The British
Government will learn, at the same time, that a ready attention
will be given to communications, through any channel which may
be substituted. It will be happy, if the change in this respect
should be accompanied by a favorable revision of the unfriendly
policy which has been so long pursued towards the United States.

With France, the other belligerent, whose trespasses on
our commercial rights have long been the subject of our
just remonstrances, the posture of our relations does not
correspond with the measures taken on the part of the United
States to effect a favorable change. The result of the several
communications made to her Government, in pursuance of the
authorities vested by Congress in the Executive, is contained
in the correspondence of our Minister at Paris, now laid before
you.

By some of the other belligerents, although professing just
and amicable dispositions, injuries materially affecting our
commerce have not been duly controlled or repressed. In these
cases, the interpositions deemed proper, on our part, have
not been omitted. But, it well deserves the consideration of
the Legislature, how far both the safety and the honor of the
American flag may be consulted, by adequate provisions against
that collusive prostitution of it by individuals, unworthy
of the American name, which has so much favored the real or
pretended suspicions, under which the honest commerce of their
fellow-citizens has suffered.

In relation to the powers on the coast of Barbary, nothing has
occurred which is not of a nature rather to inspire confidence
than distrust, as to the continuance of the existing amity.
With our Indian neighbors, the just and benevolent system
continued towards them, has also preserved peace, and is more
and more advancing habits favorable to their civilization and
happiness.

From a statement which will be made by the Secretary of
War, it will be seen that the fortifications on our maritime
frontier are, in many of the ports, completed, affording the
defence which was contemplated; and that a further time will
be required to render complete the works in the harbor of New
York, and in some other places. By the enlargement of the
works, and the employment of a greater number of hands at the
public armories, the supply of small arms, of an improving
quality, appears to be annually increasing, at a rate, that,
without those made on private contract, may be expected to go
far towards providing for the public exigency.

The act of Congress providing for the equipment of our vessels
of war having been fully carried into execution, I refer to
the statement of the Secretary of the Navy for the information
which may be proper on that subject. To that statement is added
a view of the transfers of appropriations, authorized by the
act of the session preceding the last, and of the grounds on
which the transfers were made.

Whatever may be the course of your deliberations on the subject
of our military establishments, I should fail in my duty in not
recommending to your serious attention the importance of giving
to our militia, the great bulwark of our security and resource
of our power, an organization the best adapted to eventual
situations, for which the United States ought to be prepared.

The sums which had been previously accumulated in the Treasury,
together with the receipts during the year ending on the 30th
of September last, and amounting to more than nine millions
of dollars, have enabled us to fulfil all our engagements,
and to defray the current expenses of our Government, without
recurring to any loan. But the insecurity of our commerce, and
the consequent diminution of the public revenue, will probably
produce a deficiency in the receipts of the ensuing year, for
which, and for other details, I refer to the statements which
will be transmitted from the Treasury.

In the state which has been presented of our affairs with the
great parties to a disastrous and protracted war, carried on in
a mode equally injurious and unjust to the United States as a
neutral nation, the wisdom of the National Legislature will be
again summoned to the important decision on the alternatives
before them. That these will be met in a spirit worthy of the
councils of a nation conscious both of its rectitude and of its
rights, and careful as well of its honor as of its peace, I
have an entire confidence. And that the result will be stamped
by a unanimity becoming the occasion, and be supported by every
portion of our citizens, with a patriotism enlightened and
invigorated by experience, ought as little to be doubted.

In the midst of the wrongs and vexations experienced from
external causes, there is much room for congratulation on
the prosperity and happiness flowing from our situation at
home. The blessing of health has never been more universal.
The fruits of the seasons, though in particular articles
and districts short of their usual redundancy, are more
than sufficient for our wants and our comforts. The face of
our country every where presents the evidence of laudable
enterprise, of extensive capital, and of durable improvement.
In a cultivation of the materials, and the extension of useful
manufactures, more especially in the general application
to household fabrics, we behold a rapid diminution of our
dependence on foreign supplies. Nor is it unworthy of
reflection, that this revolution in our pursuits and habits
is in no slight degree a consequence of those impolitic
and arbitrary edicts, by which the contending nations, in
endeavoring, each of them, to obstruct our trade with the
other, have so far abridged our means of procuring the
productions and manufactures of which our own are now taking
the place.

Recollecting, always, that, for every advantage which may
contribute to distinguish our lot from that to which others are
doomed by the unhappy spirit of the times, we are indebted to
that Divine Providence whose goodness has been so remarkably
extended to this rising nation, it becomes us to cherish a
devout gratitude, and to implore, from the same Omnipotent
source, a blessing on the consultations and measures about to
be undertaken for the welfare of our beloved country.

JAMES MADISON.

NOVEMBER 29, 1809.

The Message and documents therein referred to were read, and five hundred copies of the Message, and also five hundred copies of the Message together with five hundred copies of the documents, were ordered to be printed for the use of the Senate.

On motion, by Mr. GOODRICH,

_Resolved, unanimously_, That the members of the Senate, from
a sincere desire of showing their respect to the memory of the
Honorable SAMUEL WHITE, deceased, late a member thereof, will
go into mourning for one month, by the usual mode of wearing a
crape round the left arm.

THURSDAY, November 30.

PHILIP REED, from the State of Maryland, attended.

JOHN CONDIT, appointed a Senator by the Legislature of the State of New Jersey, in the place of Aaron Kitchel, resigned, produced his credentials, which were read; and, the oath prescribed by law having been administered to him, he took his seat in the Senate.

MONDAY, December 4.

RICHARD BRENT, from the State of Virginia, and WILLIAM H. CRAWFORD, from the State of Georgia, severally attended.

SAMUEL SMITH, appointed a Senator by the Legislature of the State of Maryland from the 15th of November, 1809, to the 4th of March, 1815, produced his credentials, which were read; and the oath prescribed by law having been administered to him, he took his seat in the Senate.

A message from the House of Representatives informed the Senate that the House concur in the resolution of the Senate of the 30th of November, for the appointment of Chaplains, and have appointed the Rev. JESSE LEE Chaplain on their part.

TUESDAY, December 5.

_The British Minister._

Mr. GILES, from the committee appointed on the first instant, reported in part the following resolution; which was read the first time, and passed to the second reading:

_Resolved, by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled_, That the
expressions contained in the official letter of Francis James
Jackson, Minister Plenipotentiary of his Britannic Majesty
near the United States, dated the 23d day of October, 1809,
and addressed to Mr. Smith, Secretary of State, conveying the
idea, that the Executive Government of the United States had
knowledge that the arrangement lately made by Mr. Erskine,
his predecessor, on behalf of his Government, with the
Government of the United States, was entered into without
competent powers on the part of Mr. Erskine for that purpose,
were highly indecorous and insolent; that the repetition of
the same intimation in his official letter dated the 4th of
November, 1809, after he was apprised, by the asseveration of
the Secretary of State, that the Executive Government had no
such knowledge, and that if it had possessed such knowledge
such arrangement would not have been entered into on the part
of the United States, and after also being officially apprised
that such intimation was inadmissible, was still more insolent
and affronting; and that, in refusing to receive any further
communications from him in consequence of these outrageous and
premeditated insults, the Executive Government has manifested
a just regard to its own dignity and honor, as well as to the
character and interest of the American people.

That the letter signed Francis James Jackson, headed
"Circular," dated the 13th of November, 1809, and published
and circulated through the country, is a still more direct
and aggravated insult and affront to the American people and
their Government, as it is evidently an insidious attempt
to excite their resentments and distrusts against their own
Government, by appealing to them, through false or fallacious
disguises, against some of its acts; and to excite resentments
and divisions amongst the people themselves, which can only
be dishonorable to their own characters and ruinous to their
own interests; and the Congress of the United States do hereby
solemnly pledge themselves to the American people and to the
world to stand by and support the Executive Government in its
refusal to receive any further communications from the said
Francis James Jackson, and to call into action the whole force
of the nation if it should become necessary in consequence of
the conduct of the Executive Government in this respect to
repel such insults and to assert and maintain the rights, the
honor, and the interests of the United States.

_Privileges of Foreign Ministers._

Mr. GILES, from the same committee, also reported the following bill, which was read and passed to a second reading:

A bill to prevent the abuse of the privileges and immunities
enjoyed by Foreign Ministers within the United States.

_Be it enacted, &c._, That if any foreign Ambassador, Minister,
or other person, entitled to enjoy within the United States
the privileges and immunities of a foreign Minister, shall
have committed, or may hereafter commit, any such act as by
the laws and usages of nations would justify the President
of the United States in ordering such offending Ambassador,
Minister, or other person as aforesaid, out of the District
of Columbia, or out of the Territories of the United States;
or in sending him home to his Sovereign, or to some place
or territory within his Sovereign's jurisdiction; in every
such case where the President of the United States shall
deem it proper and expedient to exercise his constitutional
authority, in either of these respects he shall be, and is
hereby authorized and empowered to cause a warrant to be issued
and signed by the Secretary of State, directed to any civil
officer of the United States, authorized to serve process, or
any military officer under the authority of the United States,
commanding him to provide for and enforce the departure of such
Ambassador, Minister, or other person offending as aforesaid,
taking due precautions to avoid improper or unnecessary
violence in executing such warrant. And all officers, civil
and military, under the authority of the United States, are
hereby required and enjoined to be obedient to such warrant.
And in case any officer, civil or military, to whom such
warrant shall be directed, shall fail, or unreasonably delay to
execute the same, every officer so offending shall be deemed
guilty of a high misdemeanor, and shall be punished by fine
and imprisonment before any court of the United States having
cognizance of the offence. _Provided_, That the fine shall not
exceed ---- dollars, nor the imprisonment be for a longer time
than ---- years.

Mr. GILES gave notice that he should call for the consideration of this subject on Thursday next.

FRIDAY, December 8.

_The British Minister._

The resolution reported by Mr. GILES, approving the conduct of the Executive in refusing to hold any further communication with Mr. Jackson, was taken up in the Senate as in Committee of the Whole. The resolution having been read,

Mr. GILES rose, and spoke as follows:

Mr. President: Before I proceed to perform the duties enjoined upon me as chairman of the committee who reported the resolution before you, permit me to express my regret that the consideration of a subject which justly excites so much sensibility should have been delayed, even only one day, on my account; and be assured, sir, that nothing less than an indisposition, sufficient to justify it, would have caused me to have been absent from my place yesterday. Perhaps, sir, I owe an apology to the Senate at this time for entering into this debate under a state of hoarseness, which must necessarily disqualify me, in some degree, from discharging my duty on the present occasion. But, sir, it is a subject of great consolation to me, to reflect that I am fortunately favored with associates on the committee, either of whom could perform the task I am now engaged in better than myself, and some of whom will certainly do me the favor of correcting any errors I may unintentionally commit, or supplying any omissions I may inadvertently make.

Although it appears to me that the propriety and urgency of the resolution now under consideration must be strongly addressed, both to the judgment and sensibility of every gentleman who has carefully attended to the distribution of powers under our constitution, and who has also carefully attended to the correspondence which gave rise to the resolution, yet, in a case of so much delicacy, it would naturally be expected, and is a respect due to the Senate, from the chairman of the committee, to present to it at least some of the general motives which induced the committee to report the resolution at this time.

It is to be observed, Mr. President, that our constitution is peculiar in the organization and distribution of its powers; and in no respect is it more peculiar than in the distribution of the particular powers embraced by the resolution. In all other Governments known to us, the same department which possesses the power to receive and negotiate with foreign Ambassadors and other public Ministers, also possesses the power to make war. It has been thought wise in our constitution to separate these powers. With a simplicity of language, and a solidity of wisdom almost peculiar to our constitution, the President is invested with the power to receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers; thus using the broadest terms in granting this power, without even an attempt at limitation or specification; evidently with a view that all the incidental or consequential powers might flow from this general expression to the department thus invested with this general power. It was easy to foresee (and no doubt the framers of our constitution did foresee) that the multiplicity and diversity of cases which would arise in the course of various diplomatic manoeuvres and negotiations, would set at defiance all attempts to limit or specify the powers of the department, in this respect, to which these powers were confided, and to be exercised on the part of the United States; and, therefore, every attempt of that kind was wisely avoided, leaving to the President to exercise his authority upon his own responsibility, to be regulated by the only established standard amongst nations, to wit: the laws and usages of nations. For, it never can be presumed, sir, that the wise sages who framed our excellent constitution could for a moment have tolerated the idea that the Ministers of foreign nations residing near the Government of the United States, should possess greater privileges and immunities than the Ministers of our Government residing near foreign Courts. Of course, the same laws--to wit, the laws and usages of nations--were left reciprocally to govern in every reciprocal case.

But, sir, notwithstanding the President is invested with the power "to receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers," and, as I think, all other incidental or consequential powers applicable to the various agencies with such Ambassadors and other public Ministers, yet Congress is invested with the power, without limitation or qualification, "to declare war." Now, sir, it must be obvious to every understanding, that these several powers are so intimately connected, and may be so dependent upon each other, that the exercise of the power conceded to the President may consequentially involve the necessity of the exercise of the power conceded to Congress, as in the case now under consideration. The refusal of the Executive to receive any further communications from His Britannic Majesty's Minister, (Mr. Jackson,) may consequentially involve us in war with Great Britain; or, in other words, may serve as a pretext for Great Britain to make war upon us, if she should conceive it her interest to do so, which I think not very improbable. Hence arises, in my judgment, the propriety and urgency of expression of the Congressional opinion upon this Executive act, and a declaration of the Congressional will as to the course of conduct Congress will pursue under any consequences which may flow from, or possibly be attributed to, this Executive act.

I conceive, sir, that the expression of this opinion, and the pledge of a solemn declaration, by Congress, are due to the people, because the people have the greatest interest in the character of their Government; and in no part of its attributes have a deeper interest than in its efficacy to resist and impel injuries and insults from foreign Governments. The people, also, are the mediate or immediate electors of Congress, and as such have a right to expect and demand that Congress will execute all their duties, and will never shrink from their constitutional responsibility in any case; and, last of all, in a case of so high and solemn a character as the one under consideration.

This course of conduct is essentially due to the Executive. The President ought to know whether, with the indispensable co-operation of Congress, he ought to proceed with dignified moderation and intelligence to assert and maintain the rights, the honor, and the interests, of the American people; or whether, for the want of that co-operation, he shall with shame and confusion of face be compelled to retrace his steps, and leave to Congress to abandon these high attributes of the nation, and, with their degradation, to record their country's ruin and disgrace. No, sir, it is not possible that an American Congress does exist, or can ever exist, that would not spurn from themselves every vestige of an idea that they could be brought, under any circumstances, to perform so degrading and dishonorable a task. It is imperiously demanded by the dignity and candor of Congress itself. What, sir, shall the exercise of one of the highest constitutional functions of Congress be brought into question, and every individual in the nation engaged in expressing an opinion on it; and shall Congress alone stand aloof, for fear of incurring a responsibility imposed on them by the constitution? Shall Congress stand by as idle spectators, and see a contest before the people, between the President and a foreign Minister, and feel no interest and take no share in such an unprecedented scene, especially when one of their highest constitutional functions may be affected by it! No, sir. Congress must speak--Congress must act. Congress never can shrink from its constitutional responsibility. It is due to the dignity--it is demanded from the candor--of Congress.

Above all, sir, it is important to the United States as a nation, that the Congressional will should be proclaimed upon this delicate and solemn occasion. It is of importance, it may be of the last importance, to the United States, that Great Britain should know, before she decides upon this subject, what is the Congressional will in relation to it. Whether she will be called upon to act against an united, harmonized Government and people--or whether she shall have for her prey, a divided people and a discordant Government.

Do you believe, Mr. President, that the conduct of Great Britain would be very different under these different conditions of the people and Government of the United States? Let me ask you this question, sir: would you not, sir, if you were Prime Minister of Great Britain, consulting her interest alone, pursue a very different course of conduct under this different state of things? Let every gentleman put the question to himself; and the answer of every one would be the same. Why then, sir, do we not unanimously take the ground here which, if we were called upon to act in an opposite hostile character, would most certainly deter us from persevering in that hostile character against the United States? Sir, if there had been any doubt upon this subject, our late experience ought to have removed it; for, sir, I have no hesitation in saying, and with pain at heart I shall be compelled to show it in the course of this debate, that, in my judgment, our present embarrassments are too much to be ascribed to our former manifestations of indecision, to our unfortunate dissensions and divisions. Sir, whenever I approach this sorrowful and awful subject, my heart feels as if it were bleeding at every pore, when I am compelled to reflect, and to believe, that this our beloved and happy country may shortly become a bleeding victim, from wounds--if not inflicted by the hands of her own sons, at least by their unhappy divisions and dissensions. Yes, sir, with a full knowledge of what is past, and strong presages of what is to come, is it not deplorable to be compelled to think, that, in a very few months, perhaps in a still shorter time, American blood must be shed, to repel the hostile spirit of Great Britain, now rendered too manifest to every understanding; and worse than all, sir, to wash away the stains of our own unfortunate divisions and dissensions; and is it not wonderful, as it is deplorable, that the virtuous and patriotic American people, and sometimes called the most enlightened in the world, with the experience of the horrible consequences, through all ages, of the divisions of a people amongst themselves, should permit themselves from the same cause, to fall a prey to the same inevitable calamities?

Look, Mr. President, through all history, from the first dispute between Cain and Abel, down to the late disastrous dissensions between the Spanish branch of the Bourbon dynasty, and find if you can, sir, a single instance of a people who gained any advantage from dissensions among themselves, and especially, sir, when they carried them so far, as to join a foreign against their country's standard! I believe, sir, not one solitary instance of this kind stands recorded. Nor is it possible or practicable in any state of human affairs--because in all cases, the foreign interference in the internal concerns of its neighbors is always for its own and never for its neighbor's benefit. With these monitory lessons before our eyes, and a full conviction of their truth upon our hearts, is it not wonderful, that we should voluntarily give up ourselves victims to the same calamities? But, sir, gentlemen may ask, where is the remedy? How can we make a sacrifice of our own opinions? Sir, the case is a plain one. Let gentlemen exercise their opinions and persevere in their arguments at all times respecting our internal concerns, as well before as after the measures are adopted; let them, respecting our foreign relations, urge their arguments with a zeal proportioned to the magnitude of the subject; they will be pleasurably received, and respectfully considered; but after the Government has taken its attitude against a foreign nation, it would be going too far to desert its standard, and to join that of the enemy. It is then time for opinion to pause and reflect, whether any consequence can be worse, or more disgraceful, than joining a foreign against its country's standard? Whether it would not be better, more patriotic, more virtuous, to support your country even in a supposed unwise course of policy, than to join a foreign standard, and use it to correct and change the course of policy thus disapproved?

Sir, in a contest between your own and a foreign nation, it never can be wrong to join the standard of your own country; nor right to join the standard of your enemy. Then, sir, here is a rallying point. It is a plain and obvious one. No understanding can mistake it. No heart can disapprove it. It is our own Government. Let that be the rallying point. There never can be a more propitious moment than the present for casting into oblivion all former irritations and dissensions. There can never be a plainer case presented to the human understanding. There never were more urgent considerations in favor of the course recommended. Whether we respect their repulsive effects upon British hostility or their harmonizing effects among ourselves, they appear to me to be equally strong and persuasive. May I not then, sir, indulge the pleasing hope, that the resolution before you will be received as the signal of unanimity in Congress, and joyfully hailed in that character through the whole of this great and extended country? Sir, does it not manifest a strange perverseness in the human character, for us to observe that, when it is perfectly at our option, we should choose to distress and injure ourselves by irritations and resentments, rather than delight ourselves with union and harmony and mutual good offices? Especially, sir, when the latter choice would command the respect, if not excite the alarm of our enemy. For, sir, do you believe that if Great Britain saw the strong arm of this nation stretched out to oppose her unjust spirit of hostility, guided in all its operations by one undivided will, she would so readily encounter its powerful influence, as if she saw it paralyzed in all its efforts from the want of a unity of will and action? No, sir, we undervalue our energies and importance, if we were to suppose that her conduct would be the same in both of these situations; or that she is at all indifferent to the course of conduct now to be pursued by us. Let us then all unite, sir, in this proposition, and disappoint her mistaken calculations upon her influence in this country. I verily believe, that union is all that is wanting to appease her hostile spirit towards us. But perhaps, sir, every gentleman present will admit, and it appears to me that no human being can deny, that if the facts stated in the resolution be supported by the correspondence upon which it is founded, that then every gentleman would readily assent to the resolution. But, sir, it is possible, although it appears to be scarcely possible, that some gentlemen may doubt whether the facts stated in the resolution be supported by the correspondence or not. This I admit is a fair though delicate inquiry, and I will therefore immediately proceed to the examination of that question--and I beg the most critical attention of the Senate in the course of the investigation.

I will now proceed, Mr. President, to inquire whether the facts stated in the resolution are supported by the correspondence upon which it is founded? In performing this task, I propose to read the whole of the correspondence which I conceive bears any material relation to the subject of the resolution, and no other; although the whole may not be entitled to, nor receive any animadversions from me, yet as my sole object is to get at the true exposition and meaning of the correspondence, if I should unfortunately omit, misconceive, or misinterpret any material part of it, I shall have the consolation to reflect, that, by presenting the whole, the means of my correction in either case will be presented to the Senate and the world, if the observations I propose now to make should ever find their way out of the walls of this Chamber. I shall also present this correspondence in its responsive order, which will be found to be indispensable to the due comprehension of some of its most essential parts.

Permit me, then, sir, to call your attention first to the letter of Mr. Jackson to Mr. Smith, dated the 11th October, 1809, pages 32, 33, of the printed documents. For, sir, although this letter is not mentioned in the resolution, yet it furnishes the original offensive insinuations, and is referred to and reiterated in the letter of the 23d October, which is noticed in the resolution, and therefore the offensive expressions of the letter of the 11th are entitled to, and shall receive, the most accurate and critical attention and analysis.

[Here the exceptionable passages were read.]