Chapter I: A. Coles (24)

The duty upon tonnage, like the duty imposed on merchandise, is paid by the consumer or grower of the cargoes transported by the ship-holders, of whom this duty is immediately collected. The ultimate payment of this duty by the grower or consumer will depend upon the relative demand for, and supply of the articles in the market to which they are exported. If the demand for the article is greater than the quantity in the market, it is paid by the consumer; if the supply exceeds the demand, it is paid by the grower, in the form of a reduction of the price of the article equal to the duty imposed.

Who are the most interested in commerce, the growers of the articles, the exchange and transportation of which constitute commerce, or the factors and freighters employed in the exchange and transportation of those articles? Can any man doubt for one moment that the growers, the rightful owners of the articles to be exchanged, are more deeply interested in commerce than the merchant and ship-holder, who only make a profit from the sale and transportation of the articles exchanged? If the profit they derive from commerce should be so enormous as to exceed the original value of those articles in the hands of the growers, still it can be demonstrated that the interest of the latter is more vitally affected by a prosperous or adverse state of commerce, than that of the merchant or ship-holder. The merchant will be regulated in the price which he gives to the grower, by the state of the market and the price of transportation to the market. Let the price be what it may in foreign markets, the merchant is regulated by it, and can only be affected by sudden changes in those markets which may be prejudicial or advantageous to him. It is a matter of small moment to him whether the articles in which he deals bring a high or low price in the market to which they are sent, if that price is not variable, because he will regulate the price he gives for them by the price which he can obtain. But the price which those articles will bring in the market to which they are sent, is all-important to the grower, because it will regulate the price which he is to receive for them beyond the power of his control. Every circumstance which tends to destroy competition and reduce the number of markets to which our produce is sent, vitally affects the interest of the grower. The planter, the farmer, is, therefore, more deeply interested in the prosperity of that commerce which finds a market for the annual surplus productions of his industry, than the merchant or ship-holder. This direct commerce is indispensable to the internal growth and improvement of the country, and to the comfort and happiness of the people, and more so to the people of the Southern and Western States than any other part of the United States. Sir, we are not so grossly ignorant as to mistake our interest in this matter. We know that, without commerce, without a market for the surplus productions of our labor, we should be deprived of many of those articles which long habit has made necessary to our ease and comfort. If, then, we are not grossly ignorant of our true interest, nothing can be more unfounded than the accusation of the gentleman from New York, (Mr. GERMAN.) The charge must be the result of ignorance or prejudice. Mr. C. said he would not follow the example of that gentleman by saying, "perhaps this prejudice might be an honest prejudice." No, he would not insult the feelings of that gentleman; he would not question his veracity or integrity by stating hypothetically, "that perhaps his opinions were honest." Whilst he repelled this unfounded charge in the manner which its nature imperiously demanded, he had no hesitation in admitting that the opinions of that gentleman, whether the result of prejudice or of ignorance, were strictly honest. Mr. C. said there was no man in the nation more friendly to that commerce which he had described than he was, and that no part of the nation cherished it with more ardor than that which he in part had the honor to represent on this floor. But, sir, there is a commerce which has been prosecuted to a very great extent by the commercial capitalists of the United States, for the prosperity of which the agricultural part of the nation do not feel the same solicitude.

In the year 1807, the United States exported upwards of $59,000,000 of foreign productions. This commerce has no connection with or dependence upon the annual surplus productions of the country, which is the only commerce that essentially promotes domestic industry and multiplies the domestic comforts of the great mass of the people. This commerce, which is the legitimate offspring of war, and expires with the first dawning of peace, is prosecuted principally by our commercial cities to the east and north of the Potomac. The landholders, the country people, the great mass of agriculturists in the United States, never had, and never can have any direct interest in it. The farmer of the Eastern and Middle States, and the planter of the Southern and Western States, stand in the same relation to this commerce. Whether it be prosperous or adverse, is a matter of small concern to them, and nothing but an effort of pure, disinterested patriotism could induce them to jeopardize the peace and happiness of the nation, and stake the prosperity of the direct commerce of the country, for the protection of this mushroom commerce.

The use proposed to be made of these frigates, if built, certainly meets my approbation. The idea of protecting our commerce by a naval force, which has been pressed with so much vehemence by some of our navy gentlemen, is worse than visionary. A navy can injure commerce, but cannot afford it protection, unless it annihilates the naval force of the adverse nation. Unless, therefore, we have the means of creating and supporting a naval force able to contend successfully with the British navy for the empire of the seas, we must abandon all idea of protecting our commerce against that nation. Great Britain, with her thousand ships of war, is unable to protect her commerce even in sight of her own coasts. According to my understanding of the views of the honorable gentlemen, these thirty frigates are to be employed in destroying the commerce of the enemy, and not in fighting her public armed vessels. They are in fact to be national privateers. In this point of view, the proposition to cashier the officer who should strike the American flag seems to be at war with the nature of their employment. They are to direct their efforts to the destruction of merchant vessels, and to avoid collision with the ships of war. It is to be apprehended that men, whose duty it is to avoid serious conflicts with the enemy, will grow timid from habit, and will resist but feebly when inevitably forced into them. The character of the naval officers of the United States makes a regulation of this kind wholly unnecessary. Their enterprise, their courage, and intrepidity, are too well established to require a regulation of such severity. As then the gentleman does not intend to dispute the sovereignty even of our own seas with our expected enemy with this naval force, but intends to employ it in the destruction of merchant vessels, an increase of that force appears to me to be wholly unnecessary and impolitic. Individual enterprise, directed by individual interest, will more effectually destroy the commerce of the enemy, than any number of frigates in the power of this Government to build and employ. The Baltimore _Federal Republican_ states that a French privateer in the Atlantic Ocean has captured about thirty merchant vessels, and that the impression made by this single privateer was so serious that thirteen vessels, several of which were frigates, were employed in cruising for her. The truth of this statement may be relied on, because that paper is not in the habit of exaggerating French successes, or of aggravating British sufferings. But it is said that, although our privateers were successful at the commencement of the Revolutionary War, before the conclusion of that contest they were entirely destroyed. Admitting the fact to be true, it does not necessarily follow that such will be the result of the war now in contemplation. After the first years of that contest, the British forces were in possession of the principal ports and harbors of the United States, which made it extremely hazardous for our privateers to approach our own coasts, or enter our own harbors. It is expected that our situation will be very different in the event of war at this time. Instead of possessing the principal ports of the United States, we expect to expel them from the whole of their continental possessions in our neighborhood. If this should be the result of the war, their means of annoying our commerce, and of destroying our privateers, will be greatly diminished, and their power of protecting their commerce from the depredations of our privateers will suffer an equal diminution.

MONDAY, March 9.

_British Intrigues to dismember the Union._

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

_To the Senate and House of
Representatives of the United States_:

I lay before Congress copies of certain documents which remain
in the Department of State. They prove that, at a recent
period, whilst the United States, notwithstanding the wrongs
sustained by them, ceased not to observe the laws of peace and
neutrality towards Great Britain, and in the midst of amicable
professions and negotiations on the part of the British
Government, through its public Minister here, a secret agent of
that Government was employed in certain States, more especially
at the seat of Government in Massachusetts, in fomenting
disaffection to the constituted authorities of the nation, and
in intrigues with the disaffected, for the purpose of bringing
about resistance to the laws, and eventually, in concert with
a British force, of destroying the Union, and forming the
eastern part thereof into a political connection with Great
Britain.

In addition to the effect which the discovery of such a
procedure ought to have on the public councils, it will not
fail to render more dear to the hearts of all good citizens
that happy Union of these States, which, under Divine
Providence, is the guaranty of their liberties, their safety,
their tranquillity, and their prosperity.

JAMES MADISON.

MARCH 9, 1812.

The Message and documents therein referred to were read, and one thousand copies of the Message and documents ordered to be printed for the use of the Senate; and on motion of Mr. CAMPBELL of Tennessee, a committee was appointed to examine the documents above referred to, and designate such as may be necessary to be printed.

Messrs. CAMPBELL of Tennessee, BRENT, and BAYARD, were appointed the committee.

Mr. LLOYD submitted the following motion for consideration:

_Resolved_, That the Secretary of State be directed to lay
before the Senate the names of any and all persons in the
United States, and especially in the State of Massachusetts,
who have in any way or manner whatever entered into, or most
remotely countenanced, the project or the views, for the
execution or attainment of which John Henry was, in the year
1809, employed by Sir James Craig, then Governor General of the
British provinces in North America, and which have this day
been communicated to the Senate of the United States.

FRIDAY, March 13.

_Answer to Mr. Lloyd's inquiry._

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

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I transmit to the Senate a report of the Secretary of State,
complying with their resolution of the 10th instant.

JAMES MADISON.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE, _March_ 12, 1812.

The Secretary of State, to whom was referred the resolution of
the Senate of the 10th instant, has the honor to report, that
this department is not in possession of any names of persons
in the United States, who have, in any way or manner whatever,
entered into or countenanced the project or the views, for
the execution or attainment of which, John Henry was, in the
year 1809, employed by Sir James Craig; the said John Henry
having named no persons or person as being concerned in the
said project or views referred to in the documents laid before
Congress on the 9th instant. Which is respectfully submitted.

JAMES MONROE.

The Message and report were read, and one thousand copies thereof ordered to be printed for the use of the Senate.

WEDNESDAY, March 18.

_Incorporation of a Mining Company in Upper
Louisiana._

The Senate resumed, as in Committee of the Whole, the consideration of the bill to incorporate Moses Austin, John Rice Jones, Henry Austin, and others, into a company, by the name of the Louisiana Lead Company; and the bill having been further amended, the President reported it to the House accordingly.

On the question, Shall this bill be engrossed and read a third time as amended? it was determined in the affirmative.

TUESDAY, March 24.

In the absence of the VICE PRESIDENT, on motion of Mr. LLOYD, the Senate proceeded to the choice of a President _pro tempore_, as the constitution provides, and WILLIAM H. CRAWFORD was elected.

THURSDAY, March 26.

_Incorporation of Lead Mine Company._

The engrossed bill to incorporate Moses Austin, John Rice Jones, Henry Austin, and others, into a company, by the name of the Louisiana Lead Company, was read the third time.

On the question, Shall this bill pass? it was determined in the affirmative--yeas 14, nays 12, as follows:

YEAS.--Messrs. Anderson, Bradley, Condit, Crawford, Dana,
German, Goodrich, Gregg, Howell, Hunter, Smith of New York,
Tait, Taylor, and Worthington.

NAYS.--Messrs. Bayard, Franklin, Giles, Horsey, Lambert, Leib,
Lloyd, Reed, Smith of Maryland, Turner, and Varnum.

So it was _Resolved_, That this bill pass, and that the title thereof be, "An act to incorporate Moses Austin, John Rice Jones, Henry Austin, and others, into a company, by the name of the Louisiana Lead Company."

WEDNESDAY, April 1.

_Erection of the Territory of Orleans into a
State._

The amendments to the bill, entitled "An act for the admission of the State of Louisiana into the Union, and to extend the laws of the United States to the said State," having been reported by the committee correctly engrossed, the bill was read a third time as amended, and, by unanimous consent, was further amended, by striking out, in the ninth section and second line, the word "next," and inserting the words "one thousand eight hundred and twelve."

_Resolved_, That this bill pass with amendments.

The bill giving further time for registering claims to land in the eastern district of the Territory of Orleans having been reported by the committee correctly engrossed, was read a third time, and passed.

The Senate resumed, as in Committee of the Whole, the consideration of the bill to enlarge the limits of the State of Louisiana; and, no amendment having been offered, on the question, Shall this bill be engrossed and read a third time? it was determined in the affirmative--yeas 21, nays 8, as follows:

YEAS.--Messrs. Anderson, Bayard, Bibb, Campbell of Tennessee,
Condit, Crawford, Cutts, Gaillard, Giles, Gregg, Horsey,
Howell, Leib, Pope, Smith of Maryland, Smith of New York, Tait,
Taylor, Turner, Varnum, and Worthington.

NAYS.--Messrs. Bradley, Franklin, German, Gilman, Goodrich,
Lambert, Lloyd, and Reed.

_Temporary Embargo._

The following confidential Message was received from the President of the United States:

_To the Senate and House of
Representatives of the United States_:

Considering it as expedient, under existing circumstances and
prospects, that a general embargo be laid on all vessels now in
port, or hereafter arriving, for the period of sixty days, I
recommend the immediate passage of a law to that effect.

JAMES MADISON.

APRIL 1, 1812.

The Message was read; and on motion, by Mr. BAYARD, that the injunction of secrecy be taken off respecting the Message last read, it was determined in the negative--yeas 11, nays 21, as follows:

YEAS.--Messrs. Bayard, Dana, German, Gilman, Goodrich, Gregg,
Horsey, Hunter, Lambert, Lloyd, and Reed.

NAYS.--Messrs. Anderson, Bibb, Bradley, Campbell of Tennessee,
Condit, Crawford, Cutts, Franklin, Gaillard, Giles, Howell,
Leib, Pope, Robinson, Smith of Maryland, Smith of New York,
Tait, Taylor, Turner, Varnum, and Worthington.

_Resolved_, That the Message be referred to a select committee, to consist of five members, to consider and report thereon by bill or otherwise.

_Ordered_, That Messrs. CAMPBELL of Tennessee, TAYLOR, GERMAN, POPE, and BAYARD, be the committee.

FRIDAY, April 3.

_Temporary Embargo._

The amendments to the bill, entitled "An act laying an embargo on all ships and vessels in the ports and harbors of the United States for a limited time," having been reported by the committee correctly engrossed, the bill was read the third time.

On motion, by Mr. LEIB, it was agreed to fill the blank with the word "ninety."

On the question, Shall this bill pass as amended? it was determined in the affirmative--yeas 20, nays 13, as follows:

YEAS.--Messrs. Anderson, Bibb, Brent, Campbell of Tennessee,
Condit, Crawford, Cutts, Franklin, Gaillard, Gregg, Howell,
Leib, Pope, Robinson, Smith of New York, Tait, Taylor, Turner,
Varnum, and Worthington.

NAYS.--Messrs. Bayard, Bradley, Dana, German, Giles, Gilman,
Goodrich, Horsey, Hunter, Lambert, Lloyd, Reed, and Smith of
Maryland.

SATURDAY, April 4.

On motion, by Mr. CAMPBELL, of Tennessee, the galleries were cleared, and the doors of the Senate Chamber closed.

A message from the House of Representatives, by their committee, Messrs. CALHOUN and WILLIAMS--Mr. CALHOUN, chairman:

_Mr. President_: The House of Representatives concur in the amendment of the Senate to the bill, entitled "An act laying an embargo on all ships and vessels in the ports and harbors of the United States, for a limited time."

FRIDAY, April 10.

_Executive Veto.--Returned Bill._

A message from the House of Representatives informed the Senate that the bill which passed the two Houses of Congress at the present session, entitled "An act providing for the trial of all causes pending in the respective district courts of the United States, in case of the absence or disability of the judges thereof," and presented to the President of the United States for his approbation, has been returned by the President of the United States, with the following objections:

"Because the additional services imposed by the bill on the
justices of the Supreme Court of the United States, are to
be performed by them rather in the quality of other judges
of other courts, namely, judges of the district courts, than
in the quality of justices of the Supreme Court. They are to
hold the said district courts, and to do and perform all acts
relating to the said courts which are by law required of the
district judges. The bill, therefore, virtually appoints, for
the time, the justices of the Supreme Court to other distinct
offices, to which, if compatible with their original offices,
they ought to be appointed by another than the legislative
authority, in pursuance of legislative provisions authorizing
the appointments.

"Because the appeal allowed by law from the decision of the
district courts to the circuit courts, while it corroborates
the construction which regards a judge of the one court, as
clothed with a new office, by being constituted a judge of
the other, submits for correction erroneous judgments, not to
superior or other judges, but to the erring individual himself,
acting as sole judge in the appellate court.

"Because the additional services to be required may, by
distances of place, and by the casualties contemplated by the
bill, become disproportionate to the strength and health of
the justices who are to perform them, the additional services
being, moreover, entitled to no additional compensation, nor
the additional expenses incurred, to reimbursement. In this
view, the bill appears to be contrary to equity, as well as
a precedent for modifications and extensions of judicial
services, encroaching on the constitutional tenure of judicial
offices.

"Because, by referring to the President of the United States
questions of disability in the district judges, and of the
unreasonableness of delaying the suits or causes pending in
the district courts, and leaving it with him in such cases
to require the justices of the Supreme Court to perform
additional services, the bill introduces an unsuitable relation
of members of the judiciary department to a discretionary
authority of the Executive department.

"JAMES MADISON."

And the House of Representatives, where the bill originated, have taken the question in the constitutional way, and have resolved that this bill do not pass.

FRIDAY, April 17.

_Temporary Non-Exportation._

On motion, by Mr. DANA, the injunction of secrecy was removed respecting the proceedings on the "Act to prohibit the exportation of specie, goods, wares, and merchandise, for a limited time."

[_The proceedings are as follow_:]

THURSDAY, April 9, 1812.

The following confidential message was received from the House of Representatives, by their committee, Mr. SMILIE and Mr. PLEASANTS--Mr. SMILIE, chairman:

_Mr. President_: The House of Representatives have passed a bill, entitled "An act to prohibit the exportation of specie, goods, wares, and merchandise, for a limited time;" in which bill they ask the concurrence of the Senate.

The bill was read, and, on motion, by Mr. CAMPBELL of Tennessee, that the bill be now read the second time by unanimous consent, it was objected to as against the rule.

_Ordered_, That the bill pass to a second reading.

FRIDAY, April 10.

The bill from the House of Representatives, entitled "An act to prohibit the exportation of specie, goods, wares, and merchandise, for a limited time," was read the second time, and referred to a select committee, to consider and report thereon; and Messrs. CAMPBELL of Tennessee, BRADLEY, and TAYLOR, were appointed the committee.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Tennessee, from the committee, reported the bill last mentioned with an amendment. Whereupon, the bill was resumed, and considered as in Committee of the Whole, together with the amendment reported thereto by the select committee; and having agreed to the amendment, the President reported the bill to the House accordingly.

On motion, by Mr. GOODRICH, that the further consideration of the bill be postponed until to-morrow, and that it be printed under an injunction of secrecy, for the use of the Senate, it was determined in the negative.

On the question, Shall the bill pass to the third reading as amended? it was determined in the affirmative--yeas 16, nays 12, as follows:

YEAS.--Messrs. Anderson, Bibb, Brent, Campbell of Tennessee,
Condit, Crawford, Gaillard, Gregg, Howell, Leib, Pope, Smith of
New York, Tait, Taylor, Turner, and Varnum.

NAYS.--Messrs. Bradley, Dana, German, Giles, Gilman, Goodrich,
Horsey, Hunter, Lambert, Lloyd, Reed, and Smith of Maryland.

FRIDAY, April 17.

_Mississippi Territory._

Mr. TAYLOR, from the committee to whom was referred on the 17th of March, the bill, entitled "An act to enable the people of the Mississippi Territory to form a constitution and State Government, and for the admission of such State into the Union on an equal footing with the original States;" and on the 6th instant, the bill to carry into effect the provisions of the eighth section of the act regulating the grants of land, and providing for the disposal of the lands of the United States south of the State of Tennessee, reported that the said bills be severally postponed to the first Monday in December next.

The report is as follows:

That in considering the subject referred to them, they could
not avoid being struck with the immense size of the Territory
proposed to be erected into a State, a size disproportionate
to the size of any of the largest States which now compose our
confederation.

It embraces, in its present form, and without any extension,
to the Gulf of Mexico, (as is proposed in the bill referred to
us,) nearly six and a half degrees of geographical longitude,
and four entire degrees of latitude, and affords an area of
twice the surface of the State of Pennsylvania.

Your committee are strongly impressed with the propriety and
expediency of dividing the said Territory, so as to form of the
same two States, whenever the population, within the limits
of each section, shall render it just and proper; and they
respectfully submit to the Senate the following divisional
line, between the western and eastern sections of the said
Territory, viz: up the Mobile river, to the point nearest its
source, which falls on the eleventh degree of west longitude
from the city of Washington; thence a course due north until
the line intersects the waters of Bear Creek; thence down the
said creek to its confluence with the Tennessee River; thence
down the said river to the northern boundary line of the said
Territory. By a view of the map of this country it will appear
that the above divisional line will divide the Territory into
nearly two equal parts, and it has, for the most part, a
delineation by nature.

By the 5th section of the 1st article of the treaty of cession
from the State of Georgia the United States are bound to erect
the said Territory into one State. It has, however, been
suggested that the State of Georgia would not, upon a proper
representation, withhold her consent to the proposed division.

To the end, therefore, that an opportunity may be afforded to
the State of Georgia to express this consent, by a legislative
act of the said State, as they shall think proper, your
committee recommend that the said bill shall be postponed to
the first Monday in December next.

MONDAY, April 20.

_Death of the Vice President._

The PRESIDENT addressed the Senate as follows:

"GENTLEMEN: Upon me devolves the painful duty of announcing to
the Senate the death of our venerable fellow-citizen, GEORGE
CLINTON, Vice President of the United States.

"By this afflictive dispensation of Divine Providence the
Senate is deprived of a President rendered dear to each of its
members by the dignity and impartiality with which he has so
long presided over their deliberations; and the nation bereaved
of one of the brightest luminaries of its glorious Revolution."

The Senate being informed of the decease of their distinguished fellow-citizen, GEORGE CLINTON, Vice President of the United States, do

_Resolve_, That a committee be appointed, jointly with such as may be appointed on the part of the House of Representatives, to consider and report measures proper to manifest the public respect for the memory of the deceased, and expressive of the deep regret of the Congress of the United States on the loss of a citizen so highly respected and revered.

_Ordered_, That Messrs. SMITH of New York, SMITH of Maryland, GERMAN, GILMAN, and BRADLEY, be the committee.

_Ordered_, That the Secretary carry this resolution to the House of Representatives.

A message from the House of Representatives informed the Senate that the House concur in the resolution of the Senate for the appointment of a joint committee "to consider and report measures proper to manifest the public respect for the memory of the Vice President of the United States," deceased, and have appointed a committee on their part.

TUESDAY, April 21.

On motion of Mr. SMITH of New York,

_Resolved unanimously_, That, from an unfeigned respect to the late GEORGE CLINTON, Vice President of the United States, and President of the Senate, the Chair of the President of the Senate be shrouded with black during the present session; and, as a further testimony of respect for the memory of the deceased, the members of the Senate will go into mourning and wear a black crape round the left arm for thirty days.

FRIDAY, April 24.

_Recess of Congress._

Mr. BRADLEY, from the joint committee of the two Houses appointed on the subject of a recess, reported the business that demands the immediate attention of Congress, and the following resolution:

_Resolved, by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled_, That, during
the present session of Congress, the President of the Senate
and Speaker of the House of Representatives shall, on the
29th day of April instant, adjourn their respective Houses to
Monday, the 18th day of May next, then to meet at the same
place in which the two Houses are now sitting.

On motion, by Mr. BRADLEY, the resolution was twice read by unanimous consent; and, on motion by Mr. POPE, amended, by striking out the words "eighteenth day of May next."

On the question, Shall this resolution be engrossed, and read a third time as amended, it was determined in the affirmative--yeas 18, nays 13.

SATURDAY, April 25.

_Recess of Congress._

The Senate resumed the consideration of the resolution for a recess of Congress from the 29th inst. to the ---- day of ---- next.

Mr. POPE moved to fill the blank with the 4th Monday in June. The most distant day would probably accommodate the greatest number of members; and this day would be sufficiently early to take measures necessary on the expiration of the embargo.

Mr. ANDERSON said he had supposed the day fixed upon by the committee, viz: the 18th of May, would have been the day. He did not himself feel the necessity of any adjournment; but, if it must take place, it ought either to be for a short time, or for so long a time as equally to accommodate all. If it were to be for a short time, it would be merely for relaxation; if for a longer time, as was now proposed, he feared it would be considered as indicative of an intention to pause in the course of measures they had commenced, and produce an impression abroad, among the people, which was much to be deprecated.

Mr. POPE said he was in favor of such a time being fixed on as should accommodate the greatest number of the members. As to the effect of an adjournment on the public mind, he imagined that the difference between a recess of twenty or thirty days would be very unimportant.

Mr. G. W. CAMPBELL said it seemed to him something like bribing the members to obtain votes, to talk about lengthening the time so as to accommodate the greatest number of members. He could not conceive it consistent with the honor of the country that they should decide the question of adjournment on the mere ground of personal convenience; he considered the only question to be, whether a recess would have a good or bad effect on the public service. He had on a former occasion stated his objection to this step, that it would produce an ill effect on the public mind. Many misrepresentations have been already made to induce the public to believe you are not in earnest. An adjournment for any length of time would seem like deserting our posts, and will put the seal on this belief. Under this view, he must vote against the adjournment; but the longer was the recess, the worse would be the effect on the public mind. He should, therefore, vote for the shortest day.

Mr. BRADLEY said he could not see that the proposed recess would be deserting their posts at all. The nation knew that the Government could not go to war without soldiers; and sitting here would certainly not restore peace. Congress had adopted many war measures, the execution of which they had put into the hands of the Executive; they had also authorized a loan of eleven millions. And while these measures were going on, could Congress, by staying here constantly, add to the number of men, or expedite the loan? If an enemy were to invade us, without any government at all, they would be promptly resisted. But, if we are going to war to redress grievances, to revenge injuries received, we should choose our own time. If we begin war before we have an army, it is bringing the nation to the last stage of degradation, not to consider at all the sufferings and losses which would be in such cases sustained. It would be a great error to attempt to put this country, by a forced vote of Congress, into war. You cannot lead this country to war as the butcher leads his flock to the slaughter-house. This is a government of opinion; the public sentiment will not be driven, but must be followed. Congress have certainly done as much for the present as they can. I wish to see the effect of the measures they have taken. The Executive is clothed with all the necessary powers to make preparation for war; and if the nation will not abide by us and support the measures of Congress, it is vain to say we can force the people into a war. I believe the people will be better satisfied with a recess than with our sitting here from day to day without doing any thing material, and there is nothing material at this moment to do. They are not irrational; they know that Congress have been in session six months; they must also foresee that when we come to war, the Council of the Nation must be perpetually in session; they will, therefore, not be dissatisfied at a short recess. If war be actually to take place at the expiration of the embargo, this, of all others, is the time for relaxation.

The question on the insertion of the eighth day of June as the day of reassembling of the two Houses, was decided as follows:

YEAS.--Messrs. Bradley, Condit, Crawford, Dana, German, Gilman,
Goodrich, Gregg, Horsey, Hunter, Lambert, Lloyd, Pope, Reed,
Robinson, Smith of New York, Turner, and Worthington--18.

NAYS.--Messrs. Anderson, Bibb, Brent, Campbell of Tennessee,
Cutts, Gaillard, Giles, Howell, Leib, Smith of Maryland, Tait,
Taylor, and Varnum--13.

So the motion was carried.

WEDNESDAY, April 29.

_Maritime Defence._

Mr. POPE asked and obtained leave to bring in a bill more effectually to protect the commerce and coasts of the United States; and the bill was read, and passed to the second reading.

TUESDAY, June 9.

_Rhode Island Resolutions._

Mr. HUNTER presented the resolutions of the Legislature of the State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, instructing their Senators and Representatives in Congress, to use their endeavors to avert the evils of war, to put our maritime frontier in a state of defence, and for the repeal of the embargo and restrictive system; and the resolutions were read.

_New York Memorial._

Mr. SMITH of New York, presented the following petition of sundry inhabitants, merchants, and others, of the city of New York, praying that the embargo and non-importation laws be continued as a substitute for war against Great Britain:

To the honorable the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled, the memorial
of the subscribers, merchants, and others, inhabitants of the
city of New York, respectfully showeth:

That your memorialists feel, in common with the rest of their
fellow-citizens, an anxious solicitude for the honor and
interest of their country, and an equal determination to assert
and maintain them.

That your memorialists believe that a continuation of the
restrictive measures now in operation will produce all the
benefits while it prevents the calamities of war. That when the
British Ministry become convinced that a trade with the United
States cannot be renewed, but by the repeal of the Orders in
Council, the distress of their merchants and manufacturers,
&c., their inability to support their armies in Spain and
Portugal, will probably compel them to that measure.

Your memorialists beg leave to remark, that such effects
are even now visible; and it may be reasonably hoped that a
continuance of the embargo and non-importation laws a few
months beyond the fourth day of July next, will effect a
complete and bloodless triumph of our rights.

Your memorialists therefore respectfully solicit of your
honorable body the passage of a law continuing the embargo,
and giving to the President of the United States power to
discontinue the whole of the restrictive system on the
rescinding of the British Orders in Council.

The conduct of France in burning our ships, in sequestrating
our property entering her ports, expecting protection in
consequence of the promised repeal of the Berlin and Milan
decrees, and the delay in completing a treaty with the American
Minister, has excited great sensation, and we hope and trust
will call forth from your honorable body such retaliatory
measures as may be best calculated to procure justice.

John Jacob Astor
Samuel Adams
Howland & Grinnell
E. Slosson
Israel Gibbs
Isaac Clason
John Slidell
John K. Townsend
Andrew Ogden & Co.
Thomas Storm
Amos Butler
Ebenezer Burrill
Isaac Heyer
Ralph Bulkley
Samuel Bell
John F. Delaplaine
Peter Stagg
David Taylor
Abraham Smith
Thomas H. Smith, jr.
Andrew Foster
Jacob Barker
William Lovett
William Edgar, jr.
Samuel Stillwell
Jacob P. Giraud
John Hone
John Kane
Amasa Jackson
William J. Robinson
Joseph Strong
Abraham S. Hallet
Joshua Jones
Frederick Giraud, jr.
Robert Roberts
John Crookes

William Adee
John T. Lawrence
Joseph W. Totten
Isaac Schermerhorn
Alexander Ruden
Joseph Otis
Lewis Hartman
Garret Storm
George Bement
S. A. Rich
Hugh McCormick
John Depeyster
Gilbert Haight
James Lovett
Leffert Lefferts
Augustus Wyncoop
John W. Gale
Thomas Rich
Samuel Marshall
Elbert Herring.

After the memorial had been read,

Mr. TAYLOR said, that the respectability of the subscribers to a petition presented to this body, and the importance of the matter therein contained, had, on various occasions, been used as inducements to us to give such petition a respectful _disposition_ in the course of our proceedings. He recollected a case in point. It was the case of the petition of an eminent merchant of Massachusetts, presented by an honorable Senator from that State, and which at the suggestion of that honorable gentleman was, by the Senate, ordered to be printed. He was of opinion that the petition just read ought not to be treated with less attention. That he had seen the petition, and had inquired into the character of its subscribers--and had been informed that the fifty-eight signers to it were among the most respectable, wealthy, and intelligent merchants of the city of New York. There are to be found in that list the names of two presidents of banks; three presidents of insurance companies; thirteen directors of banks: besides other names of pre-eminent standing in the mercantile world. They had all united in the sentiments contained in the petition, notwithstanding that there existed among them a difference in political opinions--for he understood that of the petitioners forty-two were federal and sixteen republican. Mr. T. added, that he considered some of the sentiments contained in the petition as of the highest importance. He hailed it as an auspicious occurrence, that these honorable merchants, in praying that the evils of war might be averted from them and from the nation, had nevertheless held fast to the principle of resistance to the aggressions and unhallowed conduct of Great Britain towards our nation--and had exercised the candor and firmness to bear testimony to the efficiency of the restrictive system for obtaining a redress of our wrongs, and of course to the integrity and honor of those who had imposed this system for that purpose. He hoped that the example of these petitioners would tend to counteract those strenuous and unremitting exertions of passion, prejudice, and party feeling, which had attempted to stamp upon the majority in Congress the foul and unjust censure of being enemies to commerce. That, however unfashionable and obstinate it might appear, he still believed that the embargo and non-importation laws, if faithfully executed, were capable of reaching farther than our cannon. We were at this very time tendering an urgent argument, to be felt by each city, village and hamlet in England. This touching to the quick the vital interests of that empire, would demonstrate to the people at least the folly and absurdity of the Orders in Council. The ordeal of the twenty weeks of scarcity, which the people of that unhappy country are undergoing, to relieve which, but for the madness and folly of their rulers, every yard of American canvas would be spread to the gales: the thousands of starving manufacturers thrown out of employ for want of our custom, which custom, but for the injustice of their masters, we were willing to give, now feel the efficiency of the restrictive system. These matter-of-fact arguments want no sophistry nor long speeches to give them weight. But Great Britain is proud, and will never yield to this sort of pressure. Hunger has no law. Where was her pride during the last year when she exported to her enemy on the continent more than eleven millions of pounds sterling for provisions; and meanly truckling to her enemy, consented to buy the privilege of laying out her guineas for bread; and actually submitted on the compulsion of Napoleon to buy the wines, brandies, and silks of France, which she did not want! This restrictive system, when commenced under the former embargo law, encountered every opposition among ourselves, which selfish avarice, which passion and party rage could suggest; and so successful were its assailants that while it was operating with its fullest effects, (which the prices current of that day will show,) some of its greatest champions in the National Legislature abandoned it--yes, sir, in the tide of victory they threw down their arms. How were the mighty fallen, and the shield of the mighty vilely cast away! The disavowal of Erskine's arrangement was the consequence of this retreat. But it may be said that the sentiments in their petition were extorted by the apprehension of a greater evil--war. In all our trials, those who had not predetermined to submit to Great Britain must have anticipated this alternative. Let those who by their acrimony, sneers, and scoffs, have thrown away this chief defence of our nation, be held responsible for the compulsion they have imposed on us to take this dire alternative. He said that although he was unwilling to abate a single pang which we might legally inflict upon our enemy, and might at the proper time oppose any thing like the swap proposed of one system for another, when we had the power and the right to impose upon our enemy both the one and the other, he nevertheless thought the petition was deserving of the attention which he now moved it should receive. He moved that the petition should be printed.

The motion was agreed to; and the Senate then adjourned.

THURSDAY, June 11.

_General Wilkinson's Accounts._

The Senate resumed the consideration of the resolution reported by the committee on the memorial of General James Wilkinson, which is as follows:

_Resolved_, That the proper accounting officer of the
Department of War be directed, in the settlement of General
Wilkinson's account, to place to his credit the sum of four
thousand and thirty-six dollars seventy-seven cents.

And the resolution was agreed to, and recommitted to the original committee, with instruction to bring in a bill accordingly.

FRIDAY, June 12.

_Massachusetts Memorial._

Mr. LLOYD presented a resolution of the House of Representatives of Massachusetts, passed June 2d, instant, expressing their opinion "that an offensive war against Great Britain, under the present circumstances of this country, would be in the highest degree impolitic, unnecessary, and ruinous;" also, a memorial of the said House of Representatives, passed by a majority of one hundred and sixty-six, on the same subject; and the resolution and memorial were read, and ordered to be printed for the use of the Senate.

They are as follows:

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS:

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

_June 2, 1812_.

_Resolved_, As the opinion of this House, that an offensive
war against Great Britain, under the present circumstances
of this country, would be in the highest degree impolitic,
unnecessary, and ruinous; that the great body of the people of
this Commonwealth are decidedly opposed to this measure, which
they do not believe to be demanded by the honor or interests
of the nation; and that a committee be appointed to prepare
a respectful petition to be presented to Congress, praying
them to arrest a calamity so greatly to be deprecated, and, by
the removal of commercial restrictions, to restore, so far as
depends on them, the benefits of trade and navigation, which
are indispensable to the prosperity and comfort of the people
of this Commonwealth.

TIMOTHY BIGELOW, _Speaker_.

THURSDAY, JUNE 18.

_Injunction of Secrecy on War Measures removed._

The injunction of secrecy thereon having been removed, on motion, by Mr. ANDERSON, twelve hundred copies of the confidential Message of the President of the United States of the first of June instant, were ordered to be printed for the use of the Senate.

_Certain confidential proceedings of the Senate, since first June, are as follow, the injunction of secrecy having been removed_:

MONDAY, June 1, 1812.

A confidential Message was received from the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, as follows:

[For this Message, see the _Supplemental Journal_ of the Proceedings of the House of Representatives, under the date of June 1, 1812, _post_.]

FRIDAY, June 5.

_Declaration of War against Great Britain._

A confidential Message was received from the House of Representatives, by Messrs. MACON and FINDLAY, two of their members--Mr. MACON, chairman:

_Mr. President_: The House of Representatives have passed a bill, entitled "An act declaring War between Great Britain and her Dependencies, and the United States and their Territories;" in which they ask the concurrence of the Senate; and request that the bill be considered confidentially.

An act declaring War between Great Britain and her
Dependencies, and the United States and their Territories.

_Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America_, _in Congress assembled_, That
war be and the same is hereby declared to exist between Great
Britain and her Dependencies, and the United States and their
Territories; and that the President of the United States is
hereby authorized to use the whole land and naval force of
the United States to carry the same into effect; and to issue
to private armed vessels of the United States commissions or
letters of marque and general reprisal, in such form as he
shall think proper, and under the seal of the United States,
against the vessels, goods, and effects of the Government of
Great Britain, of its subjects, and of all persons inhabiting
within any of its territories or possessions.

On motion, the bill was twice read by unanimous consent; and, on motion by Mr. Leib, it was referred to the committee appointed the 1st instant, on the confidential Message of the President of the United States of the same date, to consider and report thereon.

TUESDAY, June 9.

On motion by Mr. ANDERSON, the bill entitled "An act declaring War between Great Britain and her Dependencies, and the United States and their Territories," was considered as in Committee of the Whole. Mr. GAILLARD was requested to take the Chair; and, after debate, a motion was made by Mr. GREGG, that the bill be recommitted, for further amendment, to the committee who have under consideration the Message of the President of the United States of the 1st June. And, after debate, the President resumed the Chair, and the Senate adjourned.

WEDNESDAY, June 10.

Mr. GAILLARD was requested to take the Chair.

The Senate resumed, as in Committee of the Whole, the bill, entitled "An act declaring War between Great Britain and her Dependencies, and the United States and their Territories."

Mr. GREGG, by permission, amended his motion for recommitting the bill to the committee appointed on the confidential Message of the President of the United States, of the 1st of June, as follows:

_Resolved_, That the bill entitled "An act declaring War
between Great Britain and her Dependencies, and the United
States and their Territories," be recommitted to the committee
to whom was committed the Message of the President, of the 1st
instant, with instructions to modify and amend the same, in
such manner that the President of the United States shall have
power to authorize the public armed ships and vessels of the
United States to make reprisals upon the public and private
ships and vessels, goods, and merchandise, belonging to the
Crown of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, or
to the subjects thereof; and also to grant letters of marque
and reprisal, under suitable regulations, to be provided in the
bill, to private armed ships and vessels to make like reprisals.

THURSDAY, June 11.

Mr. GAILLARD was requested to take the Chair.

On motion by Mr. ANDERSON, the bill from the House of Representatives, entitled "An act declaring war between Great Britain and her Dependencies, and the United States and their Territories," was resumed, and considered as in Committee of the Whole, together with the motion yesterday submitted by Mr. GREGG; and on the question to agree to the motion, it was determined in the affirmative--yeas 17, nays 13, as follows:

YEAS.--Messrs. Bayard, Condit, Dana, German, Giles, Gilman,
Goodrich, Gregg, Horsey, Howell, Hunter, Lambert, Leib, Lloyd,
Reid, Smith of New York, and Worthington.

NAYS.--Messrs. Anderson, Bibb, Campbell of Tennessee, Crawford,
Cutts, Franklin, Gaillard, Pope, Smith of Maryland, Tait,
Taylor, Turner, and Varnum.

Whereupon, Mr. CRAWFORD resumed the Chair; and, on motion by Mr. Anderson, it was ordered that the committee to whom this bill is recommitted have leave to sit immediately.

FRIDAY, June 12.

_Reprisals on British Commerce._

Mr. ANDERSON, from the committee to whom was recommitted the bill, entitled "An act declaring War between Great Britain and her Dependencies, and the United States and their Territories," with instructions to modify and amend the same, in such manner that the President shall have the power to authorize the public armed ships and vessels of the United States to make reprisals upon the public and private ships and vessels, goods, and merchandise, belonging to the Crown of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and to the subjects thereof; and also to grant letters of marque and reprisal, under suitable regulations, to be provided in the bill, to private ships and vessels to make reprisals, agreeably to said instructions.

SATURDAY, June 13.

_Declaration of War._

Mr. GAILLARD was requested to take the Chair; and on motion, by Mr. ANDERSON, the consideration of the bill, entitled "An act declaring war between Great Britain and her Dependencies, and the United States and their Territories," was resumed, as in Committee of the Whole; and having agreed to sundry amendments, the President resumed the Chair; and Mr. GAILLARD reported the bill with amendments, which were considered in Senate and agreed to.

A motion was made by Mr. GERMAN, to postpone the further consideration of the bill to the first Monday in November next.

Mr. GERMAN addressed the Chair as follows:

Mr. President: I made the motion to postpone the consideration of the bill now before us, from a conviction that it will be extremely injurious to the country to pass it at this time. I feel, sir, that the State I have the honor to represent has a peculiar interest in the event of this question; and I also feel the weight of the interest which the nation at large has at stake, in the event of the passage of this bill. I therefore consider it a duty I owe my constituents, to use every reasonable exertion in my power to prevent the object of that bill, until the country is better prepared to carry it into effect.

As I presume the war, if declared, is intended to be an offensive one, I will, to establish the propriety of my motion, take a general view of the situation of this country; of its means to carry on offensive operations, as well as to defend itself, and of the situation and relative strength also of the country we are required to make war upon.

I am ready to allow, Mr. President, that both Great Britain and France have given us abundant cause for war; on this occasion, therefore, I shall dispense with using any argument which might serve to show, that if we were even in a state of preparation, and possessed the means of insuring a favorable issue, it would be bad policy for this country, at the present time, to enter into war with Great Britain, although perhaps many weighty reasons might be adduced in support of such argument.