SPEECH OF ROBERT G. HARPER,

ON THE

NECESSITY OF RESISTING THE AGGRESSIONS AND . ENCROACHMENTS OF FRANCE,

DELIVERED IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE UNITED STATES, MAY 29, 1797.

In 1797, the French Directory refused to receive Mr. Pinckney, the minister of the United States, under such circumstances that the President deemed it advisable to call a special session of Congress to take the subject into consideration. He accordingly issued a proclamation convoking Congress; and in his message, communicated at the opening of the session, he expressed, in strong terms of disapprobation, his sense of the indignity offered to the United States by the Directory. An address was moved in the House of Representatives, responding the sentiments of the President. An amendment, however, was proposed, expressive of an opinion that the House viewed the conduct of the Directory as less reprehensible than it had been represented by the Presi dent, and recommending conciliatory measures as the basis of the negociations about to be entered into with France.

The amendment being under consideration in committee of the whole, Mr. Harper delivered the following speech:

MR. CHAIRMAN,

Ar the time the interruption took place on Saturday, by the unfortunate indisposition of the speaker, I had drawn near to the close of those observations, with which at that time, I intended to trouble the committee. I shall now resume, as nearly as possible, the same train of remarks, and bring them to a conclusion as speedily as possible. As more time, however, is now afforded to me, I will take a range somewhat more extensive than I had prescribed to myself on the

former day, endeavoring, at the same time, to avoid every thing, not strictly relative to the question on the amendment, now under consideration.

[Mr. Harper here observed, that he should go a little out of his way, in order to notice and refute some positions laid down by gentlemen in favor of the amendment, which, though wholly irrelevant to the present question, would have a tendency, if allowed to pass uncontradicted, to render the people discontented with the government. Having concluded his remarks upon this subject, he proceeded thus:]

The scope and object of this amendment is to recommend it to the President, to offer certain concessions to France, in the negociations which he has declared it his intention to commence. These concessions, are understood to relate to the list of contraband, which is more extensive, as stated by the British treaty, than in that with France; and to the right of taking enemies' goods out of neutral ships, which Britain enjoys, and France by her treaty with us has given up. In these two points it is the scope and object of the amendment to recommend, that the two nations should be placed on the same footing. Hence the amendment is to be considered under two points of view; first, the recommendation itself; and secondly, the thing recommended.

As to the recommendation itself, I ask, is it constitutional-is it useful-is it politic?

With respect to its constitutionality, every body knows, that the power of negociation is given wholly to the President by the constitution, and that of making treaties to the President and senate. Can the House of Representatives control or direct that power? Can it instruct the President in matters, which the constitution has entrusted solely and exclusively to his judgment? Shall it undertake to instruct himwill he be bound to obey those instructions? Should he think fit to pursue a different course, will the House be justified by the constitution and their duty in with

holding supplies, and in leaving the country without defence? Do gentlemen foresee the dilemma, which they are preparing for themselves and for the House; a dilemma in which they must choose between pride and duty, between supporting the executive in measures adopted against their advice, and leaving the country defenceless, at the mercy of all who may choose to assail it? What possible effect can this interference have, but to lay the foundations of a schism between the different departments of government?

But admitting such a recommendation to be conformable to the constitution, in what is it useful? Is it to dispose the executive to treat? If so, it is useless, for he already has that disposition, and has strongly declared it in his speech to both Houses. He has declared it as his resolution" to institute a fresh attempt at negociation, and to promote and accelerate an accommodation, provided one can be made on terms compatible with the rights, duties, interests and honor of the nation." He has declared, that if we have committed" errors, and these can be demonstrated, we shall be willing to correct them. If we have done injuries, we shall be willing, on conviction, to redress them." Can there be a spirit more conciliatory-or would gentlemen wish to see the negociations conducted on other principles?

Is it to give information to the executive, to point out the course which the public good requires to be taken? But do gentlemen imagine that the executive is ignorant of the public interest, or less acquainted with it than the House? Is it not notorious that bodies of this kind are always unfit for negociation ? Have not the people declared it, by placing that power in the hands of the President? Can gentlemen suppose, that the House possesses, or can possess, all the information necessary, in forming an opinion about what ought to be given, and what ought to be required, in a negociation with another nation? Can the House foresee all that may happen, to render this of

fer inexpedient, or useless, or unnecessary-to justify other offers, or to make demands necessary, instead of offers of any kind? What will become of the power of negociation in the executive, if the House is first to instruct him, and afterwards to censure him?

Some gentlemen have seemed to think, that this amendment would give weight to the negociation abroad; would strengthen the hands of the executive, and place him on higher, ground. But how is this effect to be produced? By showing, it is answered, that, in making this offer, all the branches of government are united, and that the ground thus taken will be firmly supported. But must it not be perfectly evident, that the best way of giving this impression is, to pursue a conduct and hold a language, which will evince a perfect confidence in the executive, and a determination to support him with the whole force and resources of the country? Then it is, that the offers of the executive will come with weight, when they come with evidence of union in the government, and of mutual confidence among the various departments.

Some gentlemen have supported this amendment on the ground, that it will give confidence to the people of this country in the executive; and one gentleman from Virginia, (Mr. Nicholas,) has gone so far as to say, that the people of this country will not support the government, unless its measures are right. Admitting this opinion to be true, (and I am inclined to think it may be,) still it will remain to be inquired, by what means and on what standard the people would form their opinion of the propriety and wisdom of the measures, pursued by their government. Not certainly from the declarations of that gentleman or his friends; because there has not been one measure adopted by the government, since its formation, which they have not opposed in the House and out of it, on which they have not set the stamp of their most decided censure; and yet, sir, we have seen all these measures supported and approved of by the people. We have seen the

d

late President, who was in a peculiar manner the author of them, under whose auspices they were adopted and established, in spite of the most violent and persevering opposition from these very gentlemenwe have seen him surrounded with applauses, with gratitude and with thanks, from every quarter of the union; we have seen the wisdom and firmness of his administration made one very principal ground of these thanks and applauses; and even in a former House of Representatives, where the principles of these gentlemen did so greatly preponderate, when they moved to strike out of an address to this great man a clause expressly approving his administration, as wise, firm and greatly beneficial to his country, the motion was overruled by a very large majority; and when the address itself, containing this obnoxious clause, was put to the vote, it passed with only twelve nays. Yet gentlemen talk to us, as if they were the standard, by which the people would measure the conduct of government! Sir, the people are not truly estimated by those gentlemen. They are not the blind, ignorant herd which those gentlemen take them to be. They will do in future what they have always done heretofore-they will judge of the measures of government by the measures themselves, and by the just confidence which they have long placed in those whom they have appointed to administer it; not by the opinions or invectives of this or that set of men, either on this floor or out of doors. Gentlemen ought to be admonished, by the frequent and always unsuccessful appeals, which they have made to the people, to give up at length this vain chimera of being able to rule public opinion, with which they have so long suffered themselves to be deluded.

I hold, sir, in my hand a paper, from that very quarter where gentlemen probably suppose, and not without appearance of reason, that their labors in the vineyard of opposition have been crowned with most success. It is an address from Mecklenburg county, in