FRIDAY, January 31. Another member, to wit, WILLIAM BLACKLEDGE, from North Carolina, appeared, produced his credentials, was qualified, and took his seat in the House. Bridge across the Potomac. The House then again resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole on the resolution in favor of authorizing the erection of bridge across the Potomac. Mr. LEWIS.-Mr. Chairman: There is but one point to which, in my opinion, the attention of this committee ought to be directed: Will the erection of the contemplated bridge injure the navigation of the river Potomac? This is the only question applicable to the subject, and the only pivot upon which it ought to turn. Let us, Mr. Chairman, examine the objections and reasoning of the anti-memorialists upon this point. They say in their memorial that "they consider their natural and political rights will be infringed by the adoption of this measure, as the navigation of the river will be injured and obstructed thereby; that from the meeting of the stream and tide-water, at the place where the bridge is contemplated, a tendency will be produced in the impeded stream-water to deposit the earthy particles with which it is charged in time of freshes, and by which they apprehend the present, entire, main and deep channel may be divided into many small and narrow passages, to the great injury of the navigation." This, sir, is the bare assertion of the counter-memorialists; they have not deigned to state one single fact, or adduce the smallest proof in support of a result which they have taken for granted will be inevitable. Although the proof rests upon the opponents to this measure, and not upon its friends, yet I am willing and prepared to prove, by the best evidence the nature of the case will admit, that the navigation of the Potomac, instead of being injured, will be greatly benefited by the erection of this bridge. Sir, the evidence I shall offer is drawn from experience. It is known that in Europe, as well as in this country, piers have been sunk for the express purpose of deepening the channel, and improving the navigation of rivers, and if this experiment has succeeded in all other countries and rivers, surely it will not fail in the Potomac. It is not to be believed that the Potomac is unlike every other river in the world. But, sir, if we had not the aid of experience before us, common sense and common reason would revolt at the idea of injuring the navigation in the manner stated by the countermemorialists. If you oblige vessels of all descriptions to pass through your draw and of course pursue the same channel, will it not have a tendency to deepen and clean the channel, by agitating the sediment which may have settled there, and which will by that means be swept away by the current? and instead of a number of small channels, will it not have the opposite effect of improving and deepening the only [H. OF R. main channel? Surely this must be the effect. believe that the erection of this bridge can in But, Mr. Chairman, whilst I am unwilling to any manner whatever injure the navigation of the Potomac; yet I will candidly admit that the vessels passing to and from Georgetown will experience some little inconvenience at the draw; but that inconvenience will be so very trifling that it will be entirely lost in a comparison with the great general good which will result to the community. Having proved, as I trust, satisfactorily, that the navigation of the Potomac cannot possibly be injured by the adoption of this measure, let us now examine the inconvenience to which vessels passing the draw will be subjected, for this appears now to be the only remaining ground of investigation. We have been told by gentlemen on this floor well acquainted with the building of bridges and of their effects, that little or no detention is experienced in passing the draws. That it frequently happens that vessels pass through without lowering a sail or being detained a single instant when they have a fair wind, and that at no time is it necessary to detain them longer than from five to fifteen minutes. If this information is correct, (and we cannot possibly doubt it,) where, let me ask, is the very great injury to the very few vessels that will have to pass this draw? When I say very few, Mr. Chairman, I have reference to the statement made the other day by my honorable colleague, the chairman of the committee, whose report is now the subject of discussion. He then told us that his statement was taken from absolute entries made at the collector's office at Georgetown for the last seven years, and in that time only twenty-one ships, six brigs, one hundred and thirty-two schooners, and fifty-two sloops had been entered there, making in the whole two hundred and eleven vessels of all descriptions. My colleague at that time omitted to mention, or was not apprised of the fact, that of the vessels entered at Georgetown, a very considerable proportion never went there, but were destined for, and actually loaded at the Eastern Branch. It is very well known that within the last seven years a number of large vessels were loaded at the Eastern Branch by Mr. Barry alone, who was at that time engaged in making large shipments of flour and biscuit to the West Indies; yet all these vessels, as well as a great number employed in removing from Philadelphia the furniture of Congress, of the President, and of the public officers, together with those employed in bringing stores, &c., for the navy yard on the Eastern Branch, were all entered at Georgetown, that being the only port of entry for Georgetown and the city of Washington, thereby giving to Georgetown an appearance of commerce which she is not really entitled to. I have ascertained that some years ago several foreign vessels resorted to the port of Georgetown to carry away the tobacco of that town and Bladensburg, and that the ships used to lie in the Eastern Branch to obtain their H. OF R.] ABRIDGMENT OF THE Bridge across the Potomac. (JANUARY, 1806 cargo from both places. That this trade has and still think, there ought to be a bridge at declined cannot be denied, for it is an incon- Georgetown, and if the people of that place are trovertible fact that the only ship destined for of the same opinion, and will propose it, I will Georgetown last year, called the William Mur- promise to vote for it. Is it necessary already dock, Captain Tom, was loaded at Barry's wharf, to remind the people of Georgetown that for on the Eastern Branch, because there was not their exclusive benefit one arm of the river sufficient water over the bar below Georgetown Potomac has been entirely closed, by authorizing to admit her passage to and from that place. a dam from Mason's Island to the Virginia shore, Now, sir, from the whole number of vessels of which gives to them, in some measure, a moall descriptions entered at Georgetown for the nopoly of the flour which comes down the Polast seven years, we may fairly deduct one-fourth tomac? and are we now to be told by the same for those which never went there; there will people that we possess no constitutional right then remain 158 as having actually passed up to authorize a bridge across the Potomac for the the river to that place during that time; which, public good, even with a free passage to vessels divided by seven, will be something less than of all descriptions, and that even if we possess twenty-three vessels in each year, and not quite the right, it would be a wanton and cruel exerone for each fortnight. Thus, then, sir, this cise of it? The erection of the dam will cermighty obstacle-these great delays by a draw-tainly prevent flour boats from going to Alexbridge after investigation become very incon-andria at particular seasons of the year, when siderable. Indeed, the first is proven to be nothing, and the last too trifling to deserve serious consideration. But, Mr. Chairman, in order to remove every objection, or even doubt, which can possibly exist with any part of the committee, I am willing to insert a clause in the bill obliging the Bridge Company to compensate for any loss by detention at the draw. We have been told by the counter-memorialists, and it has been reiterated here, "that natural advantages ought not to be injured by artificial means." Upon this subject, Mr. Chairman, the people of Georgetown ought to have been silent; they are not aware of a retort which this objection will force upon them. Will they recollect, sir, that to artificial means alone they are indebted for the greatest part of their commerce? Will they recollect that from artificial means alone the towns of Baltimore and Alexandria have been deprived of their natural advantages to the exclusive benefit of Georgetown? Do they not know that the improvement of the Potomac above them has diverted from its natural course a commerce which belonged to others and which now enriches them? And will they permit me to remind them that even to the erection of a bridge they owe no inconsiderable share of their commerce? Yes, sir, I will remind the people of Georgetown of advantages from artificial means which they ought not to have forgotten, because to them, in a great measure, they owe their present commercial standing. The bridge below the Little Falls, at the head of the navigation of the Potomac, has given to Georgetown a considerable quantity of produce from Virginia which must otherwise have gone to Alexandria. I am very far from objecting to the means by which the importance of Georgetown has been acquired. I was pleased with the erection of a bridge at the Little Falls, because it was a convenience generally, and particularly so to that part of the country from which I come, and from the same principle I should be glad to see a number of other bridges erected, both above and below the Falls. I have always thought, high winds are frequent, as they will be obliged to go a considerable distance round Mason's Island, exposed to a wide and unprotected sheet of water, which will subject them to considerable danger, even when the wind is moderate; but before the erection of this dam, the boats could go down to Alexandria at almost any season, and with almost any wind, as they could, and covered by its banks were perfectly secure. and did, always keep close to the Virginia shore, This measure, as well as the erection of the bridge at the Falls, was evidently injurious to the interests of Alexandria. Yet, sir, had we any complaints from that quarter? Were our rights questioned by them, and our motives censured? Were we told by them that "no place should calculate on artificial advantages, which cannot be afforded without depriving other places of their natural advantages?" No, sir, they were silent; not even a murmur escaped them; they had no wish to deprive their neighbors of any advantages they could derive from should in some measure be affected by it; they "artificial means," although their interests felt none of those jealousies which appear now to influence their neighbors. It is well known that at the last session of Congress I was in favor of the causeway from Mason's Island to the Virginia shore. I did not believe at that time it could do any injury to the public, and as the people of Georgetown supposed it would benefit them by reclaiming a channel considerably injured by natural causes, I could have no reasonable objection to the experiment, and of course gave to it my support. G. W. CAMPBELL, MAGRUDER, VARNUM, and Mr. QUINCY supported; and Messrs. DAWSON, MASTERS, opposed the resolution; when the question was taken, and the resolution carriedyeas 60, nays 51. The committee immediately lution. The House took the report into conrose and reported their agreement to the resosideration. On concurring in the resolution the yeas and nays were called; and were—yeas 61, nays 49, as follows: M. Bedinger, Silas Betton, William Butler, Levi FEBRUARY, 1806.] Intercourse with Great Britain. [H. OF R. Intercourse with Great Britain. Mr. J. RANDOLPH said the House would recol Casey, Martin Chittenden, John Claiborne, Chris- | assert our rights, and support the dignity of the NAYS-Willis Alston, junior, Isaac Anderson, John Archer, David Bard, Barnabas Bidwell, John Blake, jr., Thomas Blount, Robert Brown, Joseph Bryan, George W. Campbell, John Campbell, John Chandler, Samuel W. Dana, John Davenport, jun., John Dawson, Peter Early, James Elliot, John Fowler, Charles Goldsborough, Edwin Gray, Andrew Gregg, Isaiah L. Green, John Hamilton, James Holland, David Holmes, Patrick Magruder, Robert Marion, Josiah Masters, Jeremiah Morrow, John Morrow, Jeremiah Nelson, Roger Nelson, Gideon Olin, Timothy Pitkin, jun., John Rea of Pennsylvania, John Rhea of Tennessee, Thomas Sanford, James Sloan, John Cotton Smith, John Smith, O'Brien Smith, Samuel Smith, Samuel Tenny, Joseph B. Varnum, Matthew Walton, John Whitehill, Robert Whitehill, David R. Williams, and Marmaduke Williams. Ordered, That a bill, or bills, be brought in, pursuant to the foregoing resolution; and that Mr. THOMPSON of Virginia, Mr. CAMPBELL of Maryland, Mr. LEWIS, Mr. MAGRUDER, and Mr. BUTLER, do prepare and bring in the same. MONDAY, February 3. A memorial of the merchants of the town of Boston, in the State of Massachusetts, was presented to the House and read, stating that they have witnessed, with mingled feelings of indignation towards the perpetrators, and of commiseration for their unfortunate countrymen, the insults and barbarities which the commerce of these States has sustained from the cruisers of France and Spain; but that it is their object, in the present memorial, to confine their animadversions to the more alarming, because more numerous and extensive detentions and condemnations of American vessels, by Great Britain, and to advert to the principles recently avowed and adopted by her courts, relative to neutral trade in articles of colonial produce: principles which, if admitted, or practised upon in all the latitude which may fairly be inferred to be intended, would be destructive of the navigation, and radically impair the most lucrative commerce of our country; and praying that such measures may be adopted, by negotiation, or otherwise, in the wisdom of the Government, as will tend to disembarrass our commerce, lect better than he did, for he was not present at the time, the very important resolution referred on the motion of the gentleman from Pennsylvania, (Mr. GREGG,) whom he saw in his place, to the Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union. It was no part of his purpose at this time to discuss the merits of that resolution, and it was still further from his purpose to throw any impediment, or create any delay in bringing forward that discussion; the more so, as he considered the whole country south of the seat of Government, and more particularly that part of the country in which he resided, decidedly interested in a speedy and prompt reception or rejection of the proposition. Indeed, such was his opinion of the necessity of its being speedily acted upon, that as soon as he saw the resolution which had been offered, which was not until Friday, when it was laid on their table, the first suggestion of his mind was to move the going immediately into a Committee of the Whole on it; as those gentlemen with whom he had the honor of holding personal and political intercourse would testify. But a more mature reflection had convinced him that before the resolution could receive that ultimate decision which he trusted it would receive, the House stood in need of material information, which, however it might be in the possession of this or that individual, was not possessed by the body of the House. His object in addressing the House was to obtain this information from the proper authority, from the Head of a Department, which was the only way in which information of a satisfactory nature, such as ought to influence the decision of the House, ought to be obtained. Mr. R. then submitted the following resolution: Resolved, That the Secretary of the Treasury be directed to lay before this House a statement of the exports and imports of the United States, to and from Great Britain and Ireland, and the American colonies of the same, for the two last years, distinguishing the colonial trade from that of the mother country, and specifying the various articles of export and import, with the amount of duties payable on the latter. Mr. SMILIE expressed himself in favor of the resolution, and observed that the species of information called for, had not been received by the House later than 1803. Mr. CROWNINSHIELD was of opinion that it would be best to extend the resolution so as to embrace the British Provinces of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, and the provinces beyond the Cape of Good Hope. A conversation of some length ensued between Messrs. CROWNINSHIELD, BIDWELL, and ALSTON, on the one side; and Messrs. J. RANDOLPH and J. CLAY, on the other, on amending H. OF R.] Non-Intercourse with Great Britain. [FEBRUARY, 1806. the resolution. The former gentlemen were for | able moment for the adoption of such a plan. amending the resolution so as to embrace a At this time the ports of the belligerent powers period of peace as well as war, and to obtain are open, and the effect of the measures, which information from "all the dependencies of Great I am about to propose, will not have an immeBritain," which the latter gentlemen opposed diate distressing effect upon the West Indies. on various grounds, one of which was, that if If these measures are taken, the powers of this additional information were desirable, it Europe will find that, unless they admit our could be obtained by a distinct resolution. ships into their colonial ports in time of peace, the trade between their colonies and us will be cut off by a system which will be but slightly injurious to ourselves. I think, I repeat it, that a permanent system, mild but firin, will be more likely to induce Great Britain, in particular, to recede from the unjust pretensions she has set up, than more violent and extreme measures, which, from their very nature and their injurious consequences to ourselves, must be necessarily temporary. On Mr. CROWNINSHIELD's motion to amend the resolution, so as to extend it to “British dependencies," generally, the House divided—ayes 43, noes 67. Mr. NICHOLSON suggested the propriety of adding the following words to the resolution, in which the mover acquiescing, they were incorporated into it: quan "And also a statement showing in detail the tity and value of the like articles of import brought into the United States, from other nations respectively, with the rate and amount of duty thereon." The resolution, thus modified, was agreed to without a division. Mr. CROWNINSHIELD then moved the following resolution. He said, in substance it was the same with the amendment which he had proposed to the resolution of the gentleman from Virginia: Resolved, That the Secretary of the Treasury be directed to lay before this House a statement of the amount of the exports and imports to and from the British dependencies, other than those of America, for the last two years. This resolution was likewise agreed to without a division. Mr. C. concluded, with offering the following resolutions: Resolved, That, after the day of next, no trade or intercourse in any ship or vessel owned in whole or in part by any citizen or subject of any foreign Government, shall be permitted between the United States or their Territories, and any port or place in the colonies or dominions of any European power, which trade or intercourse is not permanently permitted by the laws or regulations of such European power, to be carried on in ships or vessels of the United States. day of afore Resolved, That, after the said, no goods, wares, or merchandise, shall be exported from the United States or their Territories, in any ship or vessel owned in whole or in part by any citizen or subject of any foreign Government, to any port or place in the colonies or dominions of any European power, the importation of which into such port or place, in ships or vessels of the United States, is not permanently permitted by the laws or regulations of such European power. afore Resolved, That, after the day of said, no goods, wares, or merchandise, shall be imported into the United States or their Territories, in any ship or vessel owned in whole or in part by any citizen or subject of any foreign Government, from any port or place in the colonies or dominions of any European power, the exportation of which from such port or place, in ships or vessels of the United States, tions of such European power. is not permanently permitted by the laws or regula Resolved, That, after the day of afore WEDNESDAY, February 5. Non-Intercourse with Great Britain. Mr. CLAY.-The gentleman from Massachusetts having laid on the table a resolution arising out of the present state of our foreign relations, and as that subject is one on which I think there cannot be too much deliberation before we act, or of which too many views cannot be taken, Í will take the liberty of submitting some resolutions which I have drawn up, and to which I ask the attention of the House. In the present state of our relations with foreign powers, it appears to me that a system of commercial regu- said, no goods, wares, or merchandise, shall be imlations, mild and yet firm, one which can be ported into the United States, in any ship or vessel carried into permanent effect without much in- owned in whole or in part by any citizen or subject convenience to ourselves, will be more effectual of any foreign Government, excepting articles of the than any temporary expedients. If we are dis-growth, produce, or manufacture of the colonies or posed to adopt such a system, it will be looked upon by foreign nations as one in which we are likely to persevere. They will consider its probable effects in time of peace upon their colonial possessions, and they may be induced to enter into permanent regulations opening to us a trade with their colonies. The distinction attempted to be made between a war trade and an accustomed trade will be destroyed, and with it the only pretext upon which are founded the vexations and depredations committed on The House again resolved itself into a ComAmerican commerce. The present is a favor-mittee of the Whole, on the bill imposing a duty dominions of such foreign Government, unless such importation be expressly permitted by treaty between the United States and such foreign Government, or unless during a war in which the United States may be a party. The House immediately considered these resolutions, and referred them to a Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union. Importation of Slaves. FEBRUARY, 1806.] Non-Importation of Slaves into Territories. [H. OF R. of ten dollars on every slave imported into the | ELMER, and SMILIE, opposed the motion; when United States. Mr. JACKSON offered a new section, the object of which was to prohibit the importation into the United States of all slaves, brought either from abroad or from any State, except, in the latter case, by citizens of the United States removing to a Territory, to settle therein. Mr. JACKSON viewed this provision as necessary, in consequence of a legal construction given to an act of the last session, which allowed the importation of slaves from abroad into Louisiana. This motion was opposed by Messrs. ALSTON, ELY, MORROW, SPALDING, and SLOAN, who either viewed it as inexpedient in itself, or as proper to be introduced into a distinct bill. Mr. JACKSON said, as it was the wish of his friends, he would withdraw the motion, and offer it on another occasion. No farther amendments having been offered the committee rose, and reported their agree ment to the bill. the yeas and nays were called on it, and wereyeas 42, nays 69, as follows: YEAS.-Willis Alston, jr., George M. Bedinger, Silas Betton, Phanuel Bishop, William Blackledge, Joseph Bryan, William Butler, Levi Casey, Martin Chittenden, Christopher Clark, Matthew Clay, Frederick Conrad, Jacob Crowninshield, Samuel W. Dana, John Davenport, junior, John Dawson, Elias Earle, Peter Early, James Elliot, James M. Garnett, Edwin Gray, James Holland, John G. Jackson, Walter Jones, Thomas Kenan, Robert Marion, Josiah Masters, William McCreery, David Meriwether, Thomas Moore, Rhea of Tennessee, Thomas Sanford, O'Brien Smith, Timothy Pitkin, jr., Thomas M. Randolph, John Thomas Spalding, Samuel Taggart, Samuel Tenney, David Thomas, Thomas W. Thompson, David R. Williams, and Thomas Wynns. NAYS-Isaac Anderson, John Archer, Joseph Barker, John Blake, jr., Thomas Blount, Robert Brown, John Chandler, John Claiborne, Joseph Clay, Leonard Covington, Richard Cutts, Ezra Darby, Ebenezer Elmer, William Ely, John W. Eppes, William Findlay, James Fisk, John Fowler, Peterson Goodwyn, AnThe House immediately considered the report. drew Gregg, Isaiah L. Green, Silas Halsey, John The amendment limiting the imposition of the Hamilton, Seth Hastings, David Holmes, David tax to the first day of January, 1808, was disa-Hough, Nehemiah Knight, John Lambert, Michael greed to; and the other amendments agreed to. Mr. JACKSON inquired what the effects would be of the forfeiture of the cargo, in case slaves were smuggled into the United States? Would they be kept in the service of the United States? He did not wish to have any thing to do with them. Mr. JOHN C. SMITH said, he had voted for the resolution; but the defects in the details of the bill were so glaring, that he hoped it would be referred to a select committee, that it might be so modified as to cure these defects; or, that in case it were found insusceptible of modification, it might be rejected. Mr. S. accordingly moved the recommitment of the bill to a select committee. Leib, Joseph Lewis, junior, Matthew Lyon, Patrick Mr. JACKSON moved to strike out the proviso of the bill, which motion was disagreed to; when the bill was ordered to be engrossed for a Mr. JACKSON advocated this motion, and re-third reading to-morrow-ayes 69. marked that the proviso of the bill that declared the duty should not be construed as giving a sanction to the importation of slaves, offered an additional reason for either rejecting or recommitting it. How could this language be used with propriety in a law, when the constitution, the highest authority, authorized the trade? Mr. QUINCY spoke to the like effect, and further inquired, whether it was the intention of gentlemen to apply the provisions of the bill to slaves navigating the ships of the United States. Messrs. HASTINGS and SLOAN defended the provisions of the bill as perfectly correct. They observed that slaves were considered as property, as merchandise, and could only, therefore, in the bill be treated as such. The motion to recommit was lost-ayes 39, noes 61. Mr. CROWNINSHIELD spoke against the bill, and moved its postponement to an indefinite day. Messrs. JOHN C. SMITH, TAGGART, and RHEA of Tenuessee, supported; and Messrs. SLOAN, VOL. III.-26 THURSDAY, February 6. Another member, to wit, from South Carolina, RICHARD WYNN, appeared, produced his credentials, was qualified, and took his seat in the House." FRIDAY, February 7. Non-Importation of Slaves into Territories.* On motion of Mr. D. R. WILLIAMS the House came to the following resolution: Resolved, That a committee be appointed to inquire whether any, and if any, what additional provisions are necessary to prevent the importation of slaves into the Territories of the United States. A committee of five members were appointed. *The constitutional power of Congress to prohibit the importation of slaves into States, did not accrue till the year 1808; but Territories not being States, the constitutional prohibition had no application to them. |