« AnteriorContinuar »
H. OF R.
Lewis B. Sturges, George Sullivan, Samuel Taggart, venson Archer, David Bard, Josiah Bartlett, William Benj'n Tallmadge, Uri Tracy, Leonard White, David W. Bibb, William Blackledge, Robert Brown, William R. Williams, and Thomas Wilson.
Butler, John C. Calhoun, James Cochran, John ClopNars-Willis Alston, jr., William Anderson, Ste- ton, Lewis Condict, William Crawford, Roger Davis, friends of the measure, with open doors, without dis- represented, in the fragment of a speech dedicated to closing his particular motion, he engages in an argu. my constituents. When this publication first apment which, after consuming one hour, is now denom- peared, I was content to let it pass without notice. inated a fragment only ; and, when required by the The facts, as I believed, were too notorious to be disHouse, reluctantly submits the negative proposition torted. The very circumstance that the Speaker of thas it is not expedient at this time, under existing the House of Representatives should feel himself recircumstances, to go to war with Great Britain! Can duced to a defence of his decisions in the public prints I be mistaken in believing that the refusal of the seemed to me, of itself, enough to satisfy all reflecting House to consider such a proposition, so brought for- men that there must be something wrong at bottom: ward, will be approved by the good sense of an intel- and my ambition did not aspire to the honor of a newsligent public? It is said that a precedent for such a paper contest with any man, however high his dignity motion is to be found in the motion of Mr. Sprigg, in the State. I was, therefore, content to let the matmade in 1798. That gentleman, when the House was ter rest where it stood. But my friends have urged in Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union, me not to permit this publication, although it derives offered three resolutions, of which one was negative, its sole claim to consideration from its official charand the other two affirmative. The subject before the acter, to pass unnoticed, lest the public mind, so habitcommittee was the President's Message of 19th March, uated to authority, should be misled by it. In defer1798. At that time the practice (now no longer existence to their judgment, I enter on this task, with a ing) prevailed to discuss such messages in full. That reluctance, the evidence of which will be found in the message was a war message. Being under consider cold and sluggish manner in which it is executed. ation, it was the nature of an affirmative proposition
Of all men, it especially behooves him who brings for war, to which Mr. Sprigg's motion, in the nature
a charge against his neighbor, to avoid the error which of an amendment, was the negative. The message he reprehends. There is something repugnant to our was the text, the primary subject; his motion was in natural sense of justice to behold any man, however cidental and ancillary. But Mr. R.'s motion was high his station, or great his claims to knowledge, reprimitive, and not appertunant to any pending ques- proving in another that failing, of which he himself
, in tion. In the instance of Mr. Sprigg, no point was his own person, affords a striking example. We would made whether the committee would consider the pro- not endure, even from Solomon himself—a king, and position. Perhaps, being a direct response to the mes- the wisest of mankind-a reproof to the meanest of sage, they were bound to consider it, or not to act his subjects, because he did not confine himself to a upon the message. Out of Mr. R.'s motion, supposing single wife. This repugnance will be heightened when it adopted, no positive act could grow. It would be as the example is exhibited in the very act of rebuke; if the House should formally adopt an original resolu- and we reach the last stage of disgust, when we distion that they would not pass a particular law. The cover that the accused is innocent of the charge laid cases of Mr. R. and Mr. S. are not analogous. Sup. at his door-the accuser alone guilty. But I will close posing, however, that they were, in all their material my prefatory remarks,” and now proceed to specify circumstances, what would be proven? Only that some of the instances of omission of material circuma body, having the power to prescribe the time when stances, or of unfairness of statement, on the part of it will consider the subjects brought before it has seen Mr. Clay. fit at one time (no reason then existing against it) to
It was not “in the commencement of his observadeliberate upon a question, which at another time (when there are cogent reasons against it) it has not tions that Mr. Randolph was called to order by Mr. thought proper to consider.
Wright,” Mr. R. had been speaking some time; had The right of the House of Representatives to regu. Government with its agent at Paris, and had advanced
read several extracts from the correspondence of our late its own proceedings is quite manifest, whether we advert to the express provision of the Constitution, or considerably into the case of the New Orleans Packet, to the nature and properties of a deliberative body. It when he was interrupted by Mr. Wright. The Speak is undoubtedly responsible for the abuse of that right, er's decision that Mr. R. had a right to proceed, inas. no less than it is for the abuse of any other power with much as he had declared his intention to submit a mowhich it is invested. Whether, in the instance under tion, and his permitting that gentleman to proceed, consideration, it has so abused its authority as to excite according to his own statement, "for at least one alarm or justify censure, will be justly determined by hour," are facts conclusive of the point of order. the candor of the public, to whom alone it is amenable. It does not become me to question the ignorance,
H. CLAY. pleaded by the Speaker, of “the case on which his WASHINGTON, June 17, 1812.
friend Dr. Bibb decided, while acting as his substitute in the Chair.” Although the circumstance is cer
tainly an extraordinary one, I shall not insinuate a From the National Intelligencer of June 8, 1812. doubt that the Speaker was so disengaged, or engaged,
In the “* National Intelligencer" of the 18th of June while out of the Chair, that he did not observe an octhere appeared a production signed “ H. Clay," which currence, which attracted the general attention of the purports to supply “the omission of material circum- House and of the spectators. This transaction took stances, in relation to a late transaction in the House place on the 29th of May; Mr. Clay's publication of Representatives," and to “set fully and accurately" bears date the 17th of June. I cannot sufficiently adbefore the public that matter, which the writer more mire his want of that dangerous quality, curiosity, than insinuates to have been partially and incorrectly manifested by his refraining for three weeks from mak
12th Con. Ist Sess.-47
H. of R.
John Dawson, Joseph Desha, Samuel Dinsmoor, Elias Hawes, John M. Hyneman, Rich'd M. Johnson, Joseph Earle, William Findley, James Fisk, Thomas Gholson, Kent, William R. King, Abner Lacock, Joseph LefePeterson Goodwyn, Isaiah L. Green, Felix Grundy, ver, Peter Little, William Lowndes, Aaron Lyle, ThoBolling Hall, Obed Hall, John A. Harper, Aylett mas Moore, William McCoy, Samuel McKee, Alex. ing himself acquainted with the decision of Dr. Bibb, motion or to withhold it,” and take my seat in silence. who lodges next door to him, and under the same roof. In like manner there was no compulsion used upon
“I will not say what was the case upon which that those unhappy people of old, who obstinately and pergentleman, (Dr. Bibb,) while he was so kind as to versely imagined themselves to be exiled from Rome. represent me, was called upon to decide”—Mr. Clay's They were only interdicted the use of fire and water letter, the first column, Again—"It results that be- so long as they should remain there. No compulsion tween the decisions of Mr. Bibb and mine, certainly at all in the case ! “It depended entirely upon their between my own, there existed no discrepancy."- own pleasure whether they would go or stay”—and What! No “discrepancy” proved to exist between yet these wayward objects of the tender regard of the an unknown and a known decision? The train of majority for their rights, fancied themselves under reasoning which leads to results like this is a new and compulsion, and vented their party spleen by leaving invaluable discovery in logic. It far surpasses the old their homes in disgust. method of reasoning from the known to the unknown, When the decision was given in favor of Mr. Caland is even an improvement upon the modern practice houn's appeal to the Chair, and the motion was subof reasoning to things unknown from things more un-mitted in writing, Mr. Randolph asked if he was at known-ignotum per ignotius.
liberty to proceed! The Speaker decided that he was. Mr. Bibb's decision, on the repetition of the call to Mr. R. did accordingly proceed for about a minute, order by Mr. Calhoun, was substantially the same with when he was again called to order, and the Speaker, that of the Speaker, on the interruption by Mr. Wright. declaring that he had given a hasty opinion, reversed And, as Mr. Clay may not have " particularly directed his decision. From this an appeal was taken by Mr. bis attention to this point,” also, I beg leave to inform R., but withdrawn out of respect to his friend, Mr. him that the “discrepancy” between himself and Dr. Macon, who said that “ he had no doubt the decision Bibb may be found in the recorded vote of the latter to reduce the motion to writing and submit it (against gentleman on the Journals of the House, affirning which he had voted) was wrong, but the House havthe Speaker to have decided contrary to order. But ing established”—Here Mr. Randolph interrupted him what reasonable man will, for a moment, attach any and said, that out of respect to his friend, he would blame to the Speaker for ignorance of the “discrep- withdraw his appeal. This he did under a mistaken ancy” which existed between Dr. Bibb's and his own idea that Mr. Macon would support, by his vote, the decision, when he appears unconscious of his dis- subsequent decision of the Chair.
He regretted very crepancy” with himself. That he should forget his much the withdrawal of the appeal, when he afterown repeated decisions, on former occasions, is not so wards discovered that he had misapprehended the much to be wondered at, as that he should appear in- vote which that gentleman was about to have given. sensible to the manifest fact, that twice within the It will not escape attention, that the facts stated in space of an hour he should have reversed his own the "fragment” of Mr. R.'s speech are few and scarceopinions. Yet such unquestionably was the case.. ly accompanied by comment.. Let me recapitulate
On the subject of those former decisions, I will refer them ; members of the House to the debate in conclave on
1. The call to order by Mr. Wright; whereupon the the embargo bill, when, at a very late hour, Mr. Stan- Speaker decided that Mr. R. was at liberty to proceed, ford and Mr. Randolph were both sustained by the and accordingly he did proceed, " at least one hour,' Chair in the same right against the impatience of the by Mr. Clay's own statement. House; and I would call the general recollection to 2. The repetition of the call to order, by Mr. Calthe case of Mr. Randolph's motion to amend Mr. Ma houn, when Mr. R. was again supported in his right con's proposition to afford relief to the people of Ca to the floor by Dr. Bibb. In this case, the Speaker himself interrupted
3. Mr. Calhoun's second call to order ; "whereupon Mr. Randolph, but as soon as he understood he was the Speaker reversed his own and Dr. Bibb's decision." about to make a motion, withdrew his objection, and 4. The Speaker's declaration that it was not necessustained Mr. Randolph's right to the floor against re- sary to take the vote“ to consider," and that Mr. R. peated calls to order from different quarters of the was at liberty to continue his argument, and his reHouse. After delivering his sentiments on the, mo- traction and reversal of that opinion. tion which he contemplated to make, Mr. R. concluded Let any man read Mr. Clay's letter to the editor of by submitting it to the House.
the National Intelligencer, and then pronounce how It behooves me to admit, that when I presented my far these facts are denied or disproved? I shall not motion “under the compulsion of the House,” the defend the speech against the charge of irrelevancy of Speaker did reply " that it depended upon my own the arguments to the motion, brought against it by pleasure to withhold, or offer it,” which reply is not Mr. Clay. It shall defend itself. Neither shall I stoop stated, it seems, in the “fragment," and appears to to repel the insinuation conveyed in the following constitute one of the omissions, on my part, of which passage of the letter—" even after it [the motion) was Mr. Clay complains. Reader, I was not unconscious reduced to writing, it was believed not to be the one of the omission at the time, but I had no disposition originally contemplated by the mover.” Such insinu. to inform the world, that mockery was added to the ations it is in the power of any man to make. A injustice with which I had been treated; nor can I witty writer-one of the most shrewd observers upon compreher the interest which Mr. Clay can feel in human life and character-has said, " a certain making the fact public.
class of politicians should speak impersonally, to avoid There was no compulsion, mark you!—“It de compromitment." Thus, one of this race ought never pended entirely upon my own pleasure to offer the 'to say “I hear, or I am told, so and so:" because the
H. OF R.
ander McKim, Arunah Metcalf, Samuel L. Mitchill, than Roberts, Ebenezer Sage, Thomas Sammons, EbeJeremiah Morrow, Anthony New, Thomas Newton, nezer Seaver, John Sevier, Adam Seybert, Samuel Stephen Ormsby, Israel Pickens, William Piper, James Shaw, George Smith, John Smith, William Strong, Pleasants, jr., Benjamin Pond, William M. Richard- John Taliaferro, George M. Troup, Charles Turner, jr., son, Samuel Ringgold, John Rhea, John Roane, Jona- Robert Whitehill, Richard Winn, Robert Wright. question immediately occurs, Who told you? And he may be called upon for his authority. But, put it
Monday, June 1. impersonally, it is said, it is reported, it is believed, Mr. Firch presented a memorial and remonand he is quite safe from any such disagreeable conse- strance of sundry inhabitants of Washington quences.
county, in the State of New York, praying that The manner in which Mr. Clay, speaks of my being "all laws authorizing the raising of troops, and acquainted with the projected measure, inasmuch as I all laws interdicting foreign commerce, may be am a member of the Committee of Foreign Relations, repealed; and that a naval force may be graduis calculated to make an impression upon persons unacquainted with the state of affairs at Washington. England, or in any of our State governments, as far Most certainly “on the 30th of May it was not ex. as I am acquainted. The use made of this rule to pected,” by me, at least, or anybody else with whom I consider, which we practice in the House of Repreconversed, that any such measure as “ a declaration of sentatives, (which rule does not exist in the Rules war" would " emanate from that committee.” On the and Orders of the House,) and the abuse of thet precontrary, “it was expected” that a confidential mes vious question," are utterly subversive of the rights of sage would be received from the President, recom- the minority, for the preservation of which, rules are mending the measure, and the chief of my information chiefly instituted, if we are to credit a high authority, was derived, at second hand, from Mr. Clay himself, (Mr. Onslow;] the majority by their numbers being who, in one of his morning rides to Georgetown, a always able to protect themselves. day or two before, communicated the intelligence to By these a member of the minority may be, and is, one of my colleagues, from whom I received it. The prohibited from making any motion whatsoever ; and, authority was good; the thing happened accordingly. all discussion precluded at their pleasure on such The President's Message was referred to the Commit- measures as the majority choose to bring forward. It tee of Foreign Relations; by them to a sub-committee is notorious that the previous question, instead of beof three, (of whom I was not one,) and all the agency ing applied to its legitimate objects, that is, “when a which I had in the transaction (even subsequently to subject is brought forward of a delicate nature, as to the first of June) was to help to make up a quorum high personages, &c., or the discussion of which may while the manifesto was reading.
call forth injurious observations,"I is brought into It is not possible to make out any other difference play altogether on those great topics which especially between Mr. Sprigg's resolution and mine, except the demand discussion; and hence the recent change of substitution of Great Britain for the words “ French the rule which requires a majority to demand the “ preRepublic.” The circumstances, too, were similar. vious question," instead of "any five members," as The minority apprehended war, and were anxious to heretofore. Fortunately, the Constitution secures that avert it from the country. Would Mr. Clay's deci- “ the yeas and nays shall be taken at the requisition of sion have been affected, in case I had added two other one-fifth of the members present;" but even this proresolutions: "one to prevent the arming of merchant vision is greatly evaded by secret sessions, which lock vessels, and the other to provide for the defence of the the vote and the subject from the public eye.
But the practice of the British Parliament is quoted But what at last is the true question in which the in justification of the conduct of the House of Reprepublic are interested? It is, whether, after having been sentatives. I defy any man to show an instance in quibbled into a war by distinctions between “condi- which a member of that Parliament has been subjected tions precedent and conditions subsequent," between to the coercion exercised in the case of Mr. Randolph. “ deerees affecting our neutral rights and decrees af- “A motion to proceed to the orders of the day puts by fecting our rights municipally," we shall now, under whatever subject is under consideration ;” because the the mask of form, be deprived of the substance of free-orders of the day have there, as they have here, a prefdom of speech in the popular branch of the Legisla- erence over ordinary questions. But there is no mode ture; whether we are content to be cast, and lose for- in that Parliament, analogous to the one lately deever this invaluable privilege, for some alleged want vised and set up here, of preventing a member from of nicety in special pleading ?
bringing forward a motion on any subject fit for legisThe right of illustrating and enforcing his motion, lative deliberation, and illustrating and enforcing it by violated for the first time in the case of Mr. Randolph, every argument in his power. Such tyranny would was the last relic of freedom of debate, which new not be borne. Neither would they endure that a memrules and forced constructions had left untouched. ber of the opposition should be repeatedly interrupted The present practice of the House of Representatives upon the same plea of order, and by the same member is an anomaly in legislative proceedings. It is new in this country, and there is nothing similar to it in + On the 25th of May, 1604, is the first instance that I have found
of pulling the previous question. Sir Thomas Liuleton was, there
fore, mislaken, when he says, in Grey's Debales, vol. II, page 113, Mr. Sprigg's motion, March 26, 1798.
"Sir Henry Vane was the first that ever proposed potuing a quesRezolved, That it is the opinion of this committee, that, under existing circumstances, it is not expedient for the United States tion, whether the question should be now put? And since, it has
always been the forerunner of putting the thing in question quite Lo resort to war against the French Republic.
out." Sir Robert Howard, in ihe same debate, says, Resolve Thai provision ought to be made by law for restrict.
vious question is like the image of tbe inventor, a perpetual dis. ing the arming of merchant vessels, except in cases which the
turbance.”—2 Halsell, p. 80. practice was heretofore permitted.
Resolred, That adequate provision be made by law for the pro- See Jefferson's Manual, under the head of the “Previous tection of our seacoast and the internal defence of the country. Question."
* This pre
ally created for the protection of commerce, and An engrossed bill, supplementary to the act, for the defence of our towns and coasts.”—Laid entitled "An act for dividing the Indiana Terrion the table.
tory into two separate governments," was read Mr.Cheves presented sundry resolutions entered the third time, and passed. into at a meeting of the inhabitants of Charles- The House resolved itself into a Committee of ton, South Carolina, approbatory of the measures the Whole on the bill for the relief of William D. of the General Government, and expressive of Beall, which was reported to the House, and ortheir determination to support such measures as dered to be engrossed for a third reading: may be adopted for the maintenance of the rights The report favorable to the petition of William and honor of the country.-Laid on the table. and J. G. Ladds, passed through a Committee of
Mr. Jackson, from the committee appointed the Whole, and was referred to a committee to on the 27th ultimo, presented a bill authorizing report a bill. the discharge of William Peck from his impris- Mr. Quincy said, that by the provisions of ceronment; which was read iwice, and committed tain laws now in existence, the Consuls and Vice 10 a Committee of the Whole to-morrow. Consuls of the United States were authorized to On motion of Mr. ARCHER,
send home vessels and seamen lest destitute in Resolved, That the Committee on the Public foreign ports, and that masters of vessels were Lands be instructed to inquire into the expedi- obliged io receive them at a certain price if it ency of extending the provision of an act, entitled should not exceed ten dollars for each man. It An act granting further time to the purchasers had been found, however, in certain cases, that of land in the Territory Northwest of the river the expense far exceeded that allowance; and, Ohio, to complete their payments," to such per- from certain expressions in the law, the former sons as have purchased fractional sections on the Comptroller did decide that a sum greater than river Ohio, where such fractional sections were ten dollars per man might be allowed for such by law sold together, and amounted to a greater service by the Department of State. The course quantity than 640 acres.
of proceeding in such cases has been regulated The bill for the relief of Clement B. Penrose, by ihat decision. A new Comptroller, however, went through a Committee of the Whole, and had given a different decision, and had considered was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading. that the law precluded the allowance of more
The House resolved itself into a Committee of than ten dollars. This decision, which the Compthe Whole on the bill confirming claims to lands roller had grounded on the positive expression of in the Mississippi Territory, founded on warrants the statute, although it might be correct, the Secof survey granted by the Spanish Government of retary of State conceived would operate oppresWest Florida. The bill was reported with an sively to the citizen. Under these circumstances amendment, which was concurred in by the House, he moved the following resolution: and the bill ordered to be engrossed, and read the Resolved, That a committee be appointed to inquire tbird time to-morrow.
whether any alterations are requisite in the several acts The resolution was ordered to lie on the table. relative to Consuls and Vice Consuls, and for the pro
The House resolved itself into a Committee of tection of American seamen ; and that they have leave the Whole on the bill for the relief of Colonel to report by bill or otherwise. Jonathan Williams. The bill was reported with The resolution was adopted. amendments; which were concurred in by the House, and the bill was ordered to be engrossed,
MISSISSIPPI TERRITORY. and read the third time to-morrow.
Mr. POINDEXTER moved the following resolu
tion: of the Court party, after repeated decisions of the Chair Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives in his favor." The British House of Commons present of the United States of America, in Congress assemtheir Speaker to the Crown for its (nominal) approba- bled, That the Legislature of the State of Georgia be tion; they even ask for the confirmation of their an- and they are hereby, requested to give their assent, by cient privileges; but, under this exterior of humility law, to the formation of two States in the Mississippi and deference towards the Throne, they have sturdily Territory : Provided, In the opinion of Congress, a maintained their rights since the Restoration, and in division of said Territory for that purpose should here. no legislative assembly is the freedom of speech en after be expedient. joyed in greater latitude or security. With all their venality and devotion to Ministers, the members of that
Mr. P. said, it would be recollected that the House know full well that upon the jealous preserva- Senate had postponed the bill for the erection of tion of their privileges depends their weight in the the Territory of Mississippi into a State. The Constitution. It remains to be seen whether an
basis of that decision was, that it was inexpedient American Congress shall be justified by the public to form two Ştates out of that Territory, which sentiment in outstripping a British House of Com-could not be done without the consent of ihe Lemons in ministerial devotion ; in prostrating, from gislature of the State of Georgia, which he theremotives of caprice, temporary convenience, or party fore wished to obtain. spirit, any one of those great fundamental principles, without a religious observance of which, no free Gov
AMERICAN SEAMEN. ernment can endure.
The House resolved itself into a Commistee of JOHN RANDOLPH, of Roanoke. the Whole on the bill for the recovery, protection, JULY %, 1812.
and indemnification of American seamen.
H. OF R.
Mr. CLAY (the Speaker) made a motion for that Government will still continue, by fair and the Committee to rise. He objected to some of honorable negotiation, to endeavor, is possible, to the provisions of the bill, though he applauded procure settlement of a differences with Great and fully coincided in its object. He submitted Britain and France, and thereby avert the calamto the gentleman from Maryland, whether, as it ity of war." was ia contemplation to take a measure still more Mr. MILNOR presented petitions from sundry strong, and which would supersede the necessity inhabitants of the city and county of Philadelof the present, they ought not to suspend the de- phia, and county of Delaware, in the State of cision of the weaker measure till the other was Peonsylvania, stating their firm and unqualified disposed of. At the same time, he pledged him- conviction that the United States are noi impelself, for one, if the stronger measure should fail | led to war against Great Britain by necessity, nor from any cause, that he would agree in the prin- invited to it by expediency; and that the preserciple of the bill, and afford any aid of his 10 vation of peace and the liberation of commerce make its details as perfect as possible.
from domestic restrictions, are absolutely necesMr. Wright said, that even war measures sary to the true interests of the country: would not supersede the necessity of this bill, Mr. Rodman presented several petitions om which contemplated provisions for the support sundry inhabitants of Northampton county, in and remuneration of impressed seamen. He the State of Pennsylvania, praying to the same should not, however, now make any material op- effect with the petitions of sundry other inhabiposition to the rising of the Committee; but be iants of thai county, presented on the eleventh hoped they would not suffer such a stain on their ultimo. ebaracter as to permit thousands on thousands of Mr. BAKER presented a petition from sundry their fellow-citizens to remain in ignominious inhabitants of Jefferson county, in the State of bondage, under treatment worse than that of gal- Virginia, expressive of their disapprobation of the ley_slaves.
measures of the Government tending to war with The Committee then rose, reported progress, Great Britain, and praying that the restrictions and obtained leare to sit again.
on commerce may be repealed.
The SPEAKER presented sundry resolutions SECRET SITTING.
adopted at a public meeting of the inhabitants of A Message was received from the President of Richmond and Manchester, in the State of Virthe United States, which, when opened, the ginia, expressive of their approbation of the meaSPEAKER declared to be of a confidential pature. sures of the General Government, and declaring And the House was cleared of strangers, and so that a prompt, open, and vigorous war against remained until it adjourned.
Great Britain, ought to be declared by Congress.
The said resolutions, petitions, and memorials,
were ordered to lie on the table. TUESDAY, June 2.
A Message was received from the President of The House was cleared of all persons except the United States transmitting copies of a corresthe Members, Clerk, Sergeant-at-Arms, and Door-pondence of the Minister Plenipotentiary of Great keeper, and the doors were closed, and remained Britain with the Secretary of State. so optil
The House was then cleared, and the doors
were closed, and remained so until WEDNESDAY, Jude 3. Another member, to wit: Francis CARR, from
FRIDAY, June 5. Massachusetts, appeared, produced his credentials, A message from the Senate informed the House was qualified, and took his seat.
that the Senate have passed the bill “making The House was then cleared of all persons ex- further provision for setiling the claims to land in cept the Members, Clerk, Sergeant-at-Arms, and the Territory of Louisiana;" and the bill "supDoorkeeper, and the doors were closed, and re- plemental to the act, entitled 'An act for dividmained so until
ing the Indiana Territory into two separate Gov
ernments," with amendments to each. The SenTHURSDAY, June 4.
ate have also passed a bill “supplementary to an Mr. Potter presented sundry resolutions adopt-act, entitled "An act more effectually to provide ed by the Legislature of the State of Rhode for the organization of the militia of the District Island, expressive of their disapprobation. gener- of Columbia ;" in which amendments and bill ally, of the measures pursued by the General they desire the concurrence of this House. And Goveroment, and instructed their Senators and the Senate insist on their amendments disagreed Representatives "to use their utmost endeavors to by this House to the bill “to ascertain and es. to cause the restrictions on commerce to be re- tablish the western boundary of the tract reserved moved; to prevent the passage of the proposed for military bounties allowed to the officers and laws for imposing direct taxes; and to oppose all soldiers of the Virginia line on Continental estabmeasures which may be brought forward iending lishment." to involve the country in war."
The House was then cleared of all persons, and Mr. CHITTENDEN presented a petition of sundry the doors were closed, and, after remaining so for inhabitants of the Siate of Vermont, praying “a some time, they were again opened, and the House repeal of all the restrictions on commerce, and I adjourned.