wharves would be erected where wharves now are; and if the United States are at the expense of erecting wharves, they ought to have the jurisdiction of their sites, as well as of the sites of warehouses. This motion was negatived, there being only 12 votes for it. The committee rose and reported the bill; when Mr. HARPER renewed the motion for striking out the proviso in the third section, for the reasons urged in support of the former motion, and because this cession could be of no use to the United States; and, after some few observations upon it, the motion was carried-40 to 31. On motion of Mr. SEWALL, a section was added to the bill, repealing a law of the first session of the fourth Congress, respecting quarantine. It was then ordered to be engrossed for a third reading. JONATHAN HASFIELD. On motion of Mr. D. FOSTER, a report of the Committee of Claims, on the petition of Jonathan Hasfield, who claimed $258 for the public service, was taken up. This report, which was favorable, was concurred in, and a bill reported for his relief; it was read and committed. GAZZAM, TAYLOR, AND JONES. On motion of Mr. S. SMITH, a report on the petition of Gazzam, Taylor, and Jones, made at the last session, allowing them certain drawbacks for which they prayed, was taken up and concur red in, and a bill reported, read, and committed for their relief. ALIEN AND SEDITION LAWS. (JANUARY, 1799. Extract of a letter from Rufus King, Esq., Minister [TRANSLATION.] Decree of the Executive Directory, of October 29, 1798. The Executive Directory, upon the report of the Minister of Foreign Relations, considering that the fleets, privateers, and ships, of England and Russia, are in part equipped by foreigners. Considering that this violation is a manifest abuse of the rights of nations, and that the Powers of Europe have not taken any measures to prohibit it. Decrees: 1st. Every individual, native (ou originaire) of friendly countries, allied to the French Republic, or neutral, bearing a commission, granted by the enemies of France, or making part of the crews of ships of war, and others, enemies, shall be by this single fact declared pirate, and treated as such, without being permitted in any case to allege that he had been forced into such service by violence, threats, or otherwise. a 2d. The Executive Directories of the Batavian, Lagurian, Cisalpine, and Roman Republics, shall be instructed to this effect. 3d. The provisions contained in the first article shall be notified to those Powers which are neutral or allied to the French Republic. 4th. The Minister of Exterior Relations is charged with the execution of the present arrêt which shall be printed in the Bulletin of the Laws. [Signed] TERILHARD, President. The Message and documents were read, and or TUESDAY, January 29. THOMAS SUMTER, from South Carolina, appeared, and took his seat in the House. The bill respecting quarantines and health laws, was read the third time and passed. Mr. BROWN presented a memorial from a num-dered to lie on the table. ber of the inhabitants of the county of Northampton, in this State, expressing, in very strong terms, their alarm'at, and dissatisfaction with, the alien and sedition laws, passed at the last session, which they state as contrary not only to the spirit but to the letter of the Constitution. They complain, also, of the law giving the President power to raise a provisional army when he shall judge proper, and of that which allows him to pay any interest for money, which he may judge right, as increasing the Executive power at the expense of the other departments of the Government. AUGMENTATION OF THE NAVY. On motion of Mr. JOSIAH PARKER, the House went into a Committee of the Whole, on the report of the Navy Committee, Mr. RUTLEDGE in This memorial was referred to the same Com- the Chair; and, after some discussion, the committee of the Whole to which was referred a re-mittee rose, and reported the following resolumonstrance of the same kind from Suffolk county, in the State of New York. tions: Resolved, That two docks be established in the United States, and that 50,000 dollars be appropriated therefor. Resolved, That 100,000 dollars be appropriated for the annual purchase of timber to be used or preserved for building ships or vessels of war of the United States. Resolved, That the Navy be augmented by a number not exceeding six, of ships of war, to carry not less than seventy-four guns, (to be built within the United States,) and a number not exceeding six, of sloops-of-war, carrying not less than eighteen guns, (to be built or purchased within the United States,) and that a sum not exceeding one million of dollars be appropriated therefor. Resolved, That the President of the United States be authorized by law to augment the number of guns on board any ship now in service, or building, above the number such ship may be rated, and that 35,000 dollars be appropriated for that purpose. Resolved, That the President of the United States shall be authorized to take on the Naval Establishment such of the revenue cutters now in service, as may be, in his opinion, fit for service abroad. The words within parenthesis, were introduced on motion of Mr. LIVINGSTON. [H. OF R. such immense expense to the country. They had reference to the enormous expense of the three frigates already built, which had cost more, they said, than double the price that six frigates were originally estimated at, and which, it is probable, would never have been built, if the whole expense had been at first stated. It was urged by the friends of the resolution, that one million would be as much money as could be expended, though every possible exertion was made, considering the number of vessels al The first resolution was agreed to without de-ready building. bate. This resolution was the only one upon which a division was called. It was carried, by 52 members rising in its favor. Mr. PARKER stated that one of the docks was proposed for the Eastern and the other for the Middle States. Mr. PARKER stated the object of the 4th resoluMr. P. stated, in support of the second resolution to be, to enable the President to put on board tion, that it was necessary to secure a sufficient three of the 24-gun vessels, 8 additional guns, quantity of timber, and to have it in readiness for making them frigates of 32 guns. The 5th resobuilding ships of war. To effect this, he suppos- lution was to place such of the revenue cutters ed it would be necessary to purchase a forest cov- on the Navy Establishment as might appear proered with live oak and red cedar. And having per. A law was passed at the last session to take good timber secured, no nation in the world could them into service; but not being placed on the build better ships than the United States. Navy Establishment, the officers are unwilling to go into the service, without the same rank and pay with the officers in the Navy, and one of them had refused to act. This resolution is necessary to rectify the defect. It was objected to by Mr. MACON, that this was not a proper time to go into a speculation of purchasing land, for the sake of a future supply of timber, when we are obliged to pay eight per cent. for all the money which the Government borrows; he wished no more money to be appropriated than was necessary for a present supply of timber. No opposition was made to these resolutions; and the whole were referred to the select committee who reported them, to bring in a bill or bills accordingly. The motion was carried without a division. The House went into committee on two bills, In respect to the third resolution, Mr. PARKER which were agreed to, and ordered to be engrossstated that, according to the estimate of the Sec-ed, viz: a bill for the relief of Gazzam, Taylor, retary of the Navy, six 74-gun ships would cost and Jones, and a bill for the relief of Jonathan near $2,400,000, and the six smaller vessels about Haskill. $300,000; but, though the smaller vessels are immediately wanted, the 74's could not be built in less than a year, he, therefore, supposed that if one million of dollars were appropriated, it would be as much as would be expended before the next session of Congress. Mr. HARPER and Mr. S. SMITH supported the same opinion. WEDNESDAY, January 30. The bill for the relief of Gazzam, Taylor, and Jones, and the bill for the relief of Jonathan Haskill, were read the third time and passed. ALIEN AND SEDITION LAWS. Mr. EGGLESTON presented a petition from the inhabitants of Amelia county, Virginia, censuring many of the measures of the General Government, calling the British Treaty the first link in its chain of errors, and complaining that it follows too much the policy of the British Government, and particularly prays that the alien and sedition laws, which it terms impolitic, tyrannical, and unconstitutional, may be obliterated from our statute book; and, also, that the law authorizing the President to raise a provisional army may be repealed. Mr. HARPER, from the Committee of Ways and Means, reported a bill for the support of the MiliIt was objected by Messrs. NICHOLAS and GAL-tary Establishment for the year 1799; which was LATIN, that if it were meant that these vessels committed. should be built within a year, as had been mentioned, the whole two millions and a half of dollars ought to be appropriated; that one million only being asked for, was a proof that they would not be built within the time stated; they suspected these vessels are not wanted to meet the present supposed emergency, but that the present moment is merely seized as favorable for carrying into effect the favorite project of a Navy, as a permanent establishment, and that a commencement having been once made in the business, the ships might be completed at leisure. They were, therefore, opposed to the resolution, and said that those who think it would be desirable at this time to have these vessels, ought also to be opposed to it. since it is evident that they are wanted for future purposes; and considering the present time, when money can only be obtained at a very high rate, as a very improper season to go into a work o Mr. E. having moved to refer this petition to the same Committee of the Whole to which former petitions of the same nature had been referred, The SPEAKER laid before the House an address H. OF R.] Alien and Sedition Laws. [JANUARY, 1799. and remonstance from Essex county, in New Jer- reduce the right of petitioning? Have not the sey, of the same nature, though couched in less people a right, said Mr. L., to say to Congress, pointed language, which he wished to have the You have done wrong, you have exceeded your same direction; which having been read, powers." If they think so, who shall stop their Mr. GORDON called for a division of the ques-mouths, since the Constitution has guarantied to tion; and the question being on the Virginia ad- them this right? If gentlemen are so very scrudress, he hoped it would not prevail. Every gen- pulous as to the form of petition, they ought to tleman who had attended to the reading of this bring in a bill, and prescribe a courtly form to the paper, must have heard, he said, that it contained people, with which they would be pleased, and dea libel upon every measure of this Government fining when honest bluntness may be deemed a since its first establishment; and, at the conclu- libel and when not. With respect to the threat ison of the address, there is a sentiment still more alluded to, there is no such thing. Speaking of a exceptionable-a sort of threat, that unless Con- standing army, the petitioners say, "Repeal your gress shall proceed to repeal the two laws in ques-laws establishing armies, and you will find the mition, the militia of that county would not obeylitia a sufficient defence." If, said Mr. L., when the orders of the General Government. If a stop we pass unconstitutional laws, the people are not was not put to the presenting of such petitions as to be permitted to tell us so, the right of petitionthese, this House would be considered as a place ing will be reduced to narrow ground indeed. consecrated to abuse. Mr. ISAAC PARKER said, it could not be wonMr. EGGLESTON believed that the gentleman dered that the gentleman from New York should must have misunderstood that part of the petition so zealously defend petitions of this sort, since he to which he had particularly referred. So far as had called upon the people of the United States, he was acquainted with the gentlemen who sign- when the laws in question passed, to resist their ed the petition, he was sure they never entertained execution, and to come forward and show their such a sentiment. Indeed, they expressly de- disapprobation of them. He agreed with the genclare, in another part of the petition, that they tleman that the people have a right to petition shall always be ready to oppose an invading ene- Congress on any subject they please, but this my, and to obey the will of the majority. He House has a right to protect itself against abuse, hoped gentlemen would not so rigorously ex- and to see that the language of petitions is decent press their disapprobation of this petition, when and proper. The whole of this petition appeared they recollect that this is the first which has been more calculated to insult the majority who passpresented to Congress, though the laws in ques-ed this law than to obtain the redress prayed for. tion are generally disapproved in that State. Most other parts of the State had made representations of their disapprobation to the State Legislature, which he did not think so regular a way as to apply to this House. He hoped, therefore, the petition would be referred. They charge Congress with acting tyrannically, and the Executive with being solicitous to increase the standing Army for other purposes than the public safety. If this petition, like others on the same subject, had been expressed in decent terms, he should have had no objection to have referred it to a select committee. He had voted against the reference of the others, because he thought a Committee of the Whole an improper reference. Mr. NICHOLAS said the gentleman from New Hampshire certainly mistook the passage in the petition to which he had alluded. It merely stated that should a standing army be dispensed with, the militia of the Union would be found equal to Mr. ALLEN was sorry his friend from New the protection of the country. This, at least, is Hampshire had opposed the reference of this pethe natural construction, and he thought gentle-tition. He thought it was desirable that persons men ought not to put the most acrimonious meaning possible upon the words of petitions. Mr. KITTERA thought there was another expression in the petition not less exceptionable; which was," that the solicitude of the Administration for a standing army was a sufficient cause to apprehend that they are ultimately intended for other objects than defence against a foreign enemy." Mr. LIVINGSTON had hoped that the sedition law would have gone far enough for gentlemen, and that they would not have branded petitions to this House with the name of libel. The gentleman from New Hampshire wished this petition to receive the marked disapprobation of the House, because it disapproves of all the measures of Government, and because it contains something like a threat that the militia will not perform their duty. The first allegation was justifiable, he said, to the fullest extent; the second could not be found in the petition. To what would the gentleman | who would sign a petition like this should come forward that they might be disclosed to the world. These addresses are doubtless calculated for a particular object; but there could be no doubt but persons of this description would be held in such general contempt and abhorrence, when they are known, that their designs would fail of effect. He believed the House must be content to sit and hear a number of addresses like this, which he supposed would get worse and worse. He supposed, however, these addresses would in some way or other find their way to the public; and he trusted the honest part of the people would be induced to rise and throw off these people as so many morbid excrescences on the body politic. He had no doubt the end of the business would be confusion to the subscribers of such petitions. Mr. T. CLAIBORNE found fault with the manner in which the gentleman from Massachusetts had spoken of the right of the people to petition. Who, exclaimed Mr. C., gave that gentleman the 龋 right to stand on this floor, but the people? He was afraid Virginia was an eye-sore to some gentlemen, because they choose to express themselves in manly and strong language, and are unwilling to surrender any of their rights as Republicans. But though they speak firmly, said he, they will always obey the laws; and if the President was to order any alien amongst them to be sent out of the country, the order would be obeyed; but the men who executed the order would be the first to say the law is unconstitutional. Mr. LIVINGSTON wished the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. ALLEN) to explain what he meant, when he said "that the honest part of the people would rise and throw off the description of persons who had signed this petition, as a morbid weight upon the Union." [Mr. ALLEN replied, he did not say so.] Mr. L. so understood him, and wished he would explain to the House what he did say. The gentleman from Massachusetts, said Mr. L., does me the honor to suppose some part of the spirit shown against the alien and sedition laws had been excited by me. It is not so; the cause, he said, lies deeper-it is from a firm sense the people have of their rights; but if anything he had said or done had tended to awaken the people to a sense of their rights, he should think he had not lived in vain. Mr. THATCHER said, some gentlemen seemed to suppose that when members took their seats in this House, they surrendered certain rights, and were to be insulted with impunity, though before they came here, they would not have been liable to be so insulted without redress. Mr. S. SMITH observed, that if the gentleman was deprived of some rights by having a seat here, he possessed others, which he did not before possess; since he might say here what he might not like to say out of doors; so that what he loses in one respect he gains in another. Mr. GALLATIN scarcely believed, when the objection to this reference was first made, it would have been serious. He thought, with the gentleman from Connecticut, that the opposition is rather impolitic. This petition is objected against as being a libel, so that after having declared by law that any person who shall find fault with the doings of Government, so far as to bring it into disrepute, shall be guilty of a libel, this doctrine goes a step farther, by saying, that if these opinions are expressed by way of petition, it ought to be adjudged a libel, and not inquired into. And this is to be done, said Mr. G., not by a court or jury, but by ourselves, who passed the laws complained of, taking it for granted we are right and the petitioners wrong, and that whatever opinion differs from ours is libellous, which was effectually to destroy the provision of the Constitution, which guarantees the right of petitioning, and gives to the people the right, at any time, to oppose their opinions to those of Congress; and there is, said he, no way of doing this without charging us with being deficient in wisdom or Something worse; and although gentlemen may not like this, it is so ordered, and cannot be got over by charging a petition with being false or li [H. of R. bellous. He did not mean to justify the petition in all its parts, because it was unnecessary; but he did not think the passages which had been quoted were objectionable. The one he had already justified, and the other respecting the militia did not apply to the militia of that district in particular, but to the militia of the United States. As to the expression alluded to, that the petitioners expect a standing Army is wanted for other purposes than defence against foreign enemies, he saw nothing improper in this. This has been avowed by men high in office; it has been publicly said that the Army is not wanted so much to repel invasion as on account of certain appearances of discontent in some parts of the Union, amongst which was mentioned the part from which this petition comes, and he believed if the question of continuing the Army was to be brought up in this House, there are gentlemen who would make use of this as one of the arguments for the necessity of keeping it up. Mr. EGGLESTON called for the yeas and nays, which were agreed to be taken. Mr. PINCKNEY said, he had attended particularly to the language of the petition, because he thought the indecency of that almost the only ground upon which a petition could with propriety be rejected, and he did not think it so exceptionable as to authorize its rejection. Mr. RUTLEDGE thought it was much to be lamented that the time of the House was so frequently consumed in taking the yeas and nays, and by consequent debate to explain the reason of members' votes. Mr. R. said he should vote against the reference, because he thought it improper that petitions of this kind should go to a Committee of the Whole; they ought either to go to the Committee of Defence, with a view of showing them that their former measures were wrong, or to a select committee, to report upon them to the House. The question was taken by yeas and nays, and carried-73 to 30, as follows: YEAS-John Allen, George Baer, junior, Abraham Baldwin, David Bard, James A. Bayard, Thos. Blount, Jonathan Brace, Richard Brent, David Brooks, Robert Brown, Stephen Bullock, Samuel J. Cabell, John Chapman, Thomas Claiborne, William Charles Cole Claiborne, Matthew Clay, John Clopton, James Cochran, William Craik, John Dawson, John Dennis, George Dent, Joseph Eggleston, Lucas Elmendorf, Thomas Evans, William Findley, Jonathan Freeman, Nathaniel Freeman, jr., Albert Gallatin, James Gillespie, Andrew Gregg, William Barry Grove, John A. Hanna, Robert Goodloe Harper, Carter B. Harrison, Thomas Hartley, Jonathan N. Havens, Joseph Heister, David Holmes, Hezekiah L. Hosmer, James H. Imlay, Walter Jones, James Machir, Nathaniel Macon, William Matthews, Edward Livingston, Matthew Locke, Samuel Lyman, Joseph McDowell, Lewis R. Morris, Anthony New, John Nicholas, Harrison G. Otis, Josiah Parker, Thos. Pinckney, John Reed, James Schureman, Thomas Sinnickson, Tompson J. Skinner, Samuel Smith, William Smith, Richard Sprigg, Richard Stanford, Thomas Sumter, Mark Thomson, Thomas Tillinghast, Abram Trigg, John Trigg, Joseph B. Varnum, Abraham Venable, John Williams, and Robert Williams. NAYS-Bailey Bartlett, William Edmond, Abiel Foster, Dwight Foster, Henry Glen, Chauncey Goodrich, William Gordon, Roger Griswold, William Hindman, John Wilkes Kittera, Isaac Parker, John Rutledge, junior, Samuel Sewall, William Shepard, Peleg Sprague, George Thatcher, Richard Thomas, John E. Van Alen, Peleg Wadsworth, and Robert Waln. STAMP DUTIES. The House being again in Committee of the Whole, on the bill to amend the stamp act, and the documents which had been directed to be obtained relative to the amount of duties received, and with respect to the proper allowance to be made to the Supervisors, having been read, Mr. Oris's motion for filling up the blank for compensating the Supervisors for their trouble in stamping and dispersing the stamps, with six per cent. recurred; when Mr. Oris said, at the time he made this motion, he had obtained an informal estimate from the Commissioner of the Revenue, which appears to have been the foundation of the documents since laid before the House. The allowance of six per cent. was at that time considered by some gentlemen as very exorbitant. We have now some more data on which to form an opinion as to what these officers are entitled to receive, and if this data is to be depended upon, he did not think the sum which he had proposed would be too much. One Supervisor would, indeed, receive more than others, but this is an inequality which cannot be remedied, except an adequate salary were to be given to these officers, instead of a commission upon what they receive; and he should prefer a plan of this kind. In the State of Pennsylvania, Mr. O. said, the amount of duty collected, in the Supervisor's office, for six months, was 18,606 dollars, upward of 11,000 dollars of which was collected in the first quarter, which is attributed to the want of knowledge as to the true consumption of stamps. Mr. O. supposed 8,000 dollars a quarter would be about the average revenue, in this State, in the Supervisor's office, and a commission of six per cent. upon this, would give $1,930. Out of this sum must be deducted the extra expenses of the Supervisor, which, as estimated, would leave a clear profit of 756 dollars. To this sum must be added a commission of one per cent. on money received from other offices, which, supposing it to amount to ten thousand dollars a year, would make an additional hundred dollars. These duties, Mr. O. said, might perhaps increase in a few years, and the Supervisors might receive something from the direct tax, and as he did not wish to give large salaries, though he wished to make every person employed under the Government an adequate compensation for his services, he was willing that this blank should be filled with four per cent., which, though it would be inadequate at present, might become sufficient hereafter, if not, he supposed no objection would be made to an advance. Mr. GALLATIN said that, from a view of the documents on the table, one fact seemed to be certain, [JANUARY, 1799. that whether a Supervisor dispersed a large or a small quantity of stamps, he would stand in need of a person to work the stamp and keep an account of what was delivered out; therefore a sum per cent. might be twice too much to some officers, and far too little in others. He believed it would be improper, on this account, to make a per centage allowance. Nor ought the Inspectors to be classed with the Supervisors, as they have no trouble in either stamping or delivering the stamps. His idea was, that there should be allowance for clerk-hire to each Supervisor, for this special duty, and then allow the ordinary commission of one or one-and-a-half per cent., as is allowed upon other duties. It was true that, at the last session, the Collectors were allowed six per cent. upon the collection of all the internal duties, but as the stamp duty had not then taken place, he did not expect it would have applied to that, but if it was so considered, it was an average sum upon all the duties, and some of them are very troublesome in the collection. In order to enable the committee to form a better judgment as to what allowance will be proper to be made to the Supervisors for stamping and distributing stamps, he would make some remarks on the present actual receipts of these officers. We have had, said Mr. G., an official account laid before us of what is received by them; but there are two omissions in it, one the allowance made at the last session for clerk-hire, and the other the commission which they will receive upon the land tax. Adding these two items, he would state what is the total amount received by the Supervisors of the several States, exclusive of any ance under the stamp act. Mr. G. stated it to be as follows: allow $5,410 5,165 4,648 3,211 3,197 3,131 2,581 2,002 1,658 1,330 These sums are taken from the revenue of 1796 and 1797, and there must be deducted from them what these officers are obliged to pay for clerkhire. This statement shows that it would be inproper to make a per centage allowance, and that four per cent. on the stamp duties in the States of Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Massachusetts, will be too much, and far too little in all the small States. In Pennsylvania, it appears that upward of 18,000 dollars have been received for stamps in the Supervisor's office for six months; but as it is supposed more was received in the first quarter than will be received again, he would suppose, that |
