would be strange conduct-an assumption of power which he hoped the House would never arrogate.

Mr. KITCHELL said his meaning was, that the horse were not established yesterday, but before.

Mr. HARTLEY said it appeared, from good testimony, that the troops were requisite to save the people on the frontiers from the depredations of the Indians; he thought, therefore, that they having been established before, the House were bound to make the appropriation to give effect, or show the great inconsistency. Mr. NICHOLAS said it was not his intention to vote for these men at all; but if they must have them, perhaps it would be most economical to equip them. With respect to their power of withholding the appropriation, he had no doubt; and though they had yesterday passed a law establishing two companies of cavalry, it was in the power of that House, of the Senate, or of the PRESIDENT, to refuse an appropriation. This was the sense of the constitution. When the bill came before the House, he should give his negative to the additional horse; for, if they were always to keep up the same number of men, whether in war or peace, except two-thirds of both Houses were found to oppose the will of the PRESIDENT, they might bid adieu to all restraint upon Executive power, and count upon a military Government, if ever an Executive should be found whose will it should be to make it so. If these were to be kept up, he would still say the House had better go to $100,000 expense to mount them on horseback.

[H. OF R.

local situation of the country, and asserted the absolute necessity of the troops.

The motion was put and carried-there being 56 in favor of it.

Naval Appropriations.

Mr. W. SMITH then proposed to add $172,000 for finishing the frigates United States, Constitution, and Constellation.

Mr. NICHOLAS said he should be against appropriating so large a sum for this purpose. It was the sense of the House, on a former occasion, that it would be proper to appropriate such a sum as should put them in such a situation as to secure them from injury, but to stop short of making them fit for sea, that the expense of manning them might be avoided.

would not be a majority found in that House who would vote against finishing the frigates: as to manning them, that would remain for a future consideration.

Mr. SWANWICK said a new view of the subject seemed to be brought forward at present. Before, they had determined to finish the frigates; but now, they were not to finish them, lest they should be manned, but to finish them in part only. A gentleman yesterday said, when speaking on the subject of the PRESIDENT's Message, that he could not suppose they would have refused to pay the soldiers, though there might be some deficiency in the expression of the act; and might he not suppose, said Mr. S., if the frigates were so nearly finished, he might go on to finish them, and trust to the Legislature to furnish the money? These frigates, he said, were a very extraordinary concern. It seemed as if it was only when it was to be made a present of to Algiers, that a frigate could be finished, and not when it was for the protection of our own Mr. VARNUM said it was observed by gentle-commerce. He trusted, however, that there men that those troops were not mounted; if so, there must have been a very lavish waste of money. However that might be, gentlemen who state this matter ought to state it fairly. They ought not to say that two companies of cavalry were yesterday voted. No, they were part of the old War Establishment. It was true, the House had not the power to repeal the law; but one thing was in their power, and that they ought to do, if they see this part of the standing army necessary. The constitution returns the power to act on it once in every two years to each branch of the Legislature. The House, he thought, had good right to exercise their own opinion on the necessity of mounting these men. It was not in the power of one branch to repeal the law which keeps these men, but we ought to consider whether they are to be put in the same situation as in time of war. Mr. V. said he discharged his duty in voting against this appropriation. The House had a right to judge, and it was not in the power of the PRESIDENT to act for them. Mr. HEATH said that the subject had been fully discussed, and therefore he should only observe, that, from the authority which had recommended the mounting of these cavalry, he should vote for the appropriation.

Mr. MILLEDGE repeated his arguments on the

Mr. PARKER said, it would require all the money which had been named for finishing the frigates, without rigging, though there would be a considerable quantity of materials left on hand. There need be no apprehension of their being manned, whilst seamen's wages remained at the price they were, because men could not be got on the terms stipulated in the law for this purpose. If a smaller sum than was mentioned were to be granted, they might as well give nothing.

Mr. SITGREAVES supposed the blank was now proposed to be filled with the same sum which had been agreed upon on a former occasion. If this were the case, it ought to dissipate the fears of the gentleman from Virginia, (Mr. NICHOLAS,) as it was well known that the sum was predicated upon a supposition that the frigates were not to be manned. If they were to be manned, a further appropriation would certainly be necessary.

Mr. NICHOLAS said, it appeared to him that if all gentlemen were agreed that this business should go no further than the building of the frigates, they could have no hesitation to leave

H. OF R.]

Naval Appropriations.

[MARCH, 1797.

undone some of the internal finishing work of | frigates which had been before voted for were the vessels; if they did not wish to put them reduced to three, with intent to complete them. into such a situation as that they might force Was it not probable then, he would ask, that them into service upon the spur of an alarm, the PRESIDENT would proceed to complete those they could have no objection to their being left frigates, according to the power given him? in such a situation as to be perfectly secure, Was it not to be supposed that contracts were but not finished fit for sea. entered into for that purpose? No person could suppose but contracts were made. Then certainly the House ought not to expose the Executive to the ridiculous situation of receding from his contracts! They would not be finished before next session, and therefore no danger of equipping could be apprehended. It may be necessary to use them, but at any rate it would be running no risk to have them finished, as they could not be manned by this appropriation.

Mr. SITGREAVES said this subject had heretofore undergone a very full discussion. A motion was then made merely to finish the hulls, which was negatived. It was then said that contracts were made for all the materials, and that except the frigates were finished, the engagements which had been entered into could not be fulfilled. But there was another security against the danger apprehended. They had lately come to a determination to make all appropriations specific and particular. What was the language Mr. GALLATIN said, there seemed to be inof the present appropriation? It was for finish-volved in the present consideration the quesing the frigates, not for manning them. If it tion whether or not we should have a Navy. had been said to be for carrying into effect the As to himself, he shot d vote against the prelaw for the Naval Establishment, there might sent appropriation, because if the frigates were have been some little ground for apprehension; completely finished, he should fear they would but, as it now stood, the Executive could not get to sea. When they had on a former occaproceed to man the vessels. sion consented to finish them, it was under the condition of the law for manning being repealed; but they now stood upon new ground. Mr. G. said he had been charged with inconsistency of opinion, from having before said that he thought the PRESIDENT Would not be authorized to proceed in the manning of the vessels under the present law, whilst he was now apprehensive that he might do so. He wished to be on sure ground. He did not know but the PRESIDENT might put a different construction upon the law from him. Indeed, from the experience they had had of Presidential discretion, they need not be surprised if the vessels were sent to sea, though no appropriation was made for the purpose, should the PRESIDENT suppose there was any plea for doing so. As a proof of this power having been exercised heretofore, Mr. G. referred to the Western insurrection. In that case, he said, no appropriation was made for the expense; but the law authorizes the PRESIDENT to call out the militia when he shall see occasion to do so; he called them out, and got money from the Treasury. Indeed, the building of a frigate for Algiers, without any authority, and the pledging of the faith of the nation to pay the expense of the law-suits of our citizens in London, were strong proofs of what the Executive could do.

Mr. NICHOLAS said, when they voted the sum now asked for finishing the frigates, the expenditure was accompanied by a law to repeal the manning clause of the former act. He had made inquiries respecting contracts, and found the money in hand was equal to the fulfilment of them; if there had been any others, he supposed they should have heard of them. He again said there were many ornamental parts of the vessels which might be as well thrown upon the expense of next year as of this.

Mr. SWANWICK said, if Government could have had foresight sufficient to have known that there would have been any objections made to the finishing of the frigates, they would certainly not have entered into any contracts to that extent, but they could not possibly do this. He wished, if gentlemen were determined the frigates should not be made use of, that they would say at once they should be sold on the stocks. With respect to manning of them from the money proposed to be appropriated, that was impossible, and he saw no reason for making the business doubly sure by any other precaution.

Mr. HOLLAND said it was, with great propriety, intended by many members in the House to keep the frigates in such a state as to prevent their being manned. If we appropriate to finish them, said he, we shall be exposed to all the difficulties depicted by the gentleman from Pennsylvania; for some way would be devised to procure and pay men, if the House put it in the power of the Executive to do it: therefore he hoped, to avoid all that trouble and expense, they would not vote to finish them. For what purpose, said he, should they be finished, unless it were intended to man them? To avoid every danger of that kind, he should vote against the sum proposed.

Mr. HARTLEY said, that last year the six

Mr. G. said he did not mean to bring into view any arguments relative to the propriety of establishing a Navy in this country. He should vote against the present motion, because he did not wish to see the frigates at sea, and because he conceived a Navy to be prejudicial to the true interests of this country. Something had been said about contracts, but he did not believe any existed. They had last year been told the same thing. Any person reading the statements which had been furnished to them, would perceive that the business was not done by any contract, but that men were employed

appropriate according to their will, they were bound to do it also according to their consciences too. It was not only a weapon, but a shield, which it was their duty to use with great caution, and according to law; for, if they were to use it contrarily, it would be to make that House the supreme power, it would be to usurp the supreme authority.

Mr. Corr believed the only real question before them was, what sum they would appropriate for this object; he wished the mover would consent to leave the item blank.

Mr. W. SMITH had no objection to its being left blank.

[MARCH, 1797.

right to man the frigates, and if so, whether they should not be obliged to find the money? The powers of this House to control appropriations, had, however, already been settled. It was, indeed, an absurdity to call a body a Legislature, and at the same time deny them a control over the public purse; if this were not so, where would be the use of going through the forms of that House with a money bill? The Executive might as well draw upon the Treasury at once for whatever sums he might stand in need of. A doctrine like this would be scouted even in despotic countries.

And what was all this power that so much alarmed the gentleman from Massachusetts? It was merely a negative power to refuse to do what they thought it would be mischievous to do. Mr. N. said there was a very fashionable doctrine of throwing all power into the hands of the Executive. If there were to be extremes, however, he believed an excess of power would at least be as safe in their hands as in those of the Executive; and if this were his opinion, and the ground upon which he acted, the gentleman from Massachusetts never failed to take an opposite direction. He never thought any Executive power too great.

Mr. VENABLE said, if this was a mere question of expense, it was very extraordinary that it should have called forth such a philippic from the gentleman from Massachusetts, (Mr. AMES,) who had charged the House with arrogating to itself all the powers of Government; as being omnipotent. Upon what ground could he found such charges? If it were a question of expense merely, there could certainly be no ground for such charges; but if it were to be considered as a question of power, if they were to be told they dared not to withhold the appropriation in question, here he would intrench himself as a Representative of the people; he had a right, as a member of that House, to vote against the expense which he thought improper, and he would exercise that right. Every branch of Government had the same right, and he wished them to exercise it. And he would not be told, when he was about to exer-true they were not at first contemplated to be cise this right, that he was arrogating to himself all the powers of Government. determined to exercise his discretion on every question which came before him for decision, and he would vote against this expense.

Mr. PARKER remarked, that it had been said the frigates would carry 62 guns; it might have been possible to have made them so, but they were no more than a large sized 44-gun frigate. They might be a little larger than any other of that number of guns, but not so much. It was

so large, but strong reasons were offered for He was making them of the present size; the expense was not increased by the increase of size, in proportion to their usefulness. He therefore himself approved of what the PRESIDENT had done; and, if he had had the management of the business, he should have done the same. It had been doubted whether the sum proposed to be granted would not only finish, but equip and man the vessels. If the gentleman who had these doubts would refer to the report which had been made on the subject, he would find that $220,000 would be required for that purpose; the $172,000 proposed would barely make them ready for sea in other respects.

Mr. NICHOLAS said, the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. AMES) seldom spoke without casting some denunciation against that House. He had, however, allowed that the PRESIDENT had done, with respect to this fleet, all that any gentleman had charged him with doing; he had even put the case stronger than any other person had put it; for he had said that the Executive had determined to build the vessels of a larger size than had been contemplated by the Legislature, in order to be an overmatch The gentleman from Pennsylvania, (Mr. GALfor any other frigate. All this, said Mr. N., LATIN,) who was generally very correct in his may be right, and the approbation he gave this statements, had supposed that if the frigates conduct, was a proof the gentleman thought so; were finished, the PRESIDENT might go on to all he had to say was, that it was not legal; it man them without consulting the Legislature might be patriotic, and be done with an inten- upon the occasion; and, to show the possibility tion to serve the country; the PRESIDENT of doing this, he had alluded to his having built might understand the interests of the country a frigate for the Algerines without the approbabetter than they; but it was a conduct which tion of Congress. He lamented the situation in would not meet with the same approbation which we stood with that country, but he befrom him that it met with from the gentleman | lieved the building of the frigate was necessary. from Massachusetts. That gentleman had also The Western insurrection, and the law-suits in said that a law imposed a duty upon the House London had also been named, which he should to find the means for carrying it into effect. not stop to notice. Were they not, then, to be called upon for money to man the frigates? He asked those gentlemen whether the PRESIDENT had not a

In answer to the gentleman from Pennsylvania, he would say, that if the PRESIDENT could man the vessels and send them to sea indeper.

Mr. VENABLE was of opinion, that if the gentleman from Massachusetts had only the public good in view, which he had spoken of, he could have had no inducement to have gone into the arguments which he had introduced on this occasion. He could assure that gentleman that he felt himself as strongly bound to consider the public good in all his conduct as he could be. He believed no instance could be named in which he had not consulted that interest. As to what was, or was not, calculated for the public good, he must be left at liberty to judge for himself. But the gentleman had not put With respect to the second part of his obserthe business on this ground, but because gentle-vations, as to the absolute necessity under which men differed in opinion from others, they were every member lay to vote for the sum required