HI. OF R.]

Answer to the President's Speech.

[MAY, 1797.

tuents and himself were disposed to regard the inhabitants of the Southern States as brothers, whose features were cast in the same mould, and who had waded through the same troubled waters to the shore of liberty and independence. He hoped that gentlemen would, in their turn, think the other part of the Union entitled to some consideration.

done as a confession of guilt. Let us, said he, | terest existing among the people. His constihowever, surrender any thing, sooner than the fair fame of our country. He was not a military man, nor did he know how he should act upon such an occasion; but he knew what we ought to do. We ought, rather than submit to such indignity, to die in the last ditch. Why insinuate that the Government had been wrong? was it not enough to submit to injury; shall we not only receive the stripes, but kiss the rod that inflicts them?

The Address of the PRESIDENT disclosed, for the contemplation of the committee, a narrative Mr. Oris observed, that he was so little ac- of facts, and of the existing causes of controcustomed to the mode of conducting a debate versy between the French Republic and ourin that honorable House, that he hardly knew selves; the overtures for reconciliation, which in what manner to apply his remarks to the were to be repeated by attempts to negotiate, subject before the committee. A specific mo- and the measures of defence that might be protion had been laid on the table by the gentle-per, in case negotiation should fail. The inman from Virginia, which reduced the true juries sustained by us were of a high and atroquestion before them to a narrow compass; but cious nature, consisting in the capture of our the mover, in discussing his own proposition, vessels, depredations upon the property and had enlarged upon subjects dear to his mind, persons of our citizens, the indignity offered to and familiar to his recollection. In this circuit our Minister; but what was more aggravating he had been ably followed by the gentleman than the rest, was, the professed determination from South Carolina, and others; so that the not to receive our Minister until the complaints whole subject of the Address to the PRESIDENT, of the French should be redressed, without exand the reply of the committee, was brought planation and without exception-until we into view, with many considerations that did should violate treaties, repeal laws, and do what not belong to it. It was his design to have re- the constitution would not authorize, vacate mained silent until the subject had been ex- solemn judgments of our courts of law. These hausted by other gentlemen, and if any remark injuries should not be concealed. He did not of an important nature had been omitted, which wish, however, to indulge in unnecessary exwas not likely to have been the case, he would pressions of indignation, but to state in plain have suggested such ideas as might have pre- and unequivocal terms the remonstrances of sented themselves to his mind; but a motion injured friendship. If any man doubted of the having been made for the committee to rise, he pernicious effects of the measures of the French would then offer a few observations, not so nation, and of the actual state of our commerce, much for the sake of illustrating the question, let him inquire of the ruined and unfortunate which had been done most successfully, but in merchant, harassed with persecutions on acorder to declare his sentiments upon this im- count of the revenue, which he so long and portant occasion. He so far agreed with the patiently toiled to support. If any doubted of gentleman from Georgia, that he believed, upon its effects upon agriculture, let him inquire of ordinary occasions, an Answer to the PRESI- the farmer whose produce is falling and will be DENT'S Address should be calculated to preserve exposed to perish in his barns. Where, said he, an harmonious intercourse between the different are your sailors? Listen to the passing gale of departments of Government, rather than to the ocean, and you will hear their groans issupledge either branch of the Legislature, collat-ing from French prison-ships. Such were the erally, upon subjects that would come re-injuries, and such the requisitions of the French gularly under their consideration. But the pre- nation; and he defied the ingenuity of any gensent was not an ordinary occasion, and the tleman to draw a comparison between the situation of the country required that the An- Directory and the British Parliament, in favor swer should not be a spiritless expression of of the former; and insisted that the demands civility, but a new edition of the Declaration of Charles Delacroix were upon a parallel with of Independence. He expressed his regret that those of Lord North. He enlarged upon the upon this question gentlemen should have wan- analogy of the circumstances attending the predered into a review of measures and subjects, tensions of the British Government to bind us, so frequently examined, so deliberately settled, when we were colonies, and of the French to and which had a tendency to rekindle party subjugate us, now we are free and independent animosity. If they would never acquiesce in States. He thought it expedient to cultivate the the deliberate acts of the Government, because same spirit of union, and to use the same firm their personal sentiments had been adverse to and decided language. He regretted that questhem in the season of their discussion, there tions should be agitated upon this occasion, could be no end to controversy. For his part which had been formerly the cause of party he conceived that all party distinctions ought spirit and dissensions; and did not believe that now to cease; and that the House was now the immortal men who framed the noted incalled by a warning voice, to destroy the idea strument which dissolved the charm of allegiof a geographical division of sentiment and in- | ance and shivered the fetters of tyranny, con

descended to differ about verbal criticisms and | Virginia proposed a substitute, which, accordnice expressions, through fear of giving offence; ing to his idea, was more proper. A warm denor that it was incumbent upon the members bate had taken place, and he believed that of the committee to repress the assertion of their either might be adopted without effect, as they rights, or smother a just and dignified expres- were merely a form of words leading to no consion of their susceptibility of insult, because the clusion. Suppose a majority of one was obtainFrench had been once our friends, or because ed on the report, what end would be produced? the commencement of their revolution was a None; for it might be that the very persons struggle for liberty. There was a time when who voted on this general question, might vote he was animated with enthusiasm in favor of against particular subjects when they came unthe French Revolution, and he cherished it, der consideration; as every one would recollect while civil liberty appeared to be the object; the difficulties which had been experienced in but he now considered that Revolution as com- getting three frigates built, and this difficulty, pletely achieved, and that the war was continu- he doubted not, would again occur. Since, ed, not for liberty, but for conquest and aggran- however, these two forms of an Answer were dizement, to which he did not believe it was before them, and they were called upon to say the interest of this country to contribute. which they would adopt, it might be proper to go into some consideration of the subject.

The difference between the two productions seemed to be, that the one reported seemed to WILLIAM SMITH, from Pinckney district, express great indignity on account of the injuSouth Carolina; SAMUEL SMITH, from Mary-ries received from the French Republic, and a land; JOHN ALLEN, from Connecticut; and WILLIAM FINDLAY, from Pennsylvania, appeared, produced their credentials, were qualified, and took their seats.

H. OF R.]

Answer to the President's Speech.

[MAY, 1797.

footing with the most favored nation?" It | gentlemen to Europe. Wretched will be our certainly could not; since it was the language of right reason, of justice.

case, if we are embroiled whenever these gentlemen shall be refused, or uncivilly treated. All history is full of instances of wars, founded on such points of etiquette as these, and they admonish us against employing embassies, as much as possible, to avoid these dangers from our foreign connections. But it seems, the Directory, by Mr. Pinckney's letter, at the same time sent away thirteen other foreign Ministers; yet we do not hear that these nations went to war on this account. One of them was Sweden, a very powerful maritime nation, possessed of a considerable fleet; her Minister was dismissed; she contented herself with sending away the French Minister also, and here the dispute ended. But, surely allowance ought also to be made for the present revolutionary state of France. If all things do not proceed there with the order they ought, it is perhaps because of their present warlike and revolutionary position, which cannot but mend every day, and should induce us to make some allowance for them.

As to dictating to the Executive, could it be called dictating when we merely express our opinion and advice to him, on points which he has himself laid before us; and, in order to deliberate on which we were thus unusually called together? Very low and debasing, indeed, must be the situation of this House, if they were to be muzzled and prevented from laying their sentiments before the Chief Magistrate of the Union! When treaties are made, we are told they are laws over which we have no power. If we dare not speak on the subject before they are made, is this House reduced merely to the odious task of laying taxes, without being allowed to exercise its sense on any other public measures connected with them? Why does the PRESIDENT Communicate these things to us, if we are not allowed to express any sentiments about them? Why do the people elect their representatives all over this widely extended empire, if, when they are convened, Mr. LIVINGSTON said that, having listened they are not allowed the privilege of expressing to the gentlemen who had preceded him with their opinions on the dearest interests of their the most respectful attention, and heard their constituents? But it is stated that this will ardent expressions of patriotism and the livecreate division among the branches of the Gov-ly sense which they entertained of the true ernment, who ought always to act and think dignity of our Government, he should not alike. Were this the case, there was no use to attempt to follow them into a field which had divide the Government, as our constitution been exhausted, but would leave it to the condoes, into three branches; they might all have sideration of the committee and his country been left in one, and then no accident of this to determine upon his sentiments and the kind would have happened; but the fact is, this measures which he should suggest whether he very division of the branches was devised in was not equally disposed with others to promote order that they might operate as checks on the peace and honor, the happiness and security each other. The people thought it better that of his country and Government; he would a division of this kind should prevent acting at leave it for his measures to speak for him; he all, than that we should act hastily and unad- would not be led away by any idle or extravisedly. Thus when a law, after mature delib-neous vanity from objects so solemn and imporeration, passes this House as wise and good, the Senate were not obliged on this account to see it in the same light; they judge for themselves, and, if they see cause, rejec it, and no complaint takes place on our part because they do

So.

In another Government, indeed that of England, all the branches have been contrived into the most perfect union, Kings, Lords, and Commons, all agree, but has the Government been the better for this? Happy had it been for that nation, had this not been the case. Many an unwise measure they have gone into, might then, fortunately for the nation, have been totally prevented.

But it has been said we ought to express the highest indignation at the conduct of France. Let us examine for a moment on what this is founded. Three grounds have been mentioned; the dismission of our Minister, the spoliations on our ships, and the interference with our Government, in attempting to divide the people from it. As to the first, the dismission of our Minister, said Mr. S., nobody can feel more sensibly than I do, this indignity; but it only leads me to regret, as I have often already expressed my regrets, at our sending so many diplomatic

tant; he should speak freely as became an American at a crisis so very pressing. First, then, he should notice the Address that was before the committee, and the amendment which had been proposed to be made to it; he was sorry to observe the manner in which they had been discussed. It had been considered, on one side, that to adopt any language in reply to the Address but that which has been laid before the committee in the report, would amount to a surrender of all our rights, privileges, and independence, as a nation, to France; on the other, it has been held that the differences between us and France are distorted, and that we should at least not shut up every avenue to negotiation by an obstinate and blind assertion of our own infallibility. If he believed with those of the former opinion, that we should in any shape incur the stigma of degrading ourselves, or if he suspected even that we should sacrifice one right of our country or Government by an adoption of the amendment proposed, or he thought we should not endanger our national character and safety by the adoption of the report, he should most certainly reject the amendment and adopt the

MAY, 1797.]

DEBATES OF CONGRESS.

Answer to the President's Speech.

[H. OF R.

from that very nation whom she had irritated
to a war; and we saw her more humiliated
still, by the rejection of those propositions
which she had made to obtain peace. Have
we a better prospect than that nation? Are
our means equal to hers? Are we, indeed,
ready to embark in a war-with France, too-
and present such a lesson to the world as
America at war with France, after France has
defeated the efforts of all the world? He again
asked, have we the means? Let gentlemen
who are willing to plunge us into that dilemma
make the reply; but let not gentlemen indulge
in so hateful a picture. But, although we have
no means, he was still against surrendering the
honor of our country; fortunately, no such
sacrifice is demanded, no such measure is ne-
cessary; and were we ten times more destitute
even than we are, he should never submit to
our national degradation, were there a power
so insolent as to expect it.

report; or if he believed, with the gentleman | abject means of solicitation to obtain a peace from Massachusetts, (Mr. Oris,) that the demands of France now were any wise analogous to those of Great Britain on a former occasion, sooner than consent to a dereliction of independence and national character he would not stop short of the language of that report; but as he could not force his judgment to so outrageous a misconstruction, as he saw on the contrary numerous reasons to entertain a very different opinion, he would not consent to incur the perils and the errors in which that report would involve us; he could not consent to so hasty, so precipitate, and inconsiderate a step. The question properly before the House at this time is, whether we shall continue to express so perfect a reliance on all the acts of our own Government; whether we shall say obstinately to France that there is no possible case in which our judgment could have been misled or mistaken in our conduct towards her; and, by determining to adhere to our former conduct, preclude every possibility to an amicable adjustment; or leave a reasonable opportunity open for an effectual discussion and adjustment of differences, wherever they may subsist.

The scope of the Speech of the PRESIDENT to both Houses, it must be confessed, goes to bind us to the former conduct; and it is too evident that the report, in strict coincidence with the sentiments of several, but not all its supporters, bears that same dangerous tendency. From which line of conduct are we to expect the most beneficent issue, to treat with a complaining power by a determination to show that its complaints are groundless, or by examining the complaints and the evidence in amicable negotiation and deciding afterwards? Let us examine the complaints of France, and then determine whether they are all so frivolous as to excite irritation at the mere mention of them; unless we are so convinced, unless we are thoroughly satisfied that they are so, we cannot vote the Answer as it is reported. Should we discover in such an examination that some of our measures have been founded at least in mistake, would it then be proper to adopt the language of the Address? But should we persist under such a possibility of mistake, what do we risk? an evil much more fatal than the worst that could follow the most sober resolution which we can now adopt; we risk the alternative of abandoning it after a war in which we may be sufferers, and after we may have retarded the increasing prosperity of our country half an age. We have an example before us in a nation that was eager to snatch at a remote pretext for an assumed interference in her Government; we have seen that nation, among the most powerful and haughty in Europe, the most vain of her dignity, (real or unreal,) the most apt to interfere in the government of others; we have seen her enter into a war, and we have seen her driven to the lowest state of humiliation; we have seen her obliged to pursue the most

It was, he knew, a very ungracious, and often an unpopular task, to display the errors of our own Government; there was a national vanity, a vain and unmeaning pride, which sought to be bolstered up by frippery of words and acts of dissimulation. He knew that this empty and pernicious vanity often assumed the post and place of the true dignity of a country, and blinked contumely on him that was disposed to prefer the plain, frank, open path of integrity and truth. He would choose between these opposite passions of a nation, and preferring his duty to unmerited reproach, he would neither repress the sentiments of his mind, nor foster those which he conceived to be pregnant with ruin; he would glory more in promoting the justice of his country than in conducting her to the most brilliant triumphs in an unjust cause; he would, therefore, calmly examine whether France had just cause of complaint; and whether she had or not a just cause, he would assert that France might, without exciting indignation, think herself injured; that she might, was a sufficient reason with him for preferring the amendment, as it left an opening for rather amicable discussion and accommodation, rather than the report which had the opposite character.

THURSDAY, May 25.

Mr. GILES rose.-He said that he had always been against this form of giving Answers, since the time the practice first began; it was derived from the British House of Commons, which was a bad source for precedents. In that House, however, the Speech and the Answer were both known to be the work of the Minister, and treated with great freedom. Mr. G. thought that it would be better to direct the Committee of Rules and Orders of the House, to make one standing Answer, which would serve regularly for all Speeches. This would be an improper time for such a regulation, but though we could not now get rid of a bad habit, it was not neces

H. OF R.]

Answer to the President's Speech.

[MAY, 1797.

said that France preceded Britain in the order for stopping provisions. Britain did not publicly issue such orders until the 16th of June, 1793; but Britain had, in reality, adopted the practice long before. The French orders fluctuated; but, at one time, the United States were exempted from stoppage, when others were stopped. He then noticed the stoppage of provisions to the West Indies; the Orders of the 6th of November, 1793, and the 8th of January, 1794. In the very short interval between these two dates, France had gone on so fast that Britain found it better to ameliorate the condition of neutral States. During this time, England also made a truce for Portugal with Algiers, and this truce has cost us fifteen hundred thousand dollars, besides what it may cost hereafter. Timber had been promised to be cut for the Algerines, of a kind which this country could not furnish in due quality. Some of it was to be brought so far as from the northwest branch of the Susquehanna. He would pass over Lord Dorchester's speech to the Indians, and the British soldiers and savages joining the tomahawk against our Western frontiers. He mentioned these things, merely to keep them in view. There was something, he said, which he could never think of without surprise. This was a conversation between Lord Grenville and Mr. Pinckney. It was related in a letter, dated the 9th of January, 1794, from Mr. Pinckney. It took notice of Lord Grenville telling Mr. Pinckney the desire which the British Government had of maintaining harmony with the United States, and their readiness to support the Government of this country against a dangerous Jacobin faction who wanted to overturn it. Mr. G. said, that this betrayed more interference on the part of Britain than there ever had been on the part of France. From this time our Government had taken a leaning towards Britain. French influence was only a sentiment which we felt for the sake of liberty, but which was sometimes conjured up as a chimera to serve certain purposes. The United States had a real interest in cherishing the sentiment, which never could be dangerous.

sary to vindicate it. He said, that Mr. LIVING- | last with the King of the two Sicilies. It was STON had yesterday taken part of the ground which he intended to take. The question before the House amounted to this: shall we recommend it to the PRESIDENT to place all nations on a level as to commerce, and to remove the inequalities between them? To assist him in deciding this point, he would refer to facts and dates; and, as he did not wish to represent things in false colors, he would be glad to be corrected, if he should happen to go wrong. He would begin at the 1st of February, 1793, | when England dismissed the French Minister, and the Republic, in consequence, declared war against her. On the 22d of April following, the PRESIDENT declared this country to be in a state of neutrality, and warned the citizens to observe it. At this time, about the 10th May, M. Genet landed and raised a considerable alarm by commencing an improper correspondence with our citizens. Government from that time took a wrong impression, and acted under the idea of a dangerous French influence in this country. All this was a mistake. Genet was universally reprobated, unless by a few disorderly people, and Government from that trial should have learned to trust us. In consequence of the disturbance that Genet made, many societies entered into resolutions to support government. Even the pulpit reviled Genet. If execration, disappointment, and contempt, could fill up the measure of punishment, he had it. From the arrival of Genet to that of Fauchet, some sentiments were kept alive, and some phrases that he would review. The Friends of Order and the Disorganizers were two of them. Then we had the reign of moderation, but of so frantic a kind, for the short time which it lasted, as to exercise the greatest of despotism over opinion. This order, moderation, and disorganization, were all gone and no more said about them. Among Mr. G.'s constituents, when notice came of the Western insurrection, they were all ready to march in support of Government; instead of calling themselves the friends of order, they proved that they were so. The country remained from this time in a tranquil state till the arrival of Mr. Jay's Treaty. Or the 5th of December, 1793, a Message was received from the PRESIDENT, speaking of France in the most friendly terms. In spite of Genet's quarrel there was no misunderstanding with the Republic, and Mr. G. quoted this circumstance to prove that there was no serious difference till the arrival of Mr. Jay's Treaty. Mr. G. said that he would review what was in the mean time passing in Europe. During the summer of 1793, Britain made no less than six treaties with different nations, and one stipulation in each of them was that the contracting parties should stop all provisions going to France, and force all other nations to do so. The first of these treaties was made with Russia, on the 20th of March, 1793: the second was with Spain; the third with Prussia; the fourth with the Emperor; the fifth with Portugal; and the

As for British influence, it was a matter much more substantial. That people speak the same language with us, are scattered from one end of the continent to the other, intermarry with us, and have a very great commercial intercourse. Lord Grenville's proposition had led to Mr. Jay's Treaty. As to France trying to engage us in the war, any other nation in the world would be glad to do so. France had addressed the people of America, and was resisted: Britain had addressed our Government; and Mr. G. feared that the latter had not made so firm a stand. While Congress were taking proper measures to check the depredations, Mr. Jay, to the astonishment of mankind, was named Ambassador to England. The Treaty was signed on the 19th of November, 1794. The instructions, Mr. G. had never seen, but if we may