H. OF R.]

Georgia Limits.

(Mr. NICHOLAS) had frequently declared in that House, that slavery was an evil of great magnitude. In this respect they agreed in opinion; for he considered the existence of slavery in the United States as the greatest of evils, an evil in direct hostility to the principles of our Government; and he believed the Government had the right to take all due measures to diminish and destroy the evil, although in doing it they might injure the property of some individuals; for he never could be brought to believe that an individual can have a right in any thing which goes to the destruction of our Government, viz: that he can have a right in a wrong. A property in slaves is founded in wrong, and never can be right. He believed Government must of necessity put a stop to this evil, and the sooner they entered upon the business the better.

Mr. T. said, he honestly confessed he did not like to hear much said in that House about the rights of man; because of late there had been much quackery as to these rights. But, because these rights had been abused, it did not follow that man has no rights. Where legislators are freely chosen by the people, and frequently renewed; where a law cannot be passed without affecting the interests of the persons who pass it, these rights cannot greatly be abused; but, when we take upon us to legislate for men against their will, it is proper enough to say something about the rights of man, and to remind others, who are frequently heard speaking of these rights, that by nature these enslaved men are entitled to rights; and on that account it was, when he made this motion, that he said he would make a motion touching the rights of

man.

The reasons offered against the amendment by the gentleman from Virginia, were a little singular. He contended that certain States were overflowing with slaves, and if not colonized by opening this wide tract of country to them, they would not be able to keep or manage them. He always thought that colonizing these people tended to increase the race far beyond what it would be when penned closely together.

Mr. GILES explained, by saying, that he had said nothing about decreasing the number of blacks, but of spreading them over a larger face of country.

[MARCH, 1798. only tolerated, but sanctioned by law? Certainly not.

It was used as an argument against this amendment that this Territory would be peopled by emigrants from the Southern States, who cannot work for themselves; and on that account they must have slaves to work for them. If this be true, it makes the people of the Southern States only fit to superintend slaves. The language of this is, that these people cannot subsist, except they have slaves to work for them.

For the reason he had stated, he hoped the amendment would be agreed to; but if gentlemen thought those who at present hold slaves in the Territory should be protected in them, he should not be opposed to their holding them for a limited period.

The question was put and negatived, there being only 12 votes in its favor. Adjourned till Monday.

*

MONDAY, March 26.

Georgia Limits.

MISSISSIPPI TERRITORY-SLAVERY. The House again resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole on the bill for an amicable settlement of limits with the State of Georgia; when, after striking out the words "claiming under it," in the fifth section, and adding two new sections, the committee rose, the House concurred in the amendments, and the bill was ordered to be read a third time to-morrow.

One of the sections was moved by Mr. MILLEDGE, and was in the following words:

"That, from and after the establishment of the said government, the people of the aforesaid territory shall be entitled to and enjoy all and singular the rights, privileges, and advantages, granted to the people of the territory of the United States north-west of the river Ohio, in and by the aforesaid ordinance of the 13th day of July, in the year 1787, in as full and ample manner as the same are possessed and enjoyed by the people of the said last-mentioned territory."

The other, moved by Mr. HARPER, was to the following effect:

"That, from and after the establishment of the aforesaid government, it shall not be lawful for any sur-person to import or bring into the said territory, from any part or place without the limits of the United States, any slave or slaves, on pain of forfeiting three hundred dollars for every slave so brought, one-half to who shall sue for the same; and every person so imthe United States, and the other half to the person ported shall be entitled to and receive his or her freedom."

Mr. THATCHER said, he understood the gentleman's argument perfectly; though he did not seem to understand it himself. The gentleman wished to take the blacks away from places where they are huddled up together, and spread them over this territory; they wished to get rid of them, and to plague others with them. But they had them, and if they determined to keep them, he wished only they should be plagued

with them.

We are, said Mr. T. about to establish a Government for a new country. Ours originated from, and was founded on the rights of man, upon which ground we mean to protect it, and could there be any propriety in emanating a government from ours, in which slavery is not

ER moved to strike out the words "without the When this section was proposed, Mr. THATCHlimits of the United States," so as to have made it unlawful to have brought any slave there; but the motion was not seconded.

This was the first debate on the prohibition of Slavery in a Territory which took place under the Federal Constitution, and it is to be observed that the constitutional power of Congress to make the prohibition, was not questioned by any speaker. Expedient objections only were urged.

Relations with France.

[H. OF R.

not mean, by this disagreement, to express an to go to war with the French Republic; but he opinion, that, at this moment, it was expedient thought the formal declaration of the contrary sentiment was highly improper. The present is a period of menace and of danger, of injury and

of the actual crisis, yet he had no hesitation to avow his belief that the time is not far distant

Mr. BALDWIN hoped the House would now re- outrage, and whatever might be the expediency solve itself into a Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union. After a few observations from Mr. SEWALL against, and from Mr. NICHOLAS in favor of going into the business of the Union, the House resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole on

been read,

ap

When war must be resorted to, or the national of France was calculated to excite or justify no honor and interest be abandoned. The conduct other expectation; and under such circumstances, with such prospects, he could by no means Besides, it is contrary to the usual and ordinary consent to a formal declaration of non-resistance.

that subject, Mr. DENT in the chair; when the PRESIDENT's Message of the 19th instant having Mr. SPRIGG rose and observed, that every sub-course of Legislative proceeding, to pass mere ject which came before the Committee of the negative resolutions. The power of declaring Whole on the state of the Union must necessa- Congress shall forbear to declare war, it is a war being vested in the Congress, so long as the rily be important; but he believed there never was any more so than that which was presented sufficient expression of their sentiment that such to them by the Message of the PRESIDENT which a declaration would be inexpedient: it is the had been read. Separated as we are from Eu-only proper expression of such a sentiment; and rope by an immense ocean, it were to be wished it can be no more right to resolve that we will that we were equally separated from its political not resort to war, than it would be to pass an concerns, and that we should have to do with act to declare it would be inexpedient to make them no further than what relates to commerce. a law for the regulation of bankruptcy or any This, unhappily, had not been the case, and However desirable, other municipal concern. there now existed painful differences between therefore, he admitted unanimity to be, at a this country and the French Republic. The time like the present, he found it impossible Message which had just been read was an evi- to agree to the resolution. dence of this. In this situation of things, it peared necessary that the House should declare whether this country was to have peace or war. This was a subject in which the best interests of the Union were deeply concerned, and he hoped the business would be met fully and fairly. The PRESIDENT had informed the House that the present state of things is changed from what it was when he prohibited the arming of merchant vessels, and that therefore he had withdrawn that prohibition. Whether the order formerly issued by the PRESIDENT for this purpose was in conformity to the spirit or letter of the law, was not of importance now to inquire; the effect had been beneficial, and in the same proportion as the prohibition had been beneficial would be the evils of withdrawing it. In order Mr. B. said this was the first time that the to ascertain the sense of the committee upon what measures may be proper to be taken in the question of declaring war had ever presented itpresent crisis, he should offer the following re-self, and upon which, he believed, there might

solutions to their consideration:

Resolved, That it is the opinion of this committee, that under existing circumstances, it is not expedient for the United States to resort to war against the French Republic.

Resolved, &c., That provision ought to be made by law for restricting the arming of merchant vessels, except in cases in which the practice was heretofore permitted.

Resolved, &c., That adequate provision shall be made by law for the protection of our seacoast, and for the internal defence of the country.

The first resolution being taken up,
Mr. SITGREAVES Said that, for himself, he could
not agree to the proposed resolution. He did
VOL. II-15

Mr. BALDWIN did not agree with the gentleman last up; he thought the resolution proper and free from exception. We were, he said, twenty-three years ago, when we were about beginning the war with Great Britain, in a sitnation similar to the present; but we were then without many advantages which we now have. We were then without any common tie, except what arose from common interest. No means existed of holding conference together, but nature pointed out the course to be taken, and representatives from different parts of the country were travelling at the same moment to hold counsel together, and to speak their sentiments. The gentleman who has just taken his seat apprehends war must be the consequence of our present situation.

be a difference of opinion as to the exercise of that our constitution is imperfect; but every that power. He did not mean to say wantonly society which has a written constitution must

have recourse to it for direction. It would be

improper therefore to inquire what agency the Legislature ought to have in the declaring of war; whether it is not proper that all the circumstances relative to such a state should be before them. He did not believe it was intended that this House should merely be the instrument to give the sound of war; the subject seemed to be placed wholly in the hands of the Legislature. This was the understanding of the country when there was no Government in ex

istence, and he believed this was the meaning, of the constitution. The country is now every where agitating this question of peace or war, and he trusted they would not be left to grope their way in the dark on this important question. The PRESIDENT had informed the House that all hopes of a negotiation were at an end. He was willing to take the information as it was given, without going into the Cabinet of the Executive, and to take measures accordingly. But when some persons declare that the present state of things is already a state of war; that the country is going on in it; that the die is cast, and that we have nothing to do but to go on with it as well as we can, if the House does not believe this to be a true position, this resolution ought to be agreed to, which went to say that the House does not consider the present a state of war, but a state of peace.

Mr. OTIS said, if the gentleman who made the motion would consent to use the constitutional words on this occasion, he apprehended there would be no difference of opinion. He meant that instead of saying "to resort to war," to say "to declare war."

Mr. SPRIGG said, the resolution which he had proposed had not been the work of a moment, and he did not feel disposed to make the alterations proposed.

country. The question at present, said Mr. H., is not a question of war, but of defence; and no two questions are more distinct. If gentlemen confound these two questions, and are determined to take no measures of defence lest they should lead to war, let them say so. He believed, however, the distinction was well derstood by the American people.

[H. OF R.

war, and (in the words of Mr. SITGREAVES) was it not to be expected? Ought not the Legislature then, (who alone have the power of declaring war,) to determine the state of the country, and say whether they mean to go immediately to war or not? He thought the necessity of the un-resolution was sufficiently evident, by the motion which had been made to change the words Mr. GILES believed this the proper time to from "resort to war," to declare war; in the declare whether the country should remain in one case the mischief was met, whilst the other peace or go to war. He thought the resolution meant nothing. And if gentlemen were ready proper as it stood, because founded on the to say we were not prepared to declare war, Message of the PRESIDENT, in which the French and at the same were not ready to say it is not Republic is only named. There was a part of expedient to resort to war, it proved that they that Message, he said, which, in his opinion, thought war might be made without being deamounted to a declaration of war. The PRESI-clared. He asked whether gentlemen did not DENT tells the House, "that the situation of believe the Executive had taken measures which things is materially changed since he issued his would lead to war? And that if he were at order to prevent the arming of merchant ves-liberty to act upon a change of circumstances sels." As far as he understood the situation between this country and others, Congress were of the United States at that time, it was a state not brought into a situation in which they had of neutrality. If that state is changed, and no choice? Many discussions had heretofore the present is not a state of neutrality, he wished taken place on the constitution, but he had to know what is. He knew only of two states, never heard it doubted that Congress had the a state of neutrality and a state of war; he power over the progress of what led to war, as knew of no mongrel state between them. well as the power of declaring war; but if the Therefore, if the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED PRESIDENT could take the measures which he had STATES, could declare war, we are now in war. | taken, with respect to arming merchant vessels, Believing, however, that Congress had alone he, and not Congress, had the power of making the power to declare war, he thought it time to war. He asked whether, when report went so declare what the state of the nation is. He did far as to speak of an alliance, offensive and denot know whether the object might not be fensive, with a foreign country, it was not time answered by the resolution being general, as he to come to a declaration on the subject? Supwas and always had been (notwithstanding in- pose such an alliance was formed, would it not sinuations to the contrary) against war with be said that Congress are bound to carry it into any nation upon the earth. He looked upon it effect? He knew it would, though he should as the greatest calamity which could befal any resist the doctrine. Mr. N. said, he should be nation; and whatever may be the phantoms as unwilling to submit to any foreign country raised in perspective of national honor and as the gentleman from South Carolina; but he glory in such a state, they will, in the end, all could not, like that gentleman, say he was not prove fallacious. He believed no nation ought afraid of war. I am, said he, afraid of it. This to go to war except when attacked; and this country affords me all the happiness I can wish kind of war he should be as ready to meet as or hope for, and I know war will be destructive any one. Mr. G. said, gentlemen were con- to it. What was the difference between himtinually speaking of the degraded state of the self and that gentleman in this respect, he could nation, when their own measures had led to it. not tell; it was to him surprising that any (Mr. HARPER denied that he had ever said the gentleman should be without fear as to the nation was in a degraded state.) Mr. G. was mischiefs of war. He was of opinion that the not sure that he had said it, but he believed he step taken by the PRESIDENT, with respect to had frequently heard it. He believed we were in merchant vessels, went to declare that we rested a state which required the utmost vigor; but he our cause on arms, which was not calculated to thought every measure should be avoided which produce any good effect in our favor. He hoped might involve the country in war. For if we the amendment would not be agreed to; if it were to go to war with the French at present, was, he should vote against the resolution itself; he knew not what ever could take place which and he did not think the gentleman from New could produce peace; it must be a war of exter- Jersey, when he read the Message of the PRESImination. Mr. G. did not know that the pre- DENT, could think there was as much danger sent question was very important; but believing of a war with any other country as with the it strictly conformable to the Message of the French Republic. PRESIDENT, he should be in favor of it as it stood, and against the amendment.

Mr. NICHOLAS considered this amendment as defeating the resolution. Was there nothing, he asked, which called for a declaration of the kind proposed? Was it not clear to every one that the country was going fast into a state of

Mr. BROOKS agreed with the gentleman who brought forward this resolution, so far as it declares we are not prepared to resort to war. He believed no nation or man who had common understanding could be fond of war. The people of this country have yet the recollection of the fatal effects of the late war.

But there

H. OF R.]

Relations with France.

[MARCH, 1798.

are two kinds of war, offensive and defensive. | our frigates ought not to have remained at the He wished gentlemen to distinguish between wharves; that our extensive seacoast on which them; for though he was ready to declare is much wealth, should not be unprotected: he against offensive war, and to submit to small thought our seaports, the principal depots of injuries rather than make defensive war, yet our revenue, ought to have been fortified. He he was not willing to say he should not be joined his friends in their attempts to have ready to defend his country against the attack carried these measures, and, when they failed, of any foreign power whatever. He hoped he could not help thinking his country was in a he should be believed in this declaration, as degraded state and that she had lost the spirit he had formerly been employed in the de- which animated her in the year 1775. He hoped, fence of it; and if gentlemen meant that however, that now, when France had gone to though foreign nations attempt to nvade the lengths which she has gone to, that there our territory, and to reduce us again to the would have been only one sentiment as to the colonies of a foreign power, they would not propriety of the measures formerly proposed. repel them, he could not join them in opinion. But though he thought the nation in a degraded And though he should vote for the resolu- state, he was not in favor of war. He believed tion as moved to be amended, he should the citizens of this country were not for it. He feel himself at perfect liberty to defend his believed the Government was averse to war; country in case of attack. He wondered the and that no part of it was more so than the gentleman from Virginia should object to vote Executive. War would be a loss to this country; for the resolution, because it was general, as it and to no individual more than the Executive. included the French Republic as well as all He is no warrior, and, consequently, war has other nations. no laurels in store for him.

Mr. RUTLEDGE trusted the sentiments which The gentleman from Virginia has spoken of the gentleman from New York had expressed war as having something dazzling in perspecwould govern the committee, and that all were tive; something which flattered pride and amready to say, that though we value the blessings bition. But did the gentleman suppose that a of peace, yet we are ready to resist insult and war with France could be flattering to pride or injury from whatever quarter they come. He ambition? It could not; it would be a war of hoped this would be the conduct of this country; prudence; we must shut ourselves up, and act and notwithstanding much had been heard about on the defensive, and say, "when reason reBritish parties and French parties, that all turns, when an ebb shall take place in the affairs would unite in this determination. This being of France, when her flow of victories shall be his opinion, he should vote for the amendment; over, she will do us justice." In the mean time, and he hoped gentlemen would be satisfied with we must defend ourselves. Mr. R. repeated, this declaration, and that no more would be that he did not believe any man in that House heard of a party in the House in favor of war. could wish for war; when he looked around Though he meant to vote for the resolution, he him and saw gentlemen whose wounds are yet thought it unnecessary; but in these days of sore from former service; when he saw them jealousy and suspicion, if he were not to vote voting for measures of defence, he could not for it, he should expect to be told he was in believe, nor could any believe, that they wished favor of war. to plunge the country in war. It would sooner be believed that gentlemen who made the charges were mistaken.

Gentlemen asked whether war is not approaching? And whether the Executive is not hastening it? To the latter question he would answer in the negative; with respect to the other, he could not answer, as it depended on France, and so versatile and uncertain is every thing in that country, that no dependence can be had upon it. Mr. R. said, at the last session, when we had no intercourse with France, he thought it necessary we should have it: that intercourse had proved ineffectual; and though he sincerely wished for peace, yet he saw something in the conduct of France which almost precluded hope.

The gentleman from Virginia had said, that this country had frequently been stated as in a degraded state. He did not recollect to have made the declaration, but this was his opinion. When our national rights had been violated; when our commerce had been depredated; when the vessels of belligerent powers, which had sought an asylum in our waters, had been plundered and burnt, he thought it necessary to go into measures of defence. He thought

Mr. SEWALL was opposed to the proposition as it now stood, and hoped it would be amended. What effect it would then have, he left those to judge who introduced it. Mr. S. said, he and those who, on all questions of defence, had voted with him, had been endeavoring for some time to go into some measures of that kind, and to determine whether these measures should be confined to our own limits or be extended to the ocean. These measures ought now to be decided upon, as this is a moment in which our commerce is depredated upon in a most unprecedented manner. We are now, said he, called upon to consider the hazards of our situation. [Mr. S. then quoted a part of the PRESIDENT'S Message, as to the situation of our affairs in France, and as to the decree which was proposed respecting the taking of English goods on board of neutral vessels, and the carrying of which was declared to make neutral vessels good prizes.] This last regulation, Mr. S. said, was a direct violation of the law of nations, and