H. OF R.] FRIDAY, April 9. Proceedings. A message from the Senate informed the House that the Senate have passed a bill, entitled "An act to amend the Judicial System of the United States;" to which they desire the concurrence of this House. [APRIL, 18 Mr. CLAY, from the committee appoi the seventh instant, to examine and the state of the office of the Clerk of made a report: which was read and ordered o lie on the table. The House resolved itself into a Committe of the Whole on the bill to provide for the establishment of certain districts, and there to amend an act, entitled "An act to regulate the collection of duties on imports and tonnage." and for other purposes; and, after some time spent therein, the committee rose and reported several amendments thereto; which were sererally twice read, and agreed to by the House. [The chief alterations made from the old system consist in the holding the Supreme Court only once a year by four justices, and the establishment of six circuits, within each district of which circuit courts are to be holden twice a year, composed of one justice of the Supreme Court and the judge of the district, in which said court is held.] The bill was read twice, and referred to a select committee. Ohio State Government. Ordered, That the said bill, with the amendments, be engrossed, and read the third time to morrow. The House resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole on the report of the Secretary of State, of the seventh instant, to whom was ferred, on the nineteenth of January last, the memorial of Fulwar Skipwith; and after som time spent therein, the committee rose and re ported two resolutions thereupon; which were severally twice read and agreed to by the House, as follows: An engrossed bill to enable the people of the Eastern division of the Territory north-west of the river Ohio to form a constitution and State Government, and for the admission of such State into the Union on an equal footing with the original States, and for other purposes, was read the third time, and the blanks therein filled up: And, on the question that the same do pass, it was resolved in the affirmative yeas 47, nays 29, as follows: be erpe thereon Resolved, That provision ought to be made by k for the payment of four thousand five hundred and fifty dollars, unto Fulwar Skipwith, (which sum wa advanced by him to the United States,) with an i terest of - per centum, from the first of November, one thousand seven hundred and ninety-five. the tale The Whole o Mr. E tion wh shore of accordin instead o applied t vicinity YEAS.-Willis Alston, John Archer, John Bacon' Ordered, That a bill or bills be brought in The House then went into Committee of the Whole on the report of the committee of the twenty-second of January, on the petition of Sarah Fletcher and Jane Ingraham, referred them on the tenth of December last, and, after some time spent therein, the committee rose and reported several resolutions thereupon; which were severally twice read, and agreed to by the House, as follows: NAYS.-Thomas Boude, John Campbell, Manasseh Cutler, Samuel W. Dana, John Davenport, John Dennis, Abiel Foster, Calvin Goddard, Roger Griswold, William Barry Grove, Seth Hastings, Joseph Hemphill, Archibald Henderson, Benjamin Huger, Thomas Lowndes, Lewis R. Morris, Thomas Morris, Thomas Plater, Nathan Read, William Shepard, John Cotton Smith, John Stanley, John Stratton, Samuel Tenney, Thomas Tillinghast, George B. Upham, Killian K. Van Rensselaer, Lemuel Williams, and Henry Woods. MONDAY, April 12. widows and children, as the case may be, of the An engrossed bill for the relief of Theodosius Fowler, was read the third time, and passed. The House went into Committee of the Whole on the bill for the relief of Paul Coulon, which was reported without amendment, and ordered to be engrossed and read the third time to-day. Mr. S. SMITH, from the committee appointed, presented a bill for the relief of Lewis Tousard; which was read twice and committed to the Committee of the Whole for to-morrow. Ordered, That a bill or bills be brought in ceipt doe made to troducing It was [APRIL, 18] Judiciary System. [H. OF R. committee appoint to the said resolutions; and that Mr. | that, from these considerations, it became the examine and as, Mr. GODDARD, and Mr. STANTON, do the Clerk opare and bring in the same. An engrossed bill for the relief of Paul Coulon was read the third time and passed. Mr. S. SMITH, from the committee appointed the ninth instant, on the part of this House, jointly, with the committee appointed on the part of the Senate, "to consider and report what business is necessary to be done by Congress in their present session, and when it may be expedient to close the same," made a report thereon; which was read, and ordered to lie on the table. The House went into Committee of the Whole on the bill for the relief of sick and disabled seamen. Mr. EUSTIS moved to strike out the first section which forms the moneys devoted to the above object into a general fund, to be applied according to the discretion of the President, instead of suffering it to remain, as heretofore, applied to the particular ports, (or those in the vicinity,) from which the moneys are derived. This motion was supported by Messrs. EUSTIS, MITCHILL, and DANA, and opposed by Messrs. S. SMITH, MILLEDGE, DAVIS, MACON, and HUGER. The question was then taken on striking out the first section, and lost; when the committee rose, and reported the bill with amendments. MONDAY, April 19. Navy Pensions. An engrossed bill for the relief of widows and orphans of certain persons who have died, or may hereafter die, in the naval service of the United States, was read the third time; and, on the question that the same do pass, it was resolved in the affirmative-yeas 34, nays 29. Compensation of Collectors. Government to afford them a liberal compensation; and that the sum was considerably below that heretofore allowed. The question was taken on striking out $5,000, and lost-yeas 26. Mr. STANLEY moved to strike out that part of the bill which deducted from the compensations made to the collectors of Newbern and Edenton, the sum of $250, heretofore allowed beyond their fees. For this motion he assigned several reasons: among which were the inadequacy of the compensations, viz: about $1,600 to the duties performed, which were, notwithstanding the small amount of duties, very burdensome, owing to the smallness of the cargoes imported, and theirs being greatly inferior to the compensations allowed to the collectors of Wilmington and Petersburg. Mr. S. SMITH informed the committee that the principle on which the several compensations had been graduated was, that when the gross emoluments exceed $2,000, the salary heretofore allowed by law, in addition to the emoluments, should be withdrawn. This was the fact in relation to the ports of Newbern and Edenton; and as the duties in each of these ports did not exceed $45,000, the compensation seemed adequate; he was, however, far from being tenacious, and would have little objection to a vote of the House which should increase it. Motion lost-yeas 25. The committee rose, and reported the bill without amendment. Mr. SOUTHARD renewed the motion to strike out $5,000, for the purpose of inserting $4,000, (the same motion made in committee,) and assigned substantially the same reasons above stated. Messrs. STANLEY, BACON, and SMILIE, delivered a few observations for, and Mr. HUGER against the motion, which was taken by yeas and nays, on the call of Mr. SOUTHARD, and lost The House went into Committee of the Whole on the bill to amend the act fixing the compensation of officers employed in the col--yeas 31, nays 40. lection of duties on imposts and tonnage. This bill allows certain compensations to collectors of ports, provided the clear annual receipt does not exceed $5,000. A motion was made to strike out $5,000, for the purpose of introducing $4,000. It was contended that this latter sum was sufficient compensation to any collector; that it greatly exceeded most of the compensations allowed to the Federal officers; and that as money was appreciating, it became necessary to reduce the salaries of officers generally. In reply it was observed that very few collectors would receive so large a sum as $5,000 -none other than those of New York, Philadelphia, Baltimore, and perhaps Charleston; that the responsibility attached to these officers was greater than that attached to any other, as in some instances two million of dollars passed through their hands; that the temptation to violate duty was proportionably great; and THURSDAY, April 22. French Spoliations. Mr. GILES, from the committee appointed on the fifth of February last, to whom were referred the memorials and petitions of sundry citizens of the United States, and resident merchants therein, praying relief in the case of depredations committed on their vessels and cargoes, while in pursuit of lawful commerce, by the cruisers of the French Republic, during the late European war, made a report thereon; which was read, and ordered to lie on the table. FRIDAY, April 23. Mr. BAYARD called for the yeas and nays, which were taken, and stood-yeas 46, nays 30, as follows: H. OF R.] Disbursement of Public Moneys. [MAY, 1802. YEAS.-Willis Alston, John Archer, John Bacon, secondly, because the said judges did not only Theodorus Bailey, Phanuel Bishop, Walter Bowie, take for granted the constitutionality of the Richard Brent, Robert Brown, William Butler, said law, but did unjustly and improperly reThomas Claiborne, Matthew Clay, John Clopton, fuse to grant him a subpoena ad testificandum, John Condit, Richard Cutts, John Dawson, William directed to the said John Adams; and thereDickson, Lucas Elmendorph, John Fowler, William B. fore praying such redress as the wisdom of Giles, Edwin Gray, John A. Hanna, Daniel Heister, Congress shall deign to bestow. William Helms, James Holland, David Holmes, Michael Leib, John Milledge, Anthony New, Joseph H. Nicholson, John Smilie, Israel Smith, John Smith, (of New York,) John Smith, (of Virginia,) Samuel Smith, Henry Southard, Richard Stanford, Joseph Stanton, jr., John Stewart, John Taliaferro, jr., Philip R. Thompson, Abram Trigg, John Trigg, Philip Van Cortlandt, John P. Van Ness, Isaac Van Horne, and Robert Williams. NAYS.-James A. Bayard, Thomas Boude, John Campbell, Manasseh Cutler, Samuel W. Dana, John Davenport, Thomas T. Davis, John Dennis, Ebenezer Elmer, Abiel Foster, Calvin Goddard, Roger Griswold, Seth Hastings, Archibald Henderson, Thomas Lowndes, Lewis R. Morris, Thomas Morris, James Mott, Thomas Plater, Nathan Read, John Stanley, John Stratton, Benjamin Tallmadge, Samuel Tenney, Thomas Tillinghast, George P. Upham, Peleg Wadsworth, Lemuel Williams, and Henry Woods. TUESDAY, April 27. Naval Sites. UNAUTHORIZED PURCHASES. Mr. MITCHILL, from the committee appointed on so much of the President's Message as relates to naval sites, &c., made a further report. The report concludes as follows: Mr. GRISWOLD moved to reject the prayer of the petition. Mr. GILES moved to postpone the consideration of the petition till the third Monday in November. On this motion a debate ensued, in which Mr. GILES and Mr. RANDOLPH supported, and Mr. GRISWOLD and Mr. BAYARD opposed the motion. The question on postponement was carried, by a large majority. SATURDAY, May 1. Disbursement of Public Moneys. UNAUTHORIZED PURCHASE OF NAVY YARDS. Mr. GRISWOLD.-Again, the committee say that four navy yards were purchased without authority, and the money misapplied which was paid for them. In my judgment, this is one of the most extraordinary opinions ever pronounced. The facts which gave rise to the In the year 1799, Congress authorized by law purchase of the navy yards were as follows: the building of six 74-gun ships, and one million of dollars was then appropriated for that object, and for building six sloops-of-war. The "The committee find that, prior to the fourth of Secretary of the Treasury found that the comMarch, 1801, the sum of one hundred and ninety-mittee ought to have understood that ships nine thousand and thirty dollars, and ninety-two cents, has been expended in purchasing navy yards and making improvements upon them, without any law authorizing the purchase, or any appropriation of money, either for purchase or improvements." WEDNESDAY, April 28. Sedition Act. PETITION OF THOMAS COOPER. could not be built either in the air or upon the water, and as he was directed to build the ships, that he must, of course, procure land to place them upon, and that the land must be either purchased or hired. He found that there was not a navy yard within the United States calculated for building ships-of-the-line, and that the expense of preparing yards upon private property would be lost the moment the ship was launched, and of course that this A petition of Thomas Cooper, of the county would be bad economy. Experience had likeof Northumberland, in the State of Pennsyl-wise taught him, that the better mode would vania, was presented to the House and read, be to purchase the ground, as it would then setting forth that, in the month of April, eigh- remain at the control of the Government, so teen hundred, he was tried and condemned at long as it was wanted, and the improvements Philadelphia, before Samuel Chase and Richard would be saved. This course was accordingly Peters, judges of the circuit court of the United pursued, and I believe that few gentlemen, exStates there sitting, for having written and cept the committee, will conclude that it was published a libel upon the political character not the wisest and best. But whether it was and conduct of John Adams, the then President the best course or not, it was certainly authorof the United States; and was thereupon ad- ized by law, because it can never be seriously judged to pay a fine of four hundred dollars, doubted, whether a law which directs a thing and to suffer an imprisonment of six months; to be done, does authorize the agents to be emwhich punishment he accordingly underwent; ployed to do every thing which becomes nethat he apprehends the said trial, condemna-cessary for accomplishing the object. The laws tion, and punishment, were unjust: first, because the law, commonly called the Sedition law, under which he was indicted, was passed in direct opposition to the letter and the spirit of the Constitution of the United States; and which have authorized the building of ships have certainly empowered the public agents to purchase timber, copper, cordage, and every other necessary material, and yet no law for those objects has ever named any one of those MAY, 1802.] Disbursement of Public Moneys. [H. OF R articles. On the same principle, the law which | cretion of the officers intrusted with those con directed the building of these particular ships, necessarily authorized the public agent to procure the ground to place them upon, although it was not said, whether the ships should be built upon the water or upon the land. cerns. The minority of the committee, therefore, urged to include this transaction in the report, together with the letter of the Secretary of the Navy, but the request was rejected by the majority. We believed that the cases were But there has been one omission in this part precisely similar in principle, and that it was of the report, which, on every principle of fair- not conducting with impartiality to include the ness ought to be connected with it, and for one without the other; and we have thought which purpose the report ought to be recom- that when it was discovered that the present mitted: the omission of the letter of Mr. Stod- Administration was conducting on principles dert, late Secretary of the Navy, explanatory precisely similar to those of their predecessors, of the purchase made by him of the navy yards, it would greatly tend to satisfy all parties that addressed to the committee, in answer to an ap- the conduct of the Government had been corplication made by them upon this subject. rect. I feel no hesitation in declaring that, in This letter contains, in my opinion, a complete my judgment, the present Administration were justification of that transaction, and was so authorized to erect the navy stores, although I viewed by the minority of the committee, who believe that the power may be better questionurged that it might, at least, be included in the ed than it could be in the other cases. report; but, to our astonishment, the minority navy stores, I presume, are useful both for rerefused this justice to the man whom their re-ceiving the necessary materials for ship buildport had implicated. This opinion of the majority, in respect to the propriety of including Mr. Stoddert's letter, I must believe, will remain a solitary one, for I can scarcely imagine it possible that any other gentleman in this House would have refused, when they presented a charge against this gentleman with one hand, to offer with the other his vindication, written at their own request. If, however, the motion to recommit should prevail, I will then move an instruction to the committee, which will produce Mr. Stoddert's letter. What renders the report of the committee still more extraordinary, both in respect to erecting the buildings, and also the purchase of navy yards, is, that another subject, resembling these in principle, was before the committee, and on which they refused to report. This was the erecting of the extensive navy stores in this place by the present Administration. The present Secretary of the Navy was requested to inform the committee when those stores were erected, and from what fund the money had been taken. His answer satisfied the committee that the stores had been erected by the present Administration, and that the money, if I recollect correctly, had been taken from an appropriation for the 74's, navy yards, and docks. The minority of the committee believed, what I trust will be generally believed by those who examine the question, that this was (to say no more of it) at least as doubtful an expenditure as that for the purchase of navy yards, or for erecting the buildings on the Schuylkill. If an authority to build 74's, to complete navy yards and docks, gave an authority to erect stores for the accommodation of the navy, it was thought that an authority to build ships, necessarily included a power to procure the land to place them upon; and that an authority to purchase military stores and to manage the affairs of the army necessarily included a power to furnish, at the public expense, buildings to cover the stores, and for other necessary military purposes, at the disVOL. II-42 These ing, and securing the stores of the public ships laid up in ordinary; and although not expressly authorized by the words of the law, may very well be considered as a proper appendage to a navy yard, or as buildings rendered necessary in the finishing of the 74's; and as to the extent of the buildings, I am content to leave that point to the Department to which it has been confided. The propriety, however, of including this statement in the report (I trust) will be apparent to the House, and it will not in this place be thought correct to confine our criticisms exclusively to the past Administration. I therefore urge this as a further reason for recommitting the report. Mr. NICHOLSON had very little inclination, at this time, to enter into an explanation of this subject, which had been so misunderstood by the gentleman just up, on account of indisposition, nor was he very anxiously opposed to the recommitment, but he could perceive not a shadow of reason why the report should be recommitted. The gentleman had grounded his motion upon the opinion, that all the necessary facts had not been stated. It was, to be sure, a very late period of the session, and the discussion would therefore consume much precious time; but notwithstanding that, if it should appear that any material facts had been suppressed, there would be good ground for recommitting the report. He should therefore think it necessary to test the grounds advanced, to prove the necessity of the recommitment. As to the navy yards, the committee having been appointed "to report whether moneys drawn from the Treasury have been faithfully applied to the objects for which they were appropriated, and whether the same have been regularly accounted for;" and knowing that six navy yards had been purchased, very naturally inquired under what authority these purchases had been made, and how they were paid for. They referred to the law authorizing the building of six seventy-fours and six sloops-of H. OF R.] Disbursement of Public Moneys. war. The committee submitted an inquiry to the former Secretary of the Navy, (Mr. Stoddert,) directing him to inform the committee as to the purchase. Mr. Stoddert answered that a law had passed, appropriating one million of dollars for building the seventy-fours and sloops-of-war, and that fifty thousand dollars were also appropriated for two dock-yards; and also that two hundred thousand dollars were appropriated for the purchase of timber, or land clothed therewith; and that he thought himself authorized to purchase six navy yards, wherein to build the seventy-fours. To these several laws the committee referred for the authority under which the Secretary acted, but they could find no such authority; they could find no other, than authority to purchase two dock-yards, wherein to repair the ships. Now, although not stated in the report, there is very good reason to believe that the fifty thousand dollars never was laid out upon the two dockyards, but that this sum was cast into the surplus fund. Whether Mr. Stoddert's opinion was correct or not, that it would be more economical to build the seventy-fours in public yards, than in private yards at rent, they were not appointed to inquire; it was their business to say whether he was authorized to act so, let his private opinion be what it might. The committee were clearly of opinion, that he was not authorized to take money appropriated for one purpose and make use of it for another. [MAY, 180 tained to build docks for them. No meas different from those taken in the building of the frigates, except by legal authority, ong to have been taken with the seventy-fours. The case of the navy yard at this place va brought before the committee. It was the request of the minority that the case should inquired into. The committee sent to reques the Secretary of the Navy to say by what thority the storehouse had been erected here or from what fund it was paid. The answe was, that the storehouse had been erected ort a fund granted in February, eighteen hundred and one, for completing the seventy-fours navy yards, and the docks. The ships had ber ordered to be laid up in ordinary at this place. and the navy yard purchased. When the pre sent Secretary of the Navy came into office, found, that as a navy yard was to be complete here, and as sails, rigging, and other naval stores, must be kept here; and finding the one storehouse was already built, and anothe begun, here, it would be most prudent to 60plete that storehouse, as a necessary appendag to a navy yard where shipping would be se for repairs. To this none of the gentleme objected, but rather approved; and this s surely a purpose to which the money appropriated. Whether the other applications are or not, is for the House to decide. The committee have stated the facts. The gentleman says the accountant of the War Department was satisfied with the s counts of General Wilkins. I did not under stand the fact so-vouchers were sent on, but they were not satisfactory. tunity of reviewing that opinion. Four of those six yards are considered as purchased without authority, and the money paid for them misapplied. As to the reason, why the gentleman wishes the report recommitted; to wit, to insert Mr. Stoddert's answer with the report; it is true a motion for the insertion was made. But the Mr. BAYARD. I shall beg the indulgence only committee thought that letter was addressed to of a few words, upon one or two heads, respect them, and not to the House; that it was to ing which, the opinion I entertain is decidedly inform their minds, so as to enable them to opposed to that expressed by a majority of the make the report. They paid due attention to committee. I cannot well conceive of a plainer the reasoning of the letter, but it did not con- mistake, than what appears in the opinion, pr vince them that Mr. S. acted authoritatively. nounced on the purchase of six navy yards, made Mr. Stoddert's reasoning upon the subject by the late Secretary of the Navy. The com could not form a part of the report; the com-mittee, I think, ought to be allowed an oppor mittee were called upon to form an opinion, and not to substitute that of any individual. They were to inquire whether moneys appropriated were used to the purposes for which they were appropriated. They thought it was not, because it was appropriated to build ships, and to purchase land with timber on it, or timber alone. The question then is, whether six navy yards are six seventy-four gun ships, and whether six sloops-of-war are lands with timber growing on it or not? If Mr. Stoddert's reasoning had been adopted by the committee, it would have become their reasoning, and except it should be theirs, it would have had no business in the report. If a disposition of vindication could have been admitted, Mr. Stoddert might have been permitted to have appeared with counsel before the committee, but facts alone were required, and facts the committee state. Ships had been built for the public before, but the idea never was enter By the act of the Legislature, of February, 1799, the Secretary of the Navy was directed to cause to be built six ships, each to carry not less than seventy-four guns; and six sloops-ofwar of eighteen guns. For this purpose, a million of dollars was appropriated; two hundred thousand were appropriated to the purchase of land, bearing timber suitable for the navy, and fifty thousand dollars for the making of two docks. These laws, passed on successive days indicated the design of a permanent Navy Es tablishment. It was perfectly understood that the ships of the line were not directed to be built for the occasional defence of the country at that period, but were intended as the com mencement of a lasting system of defence, which was expected to increase with the growth of |