Page images
PDF
EPUB

MAY, 1797.]

Answer to the President's Speech.

judge from the Treaty itself, they were ex-
tremely full. For the making of such a Treaty
he had never heard a reason, nor had he ever
been able to learn one good consequence likely
to accrue from it. It had been called an instru-
ment of peace, and its first effect was, that we
were summoned to fight with France, Spain,
and Holland. One of the articles was that free
ships do not make free goods. This was highly
injurious both to France and the United States;
it implied a breach of the law of nations, be-
cause, before you can search for an enemy's
goods you must stop neutral ships. This regu-
lation could only be understood as operating
against France. If we could not help the prac-
tice going on, we should at least have suffered
it to stand as it was, without any countenance.
All the principal articles of export from the
United States were declared contraband, except
tobacco, and, indeed, that might be included
under the general title of provisions, as people
would sometimes be in want of a chew. He
spoke of this provision clause as infamous. He
referred to Count Bernstoff, Minister of Den-
mark, who had kept his country in a more
honorable situation than perhaps any other in
Europe had done during the present war. Mr.
G. read the refusal of Count Bernstoff to com-
ply with the British requisition to that effect.
During the armed neutrality, the United States
had owned that free bottoms should make free
goods. Was there any reason since to alter our
opinion? He would be glad to hear gentlemen
answer if there was any. He had always said
that the provision article was unjust to France,
and yet on account of the British Treaty we are
to plunge into a war before we know whether
we are in the right or in the wrong. Gentle-
men who had promoted the British Treaty now
came forward to support it, but it would now
be more manly to declare at once that we can-
not do so. In Citizen Adet's complaints, many
articles were unjust and trifling, but this was
always the case in productions of that sort. Mr.
G. then referred to the speech of Barras: he
said that Britain still went on robbing and im-
pressing American seamen. Mr. HARPER had
yesterday said that the impressments were few;
but how were we to be certain of that? The
men are not allowed to write to us, and Mr.
Pinckney informs us that vast numbers of them
are in French jails. He had always wondered
at our having so few communications on this
head from the Executive. A law had passed
in this House and in the Senate upon this sub-
ject, without any information from that quarter.
Gentlemen had allowed that it would be just
enough to grant an equality of privileges to
every foreign nation; but, Mr. HARPER had ob-
jected, that if this were granted to France, she
would still continue to demand. When she
makes an unjust claim, said Mr. G., we should
stop; he would not be for going any further.
The French had not acted on vague claims;
they take neutral and contraband articles; they
take the ships, and when they find our seamen

[H. OF R.

on board of British vessels, they threaten to treat them as pirates, and will not allow them to prove that they were impressed.

TUESDAY, May 30.

JOHN FOWLER, from Kentucky, appeared, produced his credentials, was qualified, and took his seat.

Answer to President's Speech.

The House again resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole, on the Address reported in Answer to the Speech of the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES; when

Mr. Corr said he thought that part of the 5th paragraph which related to the Executive Directory would be less exceptionable, and equally convey their disapprobation of such sentiments, if it were expressed more generally, and without any allusion to M. Barras. He proposed, therefore, to strike out from "at," in the 4th line of the 5th paragraph, to "United States," in the 6th line, and to insert "any sentiments tending to derogate from that confidence; such sentiments, wherever entertained, serve to evince an imperfect knowledge of the real opinion of our constituents."

Mr. W. SMITH objected to the amendment of the gentleman from Connecticut, (Mr. Corr,) because it was hypothetical. He wished, as the fact was clearly established, to have a direct reference to the Speech of Barras, in their indignation at the sentiments. As the matter had appeared of sufficient importance to find a place in the PRESIDENT's Speech, he thought it was also worthy of their notice. He insisted upon its being an attempt to divide the people of this country from their Government, by speaking insultingly of the latter, and flattering the former. He did not exactly know what was meant by the "suggestion of our former tyrants," but he supposed it meant bribery, and that by "perfidious people," General Washington was included.

Mr. W. SMITH said, that by the Government, the Executive only was meant. He was convinced of this from the manner in which he had seen the word used in the French Government paper, entitled the Redacteur.

Mr. Corr believed, that whatever M. Barras had said, it was not worth their attention. We might defy France or Frenchmen to say worse of us than they themselves said. He did not himself know how far the Speech of Barras was an act of Government; for, said he, when we directed our Speaker to reprimand Randal and Whitney, the words he used upon the occasion were not an act of the House. On another occasion, when the House were about to receive the French flag, they could not call what was said by the Speaker on that occasion, an act of the House.

Mr. WILLIAMS said, if Mr. Pinckney's letter was an authentic paper, the Speech of Barras was likewise so; and if so, it was doubtless an indignity to Government. He did not think

H. OF R.}

Answer to the President's Speech.

(MAY, 1797.

with the gentleman from Massachusetts, (Mr. | What gentlemen could not effect by reason, they FREEMAN,) that it was "childish gasconade." seemed inclined to effect in a different way. He believed it was intended as an insult to the He did not think this fair conduct. Government of this country. As to the gratitude which had been said to belong to the French nation, for their assistance in the war, he thought their services were amply repaid by the separation of this country from Great Brit-shown to this country by the Speech in quesain. Besides, he added, the French never came to the assistance of this country until they saw we were likely to be successful in our struggle. Mr. GORDON said there could be no doubt of the authenticity of Barras' Speech, since it stood upon the same ground as the rest of the documents. It was a flagrant insult upon Government, in his opinion, and warranted all that had been said upon it, as it was doubtless an attempt to separate the people from the Government.

Mr. THATCHER said the question was, whether or not any notice should be taken of the insulting Speech of Barras. When, said he, the French flag was presented to this House, we were told we were not to stop to reason, but to express forthwith our feelings of affection. But now, when the most unexampled insult is offered us, such as one man would not receive from another, we are not to notice it at all, lest it should offend the French Republic. He knew of only one reason for passing it over in silence, and that, it was true, had some weight with him. That Barras spoke as the organ of the French nation, there could be no doubt; but he had his doubts whether he knew himself what he said. The Speech had strong marks of delirium, and he could not help believing that, when he delivered it, he was either drunk or mad. If the world went on for six thousand years to come, they would never again behold such a production.

Mr. MCDOWELL was in favor of the amendment. He did not think himself bound, as had been insinuated by the gentleman from South Carolina, to echo all the sentiments in the PRESIDENT'S Speech. He wished to have an opinion of his own. He agreed that Barras' Speech was an indignity to the United States. He felt it, and would express it: but he did not think this the proper time. He denied the justness of the construction put upon the Speech by the gentleman from South Carolina. He supposed by "perfidious persons," was meant the persons in this country, generally called the "British faction." He differed in opinion also with that gentleman on the subject of dividing the people and Government, and could not allow that the phrase "good people" was intended as an insult. He allowed it was going too far to say that we owed our liberty to France; but being in some respect true, it took off from the of fence. He was sorry to see on one side of the House constant attempts made to excite the resentment of the people of this country against France. It was not necessary at present to raise such feelings. They were not about to unsheath the sword, and to say, "We conquer or die."

Mr. VENABLE Supported the amendment. He did not think any of the objections made against it had much weight in them. He thought the mode of expressing our sense of the indignity tion, was judiciously chosen by the gentleman from Connecticut. It was most consistent with dignity. It was not wise in them to take notice of every harsh expression which might be used against this country in any foreign nation; for, if such were our conduct, foreign nations would have good ground of complaint against us, and on that floor the account would be settled. Nor did ne think it very becoming or dignified in gentlemen in that House so to express themselves as. to excite frequent risibility; nor was it very honorable to that Assembly. [Alluding to the gentleman from Massachusetts.]

Mr. SITGREAVES had no doubt of the Speech of Barras being an official paper, and that its object was to divide the people from the Government. If he proved this, he trusted the language of the report would be preserved. It would be allowed that Barras was the mouth of the Directory, and that the sentiments which he speaks, are not his own, but what were beforehand agreed upon. It was doubtless, therefore, a solemn official act. With respect to the observation of the gentleman from Virginia, that what he said respecting our Government was not applicable to the Executive, but to the people at large, he believed he was wholly mistaken, as the word Government, in the French language, constantly meant Executive, as was abundantly clear from the way in which it was used in Mr. Adet's notes. [He quoted a number of passages to prove his assertion.] It was generally used for the Executive in contradistinction to Congress, or any other of the constituted authorities. If it were clearly intended to convey an insult upon our Executive, (and there could be no doubt of it,) even the mover of the amendment could not think it unbecoming in that House to express themselves in the words of the Address.

Mr. GALLATIN said, whatever might be the insult intended by the Speech of the Executive Directory, he thought it best to notice it in general terms as it was the sentiment which was objec tionable and not the Government of France. But as so much had been said about Government and people, he would say, that an insult offered to the people could not be less offensive than one offered to the Government. He supposed they alluded to the British Treaty, which was as much the instrument of Congress as of the Executive, and of the people as either, since they very generally petitioned in favor of it. He then took notice of the perversions which the gentleman from South Carolina had put upon the words of Rarras, and denied that there was the least ground for them, and said that the Gazette of the United States might as well be

MAY, 1797.]

DEBATES OF CONGRESS.

Answer to the President's Speech.

called a Government paper of this country, as If, said Mr. G. the Redacteur, that of France. it be our intention to declare war at once, then there might be some propriety in taking hold of every word which would bear to be construed into an insult, but if we wished for peace, it was unwise to do so. Besides, he said, this Speech was not communicated in an official manner, nor could it be so communicated. It was sent by Mr. Pinckney in a newspaper, from which the copy sent to them was translated, but the translation was not even authenticated, as usual. He did not dispute the fact, but it was a thing which they were not bound to notice; indeed, an error with respect to a name appeared on the face of the paper; and being delivered to Mr. Monroe, who was no longer Minister, it could not be officially communicated. He therefore thought it was not worth their rotice.

Mr. Oris thought it right to pay respect to what was recommended by the PRESIDENT. The question was whether they should notice the insult generally, or in reference to the Directory. He was in favor of the first; but as this was the only opportunity given in the Address of expressing their opinion of the conduct of the French Government, he wished the Address to stand as reported.

Mr. O. remarked upon Barras' Speech. He did not know what was meant by granting peace. When parties were at war, one granted the other peace; or sometimes a stronger power suffered a weaker to be at peace. He supposed the French meant it in the latter sense towards this country. On condition that we respect her If it Sovereignty! What was meant here? was sovereignty over their own nation, we had nothing to do with it; if it was any other, it must be the sovereignty they had over us. He concluded by remarking, that if there were any members in that House upon whom any imputation could rest of their being unduly attached to the French cause, he thought it a good opportunity to come forward and convince the world that the charges were unjust.

[H. OF R

come forward, and show the imputation false.
He informed that gentleman that he did not feel
his reputation hurt by any imputation which he
or any other person might throw upon him. He
would rather the gentleman would convince
them they were wrong, than call them names.

Mr. Oris explained. He declared he meant
only to say that they had been unjustly charged
with those imputations, and that such a conduct
would show it.

Mr. W. SMITH again urged the propriety of retaining the words in the Address as reported, as the amendment proposed had no reference to the PRESIDENT'S Speech, as that referred to an official act; whereas the amendment had no relation to France, but would apply to the people of China, or the people of this country, as well as to those of France. He believed the discussion had been of some use, because it was now on all sides acknowledged that the Speech of He could only Barras was an insult, which was not allowed at the beginning of the debate. say that gentlemen died hard; to use the expression of his friend from Pennsylvania, (Mr. SITGREAVES,) they seem determined to die in The objections to the words of the last ditch. He the present Address, were like the objections of Thomas Paine to the writings of Moses. denied that there was any similarity between expressions used in debate in that House, and expressions used by an Executive authority. No notice, he said, ought to be taken of what fell from members in that House, whilst they were allowed to be in order; and if foreign Ministers attended to hear their debates, and heard things which they did not like, they ought not to take exceptions at it, since they came there uninvited, and it was their duty to say what appeared to them right at the time.

The question was put on the amendment, when there appeared 49 votes for it, and 49 against it. The Chairman declared it carried in the affirmative.

WEDNESDAY, May 31.

Answer to the President's Speech. The House again resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole on the Answer to the PRESIDENT'S Speech, Mr. DAYTON's amendment being under consideration.

Mr. LIVINGSTON took notice of what had fallen from the gentleman last up, and showed the folly of adopting an irritating tone; as, if we charged a foreign government with making Mr. HARTLEY was persuaded there was but use of one disrespectful expression, they would one wish in the House with respect to peace, have no difficulty in retorting the complaint, as in the course of that debate, the gentleman from notwithstanding insinuations to the contrary South Carolina (Mr. HARPER) had called the but he could not agree with the proposed King of Spain the humble vassal of France, and amendment, as he wished the negotiation to be had not been sparing of his epithets to other left wholly to the PRESIDENT. The treaty enpowers; and the gentleman from Massachusetts tered into with France provided for their being (Mr. THATCHER) had termed Barras drunk or placed on the same footing with other nations, mad. He also noticed the constructions put and wished that right to be recognized by neupon the words "granting peace," and "sove-gotiation, and he doubted not the PRESIDENT reignty," as very extravagant. The Speech, he allowed, was bad enough, but he saw no reason for torturing it in this manner.

Mr. GILES said the gentleman from Massachusetts had called upon persons who might lie under imputation of being friends to France, to

would do it; for as he must see that peace was the desire of all, he would take such steps as would be best calculated to lead to it. He was against encroachments on the Executive, as, if He thought there was no they once begun, there was no knowing where they could stop.

H. OF R.]

Answer to the President's Speech.

danger of war; it would be a disagreeable thing for men who fought in the Revolutionary war, to be obliged to unsheathe their swords against France; but he trusted before they rose, means would be taken for putting the country into a state of defence.

The question was then taken on the Address as amended, and resolved in the affirmative-not choose to attend upon the PRESIDENT to preyeas 62, nays 36, as follows:

YEAS-John Allen, George Baer, jr., Abraham Baldwin, David Bard, James A. Bayard, Theophilus Bradbury, David Brooks, John Chapman, Christopher G. Champlin, James Cochran, Joshua Coit, William Craik, Samuel W. Dana, James Davenport, John Dennis, George Dent, George Ege, Thomas Evans, Abiel Foster, Dwight Foster, Jonathan Freeman, Nathaniel Freeman, jr., Albert Gallatin, Henry Glenn, Chauncey Goodrich, William Gordon, Roger Griswold, William B. Grove, John A. Hanna, Robert Goodloe Harper, Carter B. Harrison, Thomas Hartley, William Hindman, David Holmes, Hezekiah L. Hosmer, James H. Imlay, John Wilkes Kittera, Samuel Lyman, James Machir, John Milledge, Daniel Morgan, John Nicholas, Harrison G. Otis, Elisha R. Potter, John Read, John Rutledge, jr., James Schureman, Samuel Sewall, William Shepard, Thompson J. Skinner, Thomas Sinnickson, Jeremiah Smith, Nathaniel Smith, Samuel Smith, William Smith, (of Charleston,) George Thatcher, Richard Thomas, Mark Thomson, Abram Trigg, John E. Van Allen, Peleg Wadsworth, and John Williams.

[JUNE, 1797. Mr. LYON said he yesterday voted against the appointment of a committee to wait upon the PRESIDENT to know when and where he would receive their Address, because he believed the PRESIDENT should always be ready to receive important communications. He wished to make a motion, which was, "that such members as do sent the Answer to his Speech, shall be excused." He wished to be understood. He thought the motion a reasonable one, because it proposed to leave them at liberty to do as they pleased. And by the rules he saw, he was obliged to attend, except sick, or leave of absence was obtained; now, as he hoped not to be sick, he wished to put himself out of the power of the Sergeant-atArms, if he did not attend. He had been told he might stay behind without being noticed; but this was not enough for him, as he was a timid man, and the House had the law on their side, as he recollected something of a reprimand which had been given to Mr. WHITNEY. [The SPEAKER reminded him it was out of order to censure the proceedings of the House on any former occasion.] He said he stood corrected, and proceeded.

He had spoken, he said, to both sides of the House (as they were called) on the subject. One side dissuaded him from his motion, and laughed at it; the other side did not wish to join him in it, because it would look like disrespect to the person lately elected, who was not a man of their choice; but he trusted our magnanimous PREAmerica, despise such a boyish piece of business. SIDENT Would, with the enlightened yeomanry of

NAYS-Thomas Blount, Richard Brent, Nathan Bryan, Samuel J. Cabell, Thomas Claiborne, Matthew Clay, John Clopton, Thomas T. Davis, John Dawson, Lucas Elmendorph, William Findlay, John Fowler, William B. Giles, James Gillespie, Andrew Gregg, Jonathan N. Havens, Walter Jones, Edward Livingston, Matthew Locke, Matthew Lyon, Nathaniel Ma-This, he said, was no new subject with him, he con, Blair M'Clenachan, Joseph McDowell, Anthony had long heard the folly of the wise made a matNew, Josiah Parker, Samuel Sitgreaves, William ter of wonder in this respect. It was said this Smith (of Pinckney District), Richard Sprigg, jr., was not the time to abolish the custom; but this Richard Stanford, Thomas Sumter, John Swanwick, was the cant used against every kind of reform. John Trigg, Philip Van Cortlandt, Joseph B. Varnum, No better time could ever arrive, he said, than Abraham Venable, and Robert Williams. this, which was the threshold of a new Presidency, at a time when the man elected to the office was beloved and revered by his fellowCitizens; he was as yet unused to vain adulation; he had spent a great part of his life amongst a people whose love of a plainness of manner forbids all pageantry; he would be glad to see the custom done away. Were he acting in his own personal character, he perhaps might conform to the idle usage, but acting as he was for eighty thousand people, every father of a family in his district would condemn him for such an act.

Resolved, That Mr. SPEAKER, attended by the
House, do present the said Address; and that
Mr. VENABLE, Mr. KITTERA, and Mr. NATHANIEL
FREEMAN, Jr., be a committee to wait on the
President, to know when and where it will be
convenient for him to receive the same.
And then the House adjourned.

SATURDAY, June 3.

A report was received from the Commissioners of the Federal City, which was ordered to be printed.

Answer to the President's Speech.

Mr. VENABLE, from the committee appointed to wait on the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, to know when and where it will be convenient for him to receive the Address of this House, in answer to his Speech to both Houses of Congress, reported that the committee had, according to order, waited on the PRESIDENT, who signified to them that it would be convenient to him to receive the said Address, at twelve o'clock this day, at his own house.

Mr. BLOUNT said he had seconded the motion of the gentleman from Vermont, in order to give him an opportunity of stating his reasons for making it, and not from any desire to rescind the rule.

Mr. DANA observed that the House would not wish to do violence to the gentleman's feelings. It was true some of the most respectable men in the United States had waited upon the PRESIDENT in a similar way, yet, if the gentleman thought it would not comport with his own dignity to do it, he hoped he would be excused.

The motion was put, and carried unanimously.

[blocks in formation]

The SPEAKER informed the House the hour was arrived at which the PRESIDENT had appointed to receive them.

Mr. MACON moved that the House do now adjourn. He should wait upon the PRESIDENT; but it seemed to be understood that members were obliged to go. He thought, however the power of the House might extend to bringing a member into the House, there was no power to carry him out.

The motion was negatived without a division. The House then withdrew, and waited upon the PRESIDENT Of the United STATES with the following Address:

To the President of the United States:

Sir, the interesting detail of those events which have rendered the convention of Congress, at this time, indispensable, (communicated in your Speech to both Houses,) has excited in us the strongest emotions. Whilst we regret the occasion, we cannot omit to testify our approbation of the measure, and to pledge ourselves that no considerations of private inconvenience shall prevent, on our part, a faithful discharge of the duties to which we are called. We have constantly hoped that the nations of Europe, whilst desolated by foreign wars, or convulsed by intestine divisions, would have left the United States to enjoy that peace and tranquillity to which the impartial conduct of our Government has entitled us; and it is now, with extreme regret, we find the measures of the French Republic tending to endanger a situation so desirable and interesting to our country. Upon this occasion we feel it our duty to express, in the most explicit manner, the sensations which the present crisis has excited, and to assure you of our zealous co-operation in those measures which may appear necessary for our security or peace.

Although it is the earnest wish of our hearts that peace may be maintained with the French Republic, and with all the world, yet we will never surrender those rights which belong to us as a nation; and whilst we view with satisfaction the wisdom, dignity, and moderation, which have marked the measures of the supreme Executive of our country, in its attempts to remove, by candid explanations, the complaints and jealousies of France, we fee! the full force of that indignity which has been offered our country in the rejection of its Minister. No attempts to wound our rights as a sovereign State will escape the notice of our constituents; they will be felt with indignation, and repelled with that decision which shall convince the world that we are not a degraded people, that we can never submit to the demands of a foreign power without examination and without discussion.

Knowing as we do the confidence reposed by the people of the United States in their Government, we cannot hesitate in expressing our indignation at any sentiments tending to derogate from that confidence. Such sentiments, wherever entertained, served to evince an imperfect knowledge of the opinions of our constituents. An attempt to separate the people of the United States from their Government, is an at tempt to separate them from themselves; and although foreigners, who know not the genius of our country, may have conceived the project, and foreign emissaries may attempt the execution, yet the united efforts of our fellow-citizens will convince the world of its impracticability.

Sensibly as we feel the wound which has been in

[H. OF R.

flicted by the transactions disclosed in your communications, yet we think with you, that neither the honor nor the interest of the United States forbid the repetition of advances for preserving peace. We, therefore, receive with the utmost satisfaction your information that a fresh attempt at negotiation will be instituted; liation, and a disposition on the part of France to comand we cherish the hope that a mutual spirit of concipensate for any injuries which may have been committed upon our neutral rights; and, on the part of the United States, to place France on grounds similar to those of other countries in their relation and connection with us, if any inequalities shall be found to exist, will produce an accommodation compatible with the engagements, rights, duties and honor of the United States. Fully, however, impressed with the uncertainty of the result, we shall prepare to meet with fortitude any unfavorable events which may ocand to extricate ourselves from their consequences with all the skill we possess, and all the efforts in our power. Believing with you that the conduct of the Government has been just and impartial to foreign nations, that the laws for the preservation of peace have been proper, and that they have been fairly executed, the Representatives of the people do not hesitate to declare that they will give their most cordial support to the execution of principles so deliberately and uprightly established.

cur,

The many interesting subjects which you have recommended to our consideration, and which are so strongly enforced by this momentous occasion, will mands; and we trust that by the decided and explicit receive every attention which their importance deconduct which will govern our deliberations, every insinuation will be repelled which is derogatory to the honor and independence of our country.

Permit us, in offering this Address, to express our satisfaction at your promotion to the first office in the eminent talents and patriotism which have placed you Government, and our entire confidence that the prein this distinguished situation, will enable you to discharge its various duties with satisfaction to yourself and advantage to our common country.

To which the PRESIDENT returned the following answer:

Mr. Speaker, and

Gentlemen of the House of Representatives: I receive with great satisfaction your candid approbation of the convention of Congress; and thank you for your assurances that the interesting subjects recommended to your consideration shall receive the attention which their importance demands; and that your co-operation may be expected in those measures which may appear necessary for our security or peace.

The declaration of the Representatives of this nation, of their satisfaction at my promotion to the first office in the Government, and of their confidence in my sincere endeavors to discharge the various duties of it, with advantage to our common country, have excited my most grateful sensibility.

I pray you, gentlemen, to believe, and to communicate such assurance to our constituents, that no event which I can foresee to be attainable by any exertions in the discharge of my duties, can afford me so much cordial satisfaction as to conduct a negotiation with the French Republic, to a removal of prejudices, a correction of errors, a dissipation of umbrages, an accommodation of all differences, and a

« PreviousContinue »