H. OF R.] Lands between Ludlow and Roberts' lines.-Surplus Revenue.-Expenses of Impeachment. [JAN. 28, 1831. LANDS BETWEEN LUDLOW & ROBERTS' LINES. The House then, on motion of Mr. STERIGERE, went into Committee of the Whole, Mr. HOWARD in the chair, and took up the bill from the Senate, to "amend an act to quiet the title of certain purchasers of lands between the lines of Ludlow and Roberts, in the State of Ohio," together with certain amendments proposed by the Committee on Private Land Claims. of the Committee on the Judiciary, relative to repealing THE JUDICIARY. Mr. LECOMPTE submitted the following: structed to inquire into the expediency of amending the Resolved, That the Committee on the Judiciary be in[This subject has been long before Congress, and the constitution of the United States, so that the judges of the debate on the merits of the case repeatedly published in Supreme Court and of the inferior courts shall hold their the Intelligencer. General McArthur and Philip Dod-respective offices for a term of years. dridge, as agents for others, were the owners of certain Mr. WHITTLESEY demanded the question of consilands between the lines of Ludlow and Roberts, in the Mr. VANCE called for the yeas and nays on the question. deration, and They were ordered by the House, and, being taken, stood as follows: YEAS.--Messrs. Alexander, Allen, Alston, Angel, Bay State of Ohio. These lands had been sold to other individuals by the United States, believing them to be a part of the national domain, and the proceeds were paid into the treasury. Under this state of things, Doddridge had commenced suit against the purchasers, and the United States made themselves defendants in the case. In the lor, Bell, James Blair, John Blair, Boon, Cambreleng, Supreme Court, a decision was made in favor of Dod- Carson, Chandler, Chilton, Claiborne, Conner, Crochedridge. After that decision, Congress passed an act for ron, Warren R. Davis, Desha, De Witt, Earll, Findlay, the survey of the lands, and authorizing the appointment Hinds, Thomas Irwin, Jarvis, Cave Johnson, Perkins Foster, Fry, Gordon, Hall, Halsey, Harvey, Haynes, of commissioners to appraise their value. When their report was made, the President of the United States was King, Adam King, Lamar, Lea, Leavitt, Lecompte, Lewis, authorized to treat with McArthur and Doddridge for a Lumpkin, McCreery, McCoy, Miller, Nuckolls, Pettis, settlement of their claims, in order to quiet the titles of Potter, Richardson, Roane, Scott, Shields, Standefer, Stethose who had purchased from the United States. rigere, Wiley Thompson, John Thomson, Tucker, Wayne, McArthur agreed to receive for his lands the valuation fixed by Weeks, Wickliffe, Yancey.--61. the appraisers. Doddridge demanded the same sum, nold, Noyes Barber, John S. Barbour, Barnwell, BarrinNAYS.--Messrs. Anderson, Archer, Armstrong, Arwith interest, that had been paid into the treasury. An act had passed Congress, at the last session, appropriating ger, Bartley, Beekman, Bouldin, Brodhead, Brown, a sum of money for quieting these titles; and the bill at Burges, Butman, Cahoon, Clay, Condict, Cooper, Coulpresent reported was to make a further appropriation, to ter, Cowles, Craig, Crane, Crawford, Crockett, Creighthe use of Mr. Doddridge, for one of the surveys, which ton, Crowninshield, Davenport, John Davis, Deberry, he had already ceded to the United States, but for which Denny, Doddridge, Dorsey, Draper, Drayton, Duncan, the act before named did not make sufficient compensation.] Edward Everett, Horace Everett, Finch, Forward, GilDwight, Eager, Ellsworth, George Evans, Joshua Evans, A debate of some duration took place between Messrs. STERIGERE, MCCOY, WICKLIFFE, VINTON, and Holland, Hoffman, Howard, Hughes, Hunt, Huntington, more, Gorham, Green, Grennell, Hemphill, Hodges, PETTIS. It consisted chiefly, however, of explanations, hrie, Ingersoll, Johns, Kendall, Kennon, Kincaid, Leiper, and a statement of the principles on which the bill before Lent, Loyall, Mallary, Martindale, Martin, Thomas Maxwell, Lewis Maxwell, McDuffie, McIntire, Mitchell, Monell, Muhlenberg, Norton, Patton, Pearce, Pierson, Polk, Ramsey, Reed, Rose, Russel, Sanford, Wm. B. Shepard, Aug. H. Shepperd, Sill, Smith, Speight, Ambrose Spencer, Richard Spencer, Stanbery, H. R. Storrs, W. L. Storrs, Strong, Sutherland, Swann, Swift, Taylor, Test, Trezvant, Vance, Varnum, Verplanck, Vinton, Washington, Whittlesey, C. P. White, E. D. White, Wilde, Williams, Wilson, Wingate, Young.-115. the House was founded. Mr. STERIGERE moved that Mr. TREZVANT had risen to speak, when JUDGE PECK. The House then went into a Committee of the Whole, Mr. MARTIN in the chair, and proceeded to the Senate chamber, to attend the high court of impeachment sitting for the trial of Judge Peck. Having returned, and reported progress, The House again resumed, in Committee of the Whole, the bill which was before that committee in the morning relative to lands between Ludlow and Roberts' lines: with out continuing the debate, the committee rose, and reported progress, and had leave to sit again. FRIDAY, JANUARY 28. SURPLUS REVENUE. Mr. POLK, from the select committee to which was referred so much of the message of the President of the United States, at the commencement of the session, as relates to the distribution of the surplus revenue, made a report, [see Appendix;] which was ordered to lie on the table. A motion was made to print 6,000 copies of the report; which motion lies one day on the table. So the House refused to consider the resolution. EXPENSES OF THE IMPEACHMENT. Mr. ELLSWORTH stated that the witnesses attending on the trial of Judge Peck could not be discharged until they were paid. It was highly necessary, therefore, that the House should act upon the bill which he had reported this morning; and he moved to suspend the consideration of any other business on the table, for the purpose of taking up the bill to which he referred. The motion was agreed to, and the House went into Committee of the Whole, Mr. DWIGHT in the chair, and took up the bill "making provision for the compensation of the witnesses, and other expenses attending the trial of Judge Peck," together with the amendments reported by the Committee on the Judiciary. [The gross sum proposed to be appropriated by the Senate's bill, amounted to $12,000; by the proposed amendments, that amount was increased to $13,500.] Mr. POLK said, the bill provided for the compensation of the witnesses, both on the part of the United States Mr. WHITE, of New York, moved for the printing of and the respondent. In all State prosecutions, the defend3,000 copies of the reports of the majority and minority ant always paid his own witnesses, and he thought the JAN. 29, 1831.] Lands between Ludlow and Roberts' lines.--Judge Peck.--The Judiciary.—Brown Sugar. [H. of R. United States would do enough to compensate the witnesses on the part of the prosecution. He requested information as to what had been the usage in former cases of impeachment under this Government. Mr. ELLSWORTH replied that, in the case of Judge Chase, the United States had paid the witnesses on both sides. He was not positive as to the other cases. He would remark, that it would tend to the utter ruin of any individual brought before the Senate of the United States for trial, if he were to be compelled to compensate his own witnesses. It was right and proper that the Government should pay all the witnesses attending trials of impeachments; and whether Judge Peck should or should not be cleared, it was obvious that, if he were to be compelled to pay his witnesses, he was a ruined man. Mr. CARSON was in favor of the bill as proposed to be amended. He remarked, that if a precedent was now established, that the United States were not to pay witnesses on behalf of the persons accused in trials of impeachment, no future prosecution would take place, however aggravated might be the offence committed. No man would undertake it. There was no analogy between the ordinary trials in the States and a trial in the Senate' of the United States. In the latter, witnesses had gene rally to be brought from a distance, often very great, as in the present case, and their detention here was both long and expensive. What possible chance was there, he would ask, that an individual could clear himself of an alleged crime, if he was obliged to pay his own witnesses? No man could clear himself, for no man could afford the expense. In his opinion, for the United States to refuse to pay witnesses in trials of the kind referred to, would amount to a positive denial of justice, &c. The question was now demanded; and, being put on the amendments offered by the Judiciary committee, they were agreed to. The committee then rose, and reported the bill as amended; the amendments were agreed to, and the bill ordered to be read a third time to-morrow. LANDS BETWEEN LUDLOW & ROBERTS' LINES. The House then resumed, in Committee of the Whole, the bill "to amend the act to quiet the title of purchasers of the public lands between the lines of Ludlow and Ro. berts, in the State of Ohio," Mr. HOWARD in the chair. Some further conversation took place between Messrs. TREZVANT, WICKLIFFE, and VINTON, when the amendments proposed by the Committee on Private Land Claims were disagreed to, and the committee rose, and reported the bill to the House. The House concurred with the Committee of the Whole in rejecting the proposed amendments, and the bill was ordered to be read a third time to-morrow. JUDGE PECK. The hour of 12 having arrived, the House again resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole, Mr. MARTIN in the chair, and proceeded to the Senate, to attend, before the high court of impeachment, the trial of Judge Peck. Having returned, and reported progress, The House adjourned. SATURDAY, JANUARY 29. THE JUDICIARY. The bill to repeal the 25th section of the judiciary act, passed on the 4th September, 1789, coming up as the first business of the morning, the question being on the motion of Mr. BUCHANAN to postpone the motion that the bill be read a second time to Tuesday next Mr. CRAWFORD rose, and, after a few remarks, demanded the previous question; which was the motion of Mr. DODDRIDGE that the bill be rejected. The demand was sustained by the House-yeas 81, nays 69. The question was then put, "Shall the main question be now put?" And it was determined in the affirmative-yeas 75, nays 68. Mr. CRAWFORD moved for a call of the House-which motion prevailed; when it was ascertained that there were one hundred and seventy-one members present. Mr. MERCER then moved to dispense with further proceedings in the call; but the motion was negatived. The names of absentees on the first call were then called over a second time. Several of them answered to their names, and excuses were made for others; one hundred and eighty-three members were now ascertained to be present. The doors were then closed; when, On motion of Mr. DWIGHT, further proceedings in the call were suspended. The main question was then put, viz. "Shall the bill be rejected?" And it was determined in the affirmative, as follows: YEAS.-Messrs. Anderson, Armstrong, Arnold, Bailey, Noyes Barber, John S. Barbour, Barringer, Bartley, Bates, Baylor, Beekman, John Blair, Bockee, Boon, Borst, Brodhead, Brown, Buchanan, Burges, Butman, Cahoon, Chilton, Clark, Condict, Cooper, Coulter, Cowles, Craig, Crane, Crawford, Crockett, Creighton, Crocheron, Crowninshield, John Davis, Deberry, Denny, De Witt, Dickinson, Doddridge, Dorsey, Drayton, Dwight, Eager, Earll, Ellsworth, G. Evans, Joshua Evans, Edward Everett, Findlay, Finch, Forward, Fry, Gilmore, Gorham, Green, Grennell, Gurley, Halsey, Hemphill, Hodges, Holland, Hoffman, Howard, Hubbard, Hughes, Hunt, Huntington, Ihrie, Ingersoll, Thomas Irwin, William W. Irvin, Johns, Cave Johnson, Kendall, Kennon, Kincaid, Perkins King, Adam King, Leavitt, Leiper, Lent, Letcher, Magee, Mallary, Martindale, Lewis Maxwell, McCreery, McDuffie, McIntire, Mercer, Miller, Mitchell, Monell, Muhlenberg, Norton, Pearce, Pierson, Powers, Reed, Richardson, Rose, Russel, Sanford, Scott, William B. Shepard, Augustine H. Shepperd, Shields, Sill, Speight, Ambrose Spencer, Richard Spencer, Sprigg, Standefer, Sterigere, Henry R. Storrs, William L. Storrs, Strong, Sutherland, Swann, Swift, Taylor, Test, J. Thomson, Vance, Varnum, Verplanck, Vinton, Washington, Weeks, WhittleSey, C. P. White, Edward D. White, Williams, Wilson, Wingate, Young.--138. NAYS.--Messrs. Alexander, Allen, Alston, Angel, Barnwell, Bell, James Blair, Bouldin, Cambreleng, Campbell, Chandler, Claiborne, Clay, Coleman, Conner, Daniel, Davenport, W. R. Davis, Desha, Draper, Foster, Gaither, Gordon, Hall, Harvey, Haynes, Hinds, Jarvis, Richard M. Johnson, Lamar, Lecompte, Lewis, Loyall, Lumpkin, Lyon, Martin, Thomas Maxwell, McCoy, Nuckolls, Overton, Patton, Pettis, Polk, Potter, Roane, Wiley Thompson, Trezvant, Tucker, Wickliffe, Wilde, Yancey.--51. So the bill was rejected. BROWN SUGAR. The House then resumed the consideration of the resolution submitted by Mr. HAYNES Some days since, relative to brown sugar. Mr. WHITE, of Louisiana, said, that, when this subject before came up in order, it was laid over for a specific object. I myself, said Mr. W., moved its postponement, as well from my own conviction of the propriety of the step, as at the instance and suggestion of some other gentlemen. The object alluded to was, to let in a report on the subject, which we were daily expecting to receive from the Treasury Department, in compliance with a call from this House. That report, sir, has since been sent H. OF R.] Judge Peck.-Illinois and Michigan Canal. [JAN. 31, 1831. their land by white men, and brought a suit for its recovery, but were too poor to employ counsel. They had thrown themselves on the State of Tennessee for the benefit of the pauper law, so as that counsel might be employed for them; but the benefit of that law was refused. He hoped the petition would go to the Committee of Claims. Mr. WILLIAMS moved its reference to the Judiciary committee. in, but, being of some volume, the public printer has not Mr. CROCKETT maintained that the petition should had time enough to lay it on our tables. This circum-go to the Committee of Claims. He explained the object stance I regret as much as any one can; yet it does present of the memorialists. They had been dispossessed of the question, how far it be proper to proceed without it. Several gentlemen have mentioned the subject to me; and one among the number intimated that, if I did not move its further postponement, he would. As to myself, it does appear to me that it would not be over respectful to the gentleman who presides in the department, to take no heed of a document which we have caused him to prepare with no inconsiderable labor. Besides, I feel that I should be wanting in deference to the people where I live, if I neglected to use, and to imbue the House, as far as depends on me, with a knowledge of the facts which they have taken so much pains to embody. There is another consideration: we are bound by the rule we have adopted| to attend in the Senate, during this week, on the debate of the impeachment we have preferred against Judge Peck. The hand on the dial plate indicates that but five minutes could now be allotted to the subject. For these reasons, sir, I move its further postponement until next Wednesday, in the hope that it may be then taken up, and prosecuted to a termination. The motion prevailed. The resolution heretofore submitted by Mr. DRAYTON, calling on the Secretary of War for certain information relative to officers of the army, furloughs, &c., was considered and agreed to. The resolutions heretofore submitted by Mr. HODGES, calling upon the Secretary of State for certain information, were taken up, considered, and modified to read as follows: 66 Resolved, That the President of the United States be requested to inform this House what measures have been taken by the Executive in relation to the capture, on the 4th of July, 1829, of the ship Galatea, late of the port of New Bedford, by a Portuguese naval squadron then blockading the island of Terceira; and, also, in relation to the imprisonment and robbery of the crew of said ship; and to the capture of other American vessels under the same order of blockade. "Resolved, That the President be requested to lay before this House any correspondence that may have been had touching this matter, within the knowledge or possession of the President, not incompatible with the public interest." After a few remarks from Mr. H. in explanation of the object of the resolutions, they were agreed to, as modified. The resolution offered by Mr. POTTER a few days since, to amend the rule of the House which limits the discussion of resolutions to one hour, was next taken up. Mr. POTTER was going on to state the reasons which induced him to offer the resolution, and explaining the bad effects of the present rule, when he was interrupted by the expiration of the hour-elucidating, as he said, the inexpediency of the rule, and exemplifying the great disadvantages under which members labored. JUDGE PECK. The House then again resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole, Mr. MARTIN in the chair, and proceeded to the Senate, to attend the trial of Judge Peck before the high court of impeachment. Having returned, and reported progress, The House adjourned to Monday. MONDAY, JANUARY 31. After some conversation between Messrs. CLAY, WILLIAMS, WHITTLESEY, and others, the petition was finally referred to the Committee of Claims. Mr. MERCER, from the Committee on Internal Improvements, reported a bill to authorize a subscription to the stock of the Alexandria Canal Company; which was twice read; and the question being on its commitment, Mr. POTTER moved to lay the bill on the table. Mr. MERCER called for the reading of the report of the Committee on Internal Improvements, which reported the bill. The Clerk was about to read it; when Mr. MERCER earnestly entreated the gentleman from North Carolina to withdraw his motion, and thus save the time of the House, and the money of the nation. Mr. POTTER said, that, yielding to the advice of his friends around him, he would withdraw his motion to lay the bill on the table. When the bill granting a charter to the company was before the House, at the last session, it was generally understood that, if the company obtained the charter, they would not ask Congress for a subscription to their stock. Mr. MERCER stated that the gentleman was under a misapprehension. The individuals who advocated the granting of a charter had no power to pledge the company that they would not ask Congress to subscribe to the stock of that company. He assured the gentleman that there was no pledge; and he felt convinced that, if the gentleman would read the report of the committee on the subject, and had no constitutional objections to the measure proposed, he would unite with the friends of the bill in procuring its passage. The bill was then committed. Mr. DODDRIDGE asked leave to submit a motion to print 6,000 copies of the reports of the majority and minority of the Committee on the Judiciary relative to repealing the twenty-fifth section of the judiciary act of 1789; but the House refused the leave. JUDGE PECK. The House then, on motion of Mr. SPEIGHT, resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole, Mr. CAMBRELENG in the chair; and, on motion of Mr. HAYNES, proceeded to the Senate, to attend the further trial of Judge Peck before the high court of impeachment. Having returned, the chairman reported that the committee, in pursu ance of the order of the House, had attended the trial of Judge Peck; and that the Senate, had pronounced judgment in the case, and, by a vote of 22 to 21, had refused to sustain the impeachment preferred by the House; and that the court had adjourned sine die. ILLINOIS AND MICHIGAN CANAL. The House then proceeded to the consideration of the motion made on the 6th instant to reconsider the vote by which was rejected the bill to authorize a change in the Mr. CROCKETT presented the petition of three Chero-disposal of the land granted for the construction of the kee Indians, who are entitled to reserves of six hundred and forty acres of land cach, and moved its reference to the Committee of Claims. Mr. CLAY suggested that the proper reference would be to the Committee on the Public Lands. Illinois and Michigan canal. Mr. DUNCAN hoped the motion for reconsideration would prevail, and that the bill would be made the order of the day for some day certain; by which time he trusted that he should be able to satisfy gentlemen on a point JAN. 31, 1831.] Claim of James Monroe. which was objected to when the bill was last before the House; and he called for the reading of the report of the Committee on the Public Lands, which committee reported the bill. It was read by the Clerk. [H. of R. lowance to Mr. Monroe for a house purchased by him in Paris, for instance, was an item to which he objected. Mr. SUTHERLAND, in a very impressive speech, supported the claim, at considerable length. He alluded to the revolutionary services of Mr. Monroe, and his present unenviable situation. Mr. VANCE said that, when the bill was taken up before, he was desirous of offering an amendment, with a view to meet the views of gentlemen. If no other mem- Mr. HOWARD called for the reading of a memorial ber did, he should take occasion, if the House agreed to from his constituents, in support of the claim, as being reconsider the bill, to submit an amendment, so as, if pos-couched in stronger language than he could use, and sible, to meet the views of gentlemen, and secure the which he hoped would be read to the House instead of passage of the bill in the best possible shape. any remarks from him. The memorial was read. Mr. McDUFFIE made a few very energetic remarks in favor of the claim, and its settlement by the accounting officers of the treasury. He alluded particularly to Mr. Hagner, as one of the best, most industrious, and faithful accounting officers of the Government, and said that, if the claim should be referred to him, ample justice would Mr. DUNCAN remarked that the gentleman who had made the motion to reconsider, had stated to the House, at the time of doing so, that he did it with the view to offer an amendment, proposing to appropriate money, in lieu of scrip, to aid the State of Illinois in the construction of the proposed canal. If gentlemen would prefer the appropriation of money, he had no objection; though, be done. for his own part, he should be perfectly satisfied with scrip. Gentlemen were mistaken in the idea that the scrip Mr. BUCHANAN was in favor of the claim, as well as would be sacrificed. Lands to the amount of $360,000 in favor of sending it to the accounting officers of the had been sold in the State of Illinois the last year; it was treasury for adjustment. He also eulogized Mr. Hagner proposed by the bill to apply but $50,000 worth of scrip as a faithful public officer, and hoped the claim might be in a year; and it was evident that it would be equal to settled as proposed. money in the hands of the State. Mr. VANCE said that, for himself, he was willing to take the bill as it was; but it did not appear to be so framed as to satisfy gentlemen; and with a view to give more general satisfaction, the motion had been made to reconsider, so as to submit the amendment suggested. Mr. POLK opposed the claim. Mr. ELLSWORTH said he did not rise to enter into Mr. BELL said he had voted for the original bill, and the merits of this bill; his vote was recorded in the comstated the grounds upon which he did so. He should be mittee-a sense of duty only induced him to vote as he opposed to an amendment like the one suggested, and did. I shall not be sorry, said Mr. E., if gentlemen can could not vote for the reconsideration, though he had find it to be their duty to vote otherwise. My object is to voted for the bill originally. state the objections I have to the reference proposed by the honorable gentleman from Virginia, viz. that the adjustment of this account shall be referred to an accounting officer of the treasury, to act under the Secretary of War, subject to the supervision and final decision of the President. The manner of reference, and the principles of settlement, are incorrect. The whole is nothing less than passing a vote that the present Executive shall allow to one of his predecessors what, on vague principles of equity, if not of mere generosity, he pleases. I would as willingly give this power to the present Executive, as to any man; but I think we should give it to no man. He ought not to be called to this duty; he must feel his embarrassment in discharging it, and he cannot act as another man might. I would not object to a reThe House then took up the bill for the relief of James ference to an accounting officer; but then I want his Monroe-the question being on concurring with the Com-responsibility. As is proposed, he is to act under another; mittee of the Whole in striking out the enacting clause of Mr. IRVIN, of Ohio, with a view, as he said, to have done with the subject, for the present session, at least, moved to lay the motion for reconsideration on the table. The motion was negatived. The question was then put upon the reconsideration of the vote by which the bill had been rejected, and was decided in the negative-yeas 82, nays 109. the bill. JAMES MONROE. and I assure the House, under this reference, he will not assume our responsibility, and do what, in committee, we Mr. MERCER rose, and said that, when the bill was have said ought not to be done, and especially as he acts under consideration in Committee of the Whole, he had under the Secretary of War, who is thus placed over an suggested the propriety of retaining the enacting clause; inferior officer, to direct his course. Nor can the Secreand that, if it were not stricken out, he should move to tary feel any responsibility--the amendment is that the strike out the whole of the bill after the enacting clause, President is to decide; and I repeat that the whole is left and submit an amendment, referring the claim to the ac- to the generosity of the Executive. We lay down no counting officers of the treasury for a just and equitable definite rules--we designate no items--we fix no limits-settlement. The committee had, however, seen proper and, for aught we can do, if this amendment prevails, to strike out the enacting clause. He hoped the House claims to any amount may be allowed against us. Sir, it would not agree with the committee in their amendment; is our duty to pass judgment upon these claims. If they in the event of which he should submit an amendment, [which he read. Mr. M., in a speech of some length, then spoke in favor of the claim, and in explanation of his amendment. Mr. CHILTON should be opposed to the amendment. He hoped, however, that the House would at once concur with the committee, and strike out the enacting clause of the bill. He called for the yeas and nays on the question, and they were ordered by the House. Mr. CARSON spoke in favor of the claim, and against the amendment of the committee. A bill should pass in some shape, extending relief to Colonel Monroe. Mr. PATTON gave his views on the subject; he was opposed to the amendment, yet thought that the sum proposed to be allowed by the bill was too large. The alVOL. VII.--35 are legal, then we already have accounting officers to allow them; if they are not legal, but are to be allowed on principles of indefinite equity or generosity, it is our business to determine the amount, or reject them. With the fullest confidence in the Executive, that he would do what seemed to him right, I will not consent to impose upon him this unwelcome duty--he is in a most delicate situation, when called by Congress, and that, too, after our vote in committee, to adjust the accounts of President Monroe. It is nothing less than an appeal to his generosity--the persons under him will never, in such a case as this, undertake to discriminate between the items. They have no rule for it. As none of the items are a legal charge, they will at once refer the whole to the President, and he must take the responsibility of allowing H. OF R.] Claim of James Monroe. [JAN. 31, 1831. them, or incurring the displeasure of the friends of the mansion to all who sought a place of refuge, and limited bill--a situation in which he ought not to be placed, for his family only by the number of his countrymen. in it he cannot act as in the discharge of his appropriate duties. Mr. EVERETT, of Massachusetts, was in favor of it. He made several remarks in support of the claim, and concluded, by making a very feeling appeal to the House in its support. Mr. DWIGHT also spoke on the same side. To give the French nation an assurance which its watchful jealousy seemed to demand, that we were desir ous of a lasting peace and friendship with them, he bought a house in Paris, for which he paid a large sum of money. He declares most solemnly that his sole object was to give the French unequivocal proof of our sincere desire for perpetual amity, and that he should not have made the purchase upon any other consideration, or for Mr. DAVIS, of Massachusetts, observed, he should any other purpose. The title to this estate has failed, and have been content to pursue his usual course, by giving a he has lost the whole amount of the purchase money. He silent vote, if he had not noticed, during this earnest and admits that he had no instructions to purchase it for this protracted debate, that many gentlemen seemed to enter- Government, but took it at his own risk, believing himself tain erroneous views of the nature and character of the called upon so to do for the good of the country. It is demand made upon the Government. Although, said Mr. said this furnished no ground of legal claim upon the D., I was a member of the select committee to whom this treasury-agreed--but I appeal to gentlemen on this matter was referred, both in the last and in the present floor as individuals, as men bearing the relations of honorCongress, I had resolved to leave the discussion to others; able, high-minded citizens in the community; as men but after what has taken place to day, I feel called on by a having just conceptions of the moral obligations which sense of duty to place the claim in its true light before a exist between principal and agent, between master and vote is taken; for I am persuaded it has merits which have servant; and ask each, if he had employed an agent in his been overlooked in the heat of debate. I have, said he, service, who, in a difficult and embarrassing crisis of his looked over the voluminous documents which are intended affairs, had advanced his private funds without instructions, to illustrate and support it, not at the present session, but but solely for the benefit of his principal, and with the during a former Congress—and although I may not in my hope of rescuing him from imminent peril, and should recollection be exact in their details, yet my memory will thereby ruin himself while he protected the interests of not fail me in the material facts. I may claim, therefore, his employer, whether, to such an agent, he could turn without subjecting myself to the imputation of vanity, to a deaf ear if he should appeal to his sense of justice and know something of the facts as they are set forth. Let equity for relief in his distress? Whether he could us then see what they are. Mr. Monroe was appointed spurn him away, and leave him to perish with hunger and to a twofold mission: first to France, and then to Eng- nakedness? And, if he could, whether the world would land, by Mr. Jefferson, who, having an over solicitude not condemn such an individual as cold, selfish, heartless? to economize the public funds, informed him, when the as destitute of the sympathies of our nature, and an appointment was made, that he must be content with one idolater of money? Sir, there would be but one opinion outfit instead of two, as had been usual under similar in such a case-the servant sinks his private means in his circumstances, both before and since. It was then believ- most sincere endeavors to promote the interests of his ed, both by the President and the minister, that this master, and without a thought of benefiting himself; that arrangement would cover the expense; but the latter found on experiment that it was a great mistake, for he had been compelled to draw largely upon his private resources to maintain himself. master can never live honored and respected in the enjoyment of wealth among his fellow-citizens, while that servant is perishing with poverty. Now, sir, what is the difference between this and the case before us? We are On his return, after much delay, the second outfit was not, as some gentlemen seem to suppose, a judicial allowed to him, and he received it, protesting that it fell tribunal to decide between parties, but we are the master far short of indemnifying him. This is, said Mr. D., the settling with the servant; and shall it be said that we cansubstance of the story; and, in order to understand the not, or that we will not, deal justly? Mr. Monroe sunk a grounds of appeal to this Government, it is necessary to large portion of his private property in this house-it is advert to the state of public affairs at the time, and to gone, and we are assured the act was done with the best notice some of the items of claim presented for our con- intentions, and solely for our good--and I appeal to gensideration. I shall not trouble the House, how ever, with tlemen to decide in this case as they would in a private that kind of examination which has been gone through by transaction. I ask them whether they are prepared to many gentlemen, for it is wholly unnecessary as I view say there is no equity in this demand; whether they are this matter, for I do not consider Mr. Monroe as having willing to push it from them by striking out the enacting established a strictly legal claim, and shall not, therefore, clause of the bill, and obtain for their country a repudraw in question the reasoning which has been pressed tation which, as individuals, they would be unwilling to upon us on this head, and which has occupied the time of own. the House for several days. I see, said Mr. D., another item to, which I will also ask What, then, said Mr. D., was the state of public affairs? the attention of the House for a moment. It is money adIt was a momentous crisis--a crisis big with the fate of vanced to relieve the necessities of Thomas Paine. Europe. It was the period of the French revolution, sum is not large, but too large for a poor man to lose. when the mind of that nation was on fire, threatening to At the period of indiscriminate slaughter, during the consume itself, and whatever approached it. It was a time French revolution, Paine was seized and incarcerated, of great embarrassment, which called for great skill, for but through accident his life was spared, though he was uncommon prudence, and the most patient forbearance; kept immured in a loathsome cell until he almost perished which demanded a spirit of unexampled temperance and from suffering. In this situation he made an appeal to conciliation to maintain and secure the interests of the the minister for protection as a foreigner, and through country. In these extraordinary circumstances, the min- his interposition was liberated; but he was worn down ister declares he felt himself bound, by his regard for the with disease, penury, and want. He had no one to appeal peace and prosperity of this nation, to adopt measures to but the minister of his adopted country. This appeal attended with unusual expense. His protection was was made, and for the honor of my country I feel sincerely sought by a large number of his countrymen against_the|thankful it was not made in vain. imminent dangers and misrule of the times. It was not I am aware, sir, that this individual has justly forfeited sought in vain. He threw open the doors of his hospitable much of his character, and that in aftertimes his memory The |