H. OF R.] Constitution of Michigan. sir, to contrast the course of the agents of Michigan, and of the gentleman from Massachusetts, with that heretofore pursued by the delegation from Ohio in the conduct of this question. The Senate of the United States, at each session of the last Congress, passed a bill to confirm the boundary of Ohio. It so happened that there was a member from the State of Ohio on the Committee on the Judiciary, and on the Committee on the Territories. A gentleman from the State of Ohio, not now a member of this House, had in both instances moved the commitment of the bill to a select committee, stating to the House, as his reason for so doing, that it was the desire of the Ohio delegation that the committee should be composed wholly from States having no interest in the question in dispute; and at the same time expressing a wish that he might not be named as chairman of the committee, at the head of which he would be entitled by courtesy to be placed, as the mover of the order. In both instances, the committee was organized according to the request of the mover. Now, sir, I leave the course of the delegation from Ohio to speak for itself, when contrasted with this attempt of the agents of Michigan to obtain a one-sided report. The gentleman seems to think that, because the members from Ohio may vote upon this question, he, as the avowed partisan of Michigan, may, with the same propriety, preside over the committee who shall report the facts and law to the House. If any member from the State of Ohio should attempt to take charge of the question as chairman of the committee, or to thrust himself into the committee as a member of it, then, and not till then, will the analogy between us and the gentleman's present position hold good; and no gentleman can deny that a member from Ohio might not be placed on the committee with as much propriety as the gentleman from Massachusetts can be permitted to retain his place on it. The gentleman has informed you, and his statement is true, that at the last session a week was consumed in debating this question before the select committee. The statement itself must satisfy every member of this body of the impossibility of making the question, in all its details, understood in the House; and that, in coming to its decision, it must rely mainly upon the industry, impartiality, and cautious scrutiny of the committee. A right understanding of it involves the necessity of going back to the very foundation of the legislative and political history of the western country; of entering into a comparison of the early and modern geography of the country, and the true construction of a complicated series of laws and ordinances, through a period of half a century. Ancient and modern maps must be examined. The very number of the House renders it impracticable for each member, as the debate progresses, to obtain a personal inspection and explanation of them, while the committee, from the smallness of its number, can sit down and go through all the details and facts with the caution and accuracy of which the proceedings of a judicial tribunal are susceptible. To commit such a question, involving rights of vital importance to three States of the Union, into the charge of one who has already avowed his hostility to them, is worse than mockery. Again, sir: this subject is brought here for the action of the House upon it. I cannot forget that the gentleman from Massachusetts, at the last session of Congress, declared it as his opinion that there ought to be no action of Congress upon this subject; and yet, sir, strange as it may seem, the gentleman comes forward and proffers to take it into his charge, while, at the same time, he gives us ample evidence that his opinion has undergone no change. Now, sir, I am for putting it in the charge of those who will bring it forward for the action and decision of the House. The gentleman, sir, from Massa [DEC. 28, 1835. chusetts, has disqualified himself from taking this subject into his hands, not only by his declaration that there ought to be no action upon it, but also by his course last session, when it was under his charge. A speech of the gentleman, made at the last session, which went the rounds of the country, and has been several times referred to during this debate, would naturally lead all who did not know the facts to suppose the bill, then under his charge as chairman of the committee, had been under the consideration of Congress at the time it was delivered. Not so, sir. The gentleman, instead of asking the commitment of the bill when it was reported back from the select committee, or taking any order in reference to it, left it where, in the then state of business in the House, it was altogether impossible for its friends to bring it before the House. While the bill was thus situated, at a time when it was not before the House, the gentleman went out of his way, and beyond the pale of the rules of the House, to assail the bill, and to pronounce a violent philippic against it and the States interested in it. It was impossible to make any reply to the assertions then made by the gentleman, both because the merits of so complicated a subject could not be gone into in detail when the bill was not before the House, and because the state of its business would not justify the necessary consumption of time required to enter into the discussion. The member [Mr. BINNEY] of the select committee who, as has been stated by the gentleman from Massa. chusetts, dissented from the opinion of the other six, and who is not now a member of this House, said, in reply, that he would not be drawn into the discussion of the merits of the bill at that time; but that whenever it should come up for consideration, he was prepared to show that the construction put upon the ordinance of 1787, by the gentleman from Massachusetts, was wholly groundless and untenable. That gentleman, who, for legal attainments, has no superior in this House or in this nation, gave to the subject in all its details the fullest investigation, which brought him to believe in the justice of the claim of Ohio, as firmly as the gentleman from Massachusetts does in its injustice. The gentleman from Massachusetts had gone out of his way to remark, upon the report of the Judiciary Committee of the Senate on the subject of the Ohio boundary, and had seen fit to throw out an intimation that their report was wanting in ability, from which we are to infer it is not entitled to our respect. Whether it be or be not in order for the gentleman from Massachusetts to introduce the proceedings of that body into this House, he (Mr. V.) would not undertake to decide; but he would state what he knew of their report, and gentlemen might decide for themselves how far their opinion is entitled to respect. That committee was composed of gentlemen, not only eminent for legal acquirements, but among the most eminent in the States from which they came. The question was most elaborately argued before that committee. Every thing that could be said in favor of the pretensions of Michigan was said the opening argument for Michigan having occupied an entire day and a half. The committee gave the most scrupulous attention to every thing that was said, and investigated the subject in all its details with the most cautious scrutiny. He (Mr. V.) was able to state what occurred in the committee of the Senate, as he was deputed by the delegation from Ohio to argue the question on behalf of the State before the commit. tee a duty which he had performed. The result was, that committee came to the unanimous opinion that the State of Ohio was entitled to be confirmed in her claim, and so reported to the Senate. In that body this question has been twice debated, and a bill to confirm the boundary of Ohio has been twice passed by a vote of DEC. 29, 30, 1835.] Sufferers by Fire in New York-Representative from Michigan. something like thirty to nine. This statement of facts, sir, may lead us to doubt whether the claim of Ohio is so totally groundless as the gentleman from Massachusetts asserts it to be; and we may justly entertain some suspicion of the soundness of the gentleman's own opinion, when he declares that Michigan is entitled to the country in dispute "by every law, human and divine." Mr. V. said that, when the bill came from the Senate to the House, by the direction of the delegation from his State, he had argued the question before the select committee of which the gentleman from Massachusetts was chairman. He had endeavored to discharge his duty to his State faithfully; but with how little success the gentleman has already informed the House. Mr. V. said that he did not know that his colleagues would be disposed again to devolve upon him the discharge of so important a duty. But he would say that, after what had happened, and after the avowals which the gentleman had made to-day, he should be restrained by self. respect from going before that gentleman to argue the question. He said it had fallen to his lot to attempt in a court of justice to argue a question which the judge had already decided; but in a case like the present, he would not submit to the oppression of feeling attendant upon such an effort; nor would he, under existing circumstances, argue it before him, out of respect to his State; and when the gentleman's speech shall go to Ohio, he doubted not but the united voice of the people and of the Legislature would forbid the argument of their claim before him. Mr. V. said the opinion had been expressed from dif ferent sides of the House, that the two questions of the admission of Michigan with the boundaries she has assumed for herself, and the question relating to the boundary of the States of Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois, ought to be referred to the same committee, since both involve to the fullest extent the question of boundary in dispute. The House having already decided that the former should go to the Judiciary Committee, there seemed to be a peculiar fitness that the latter should accompany it. And he would again repeat, in conclusion, that the latter question cannot be left in the hands of the gentleman from Massachusetts, after the declaration he has made of his motives, without marked disrespect, on the part of the House, to the States whose rights are involved in the ref erence. The question was then taken by yeas and nays, on the pending motion, and decided in the affirmative, 107 to 79, as follows: YEAS--Messrs. Chilton Allan, Bailey, Bockee, Bond, Boon, Buchanan, Bunch, William B. Calhoun, Campbell, Carter, Casey, Chaney, Chapman, Chapin, Childs, Claiborne, Clark, Connor, Corwin, Craig, Crane, Cushing, Davis, Dromgoole, Efner, Evans, Everett, Farlin, Forester, Philo C. Fuller, James Garland, Rice Garland, Graham, Granger, Graves, Grayson, Grennell, Griffin, Hiland Hall, Hamer, Hammond, Hannegan, Hardin, Harlan, Harper, Samuel S. Harrison, Hazeltine, Hoar, Howard, Howell, Hubley, Huntsman, Janes, Jarvis, Henry Johnson, John W. Jones, Benjamin Jones, Judson, Kennon, Kilgore, Kinnard, Klingensmith, Lane, Lawrence, Gideon Lee, Luke Lea, Loyall, Lucas, Martin, Samson Mason, Maury, May, McCarty, McKennan, McKim, Mc. Lene, Mercer, Morris, Page, Patterson, Pettigrew, Phillips, Pinckney, Reed, Rencher, John Reynolds, Rogers, Russell, Augustine H. Shepard, William B. Shepperd, Shields, Slade, Sloane, Spangler, Standefer, Storer, Taliaferro, Thomas, John Thomson, Waddy Thompson, Toucey, Underwood, Vinton, Webster, Whittlesey, Lewis Williams, Wise-107. NAYS-Messrs. Adams, Heman Allen, Anthony, Ashley, Barton, Beale, Bean, Beardsley, Beaumont, Borden, Briggs, Brown, Bynum, Cambreleng, John Chambers, [H. OF R. Cleveland, Coffee, Cushman, Darlington, Deberry, Den, So the House agreed to reconsider the vote referring the boundary question to a select committee. The CHAIR stated that the question would be on the original motion, to refer the subject to a select committee. Mr. ADAMS withdrew the motion of reference to a select committee. Mr. HAMER moved that the subject be referred to the Committee on the Judiciary; and it was agreed to without a count. The House then adjourned. TUESDAY, DECEMBER 29. Mr. ELY MOORE, one of the Representatives from New York, appeared, was qualified, and took his seat. Mr. CAMBRELENG moved a suspension of the rules of the House, to enable such committees as were ready to do so to report bills; but the motion was negatived without a division. Mr. CAMBRELENG then moved to suspend the rules so far as to allow the Committee of Ways and Means to report sundry appropriation bills; but this motion was also negatived, (two-thirds of the number of members present being required to sustain it,) by the vote of ayes 50, noes 93. NEW YORK SUFFERERS BY FIRE. Amongst other petitions presented by the gentleman sufferers from the recent destructive fire in the city of last named, was one from certain merchants who were New York, in relation to which Mr. CAMBRELENG said he should have pressed its immediate consideration, had it not been that further action was anticipated on this subject, such as might tend to meet the views of the petitioners. The subject was already before the House, but the arrival of a committee, deputed by the merchants of New York, was exThe propositions pected in this city on Monday next. contained in the petition he had presented, as to the laws of the land, were of the highest importance. He should therefore move that so much of the petition as related to subjects not comprised in the former petition should be referred to a Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union; the remainder to the Committee of Ways and Means. The motion was unanimously agreed to. The remainder of the day was spent in the reception and disposing of petitions, bills, &c., till the hour of adjournment. WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 30. REPRESENTATIVE FROM MICHIGAN. Mr. BEARDSLEY said it was within the recollection of the House that, a few days since, he had moved that the gentleman who had presented himself there as a Representative from what is called the State of Michigan, be permitted to occupy a seat on the floor during the sittings of the House. It seemed due from himself that he should ask the House to consider that motion; but, before doing so, he wished to suggest that he designed to modify his proposition, by merely asking the House to permit that gentleman to come within the hall during the sittings of the House in the character of a spectator; that, he trusted, would be acceptable to the whole House; and he had done it with reference to former precedents, particularly that of the State of Tennessee. Mr. B. then sent his modified proposition to the Chair, to be read from the Clerk's table for the information of the House, and was as follows: Resolved, That Isaac E. Crary, who claims to have been duly elected a member of this House, be admitted as a spectator within the hall during the sittings of this House. Objection being made, Mr. BEARDSLEY moved to suspend the rules of the House to enable him to make the motion, and asked for the yeas and nays; which were ordered, and which were as follows: [DEC. 30, 1835. praying for an extension of the charters of the existing banks in said District of Columbia, or for the establishment of any other bank or banks in their stead, and to examine into the condition of the currency of said District, to inspect the books and to examine into the proceedings of said banks, to ascertain whether their charters have been violated or not, and whether any abuses or malpractices have existed in their manage. ment, to send for persons and papers, to examine witnesses on oath, and to appoint a clerk to record their proceedings. Mr. SHEPARD said that the present question was more a question of propriety and fitness than any thing else. It was for the House of Representatives to say whether they would take this matter from a standing committee, and refer it to a select committee. He said the House could judge of the propriety of doing that as well without argument as with it. It was not for him to say whether the Committee on the District could perform the duty as well as a select committee. To show the entire uselessness of the motion of the gentleman from Maryland, [Mr. THOMAS,] he held in his hand a that the Committee on the District would appoint some of their members to investigate fully the affairs of the banks. It seemed to him that the gentleman could have obtained his object by moving instructions to the Committee on the District. If this was done, he would pledge himself to the House that any queries which the gentlemen would put to him should be put to the banks of the District, and answered; and then it would be for that gentleman to say whether they were answered properly or not. It was a question of propriety for this House to say whether it would take from the Committee on the District of Columbia that business which legiti mately belonged to it, and send it to another committee. If the House has no confidence in the Committee on the District, let it say so. He, however, as a member of that committee, was willing to examine the banks of the District as scrupulously as he could. YEAS-Messrs. John Q. Adams, Ashley, Bailey, Barton, Bean, Beardsley, Bockee, Boon, Rorden, Bovee, Boyd, Briggs, Brown, Buchanan, Cambreleng, Camp-letter from the president of one of the banks, requesting bell, Chapman, Chapin, Childs, Claiborne, Clark, Cleveland, Connor, Corwin, Craig, Cramer, Crane, Cushing, Cushman, Darlington, Deberry, Dickerson, Doubleday, Dromgoole, Efner, Everett, Fairfield, Farlin, P. C. Fuller, Galbraith, J. Garland, R. Garland, Gillet, Glascock, Granger, Grennell, Haley, J. Hall, Hamer, Hard, S. S. Harrison, A. G. Harrison, Haynes, Hazeltine, Henderson, Hiester, Hoar, Howard, Howell, Hubley, Hunt, Huntington, Ingham, W. Jackson, J. Jackson, Janes, J. Johnson, R. M. Johnson, Cave Johnson, H. Johnson, J. W. Jones, Judson, Kennon, Kilgore, Lane, Lansing, Laporte, Lawler, Lawrence, Lay, T. Lee, Leonard, Lincoln, Loyall, Lyon, A. Mann, J. K. Mann, Martin, W. Mason, M. Mason, S. Mason, Maury, McKay, McKennan, McKeon, McKim, Miller, Montgomery, Moore, Morris, Muhlenberg, Owens, Page, Parker, Parks, Patterson, Franklin Pierce, Dutee J. Pearce, Phelps, Phillips, Potts, Reed, Joseph Reynolds, Roane, Rogers, Schenck, Seymour, Slade, Sloane, Smith, Sprague, Storer, Taliaferro, Thomas, J. Thomson, Toucey, Turner, Turrill, Vanderpoel, Wagener, Wardwell, Weeks, Whittlesey-133. Mr. THOMAS said that justice to himself made it proper to remind the House of an occurrence in the last Congress connected with this question. There were four banks in the District that stopped specie payments in 1834, two of which are now asking a recharter. In 1835, these banks memorialized this body for the passage of a law to recharter them. It was but justice to the city that we should act understandingly on this matter; that an inquiry should be instituted to ascertain the causes of these failures. But he said that, without ob NAYS-Messrs. C. Allan, Beale, Bond, Bunch, J. Calhoon, W. B. Calhoun, Carr, Carter, Casey, J. Chambers, Coles, Davis, Denny, Evans, Forester, French, Graham, Graves, Grayson, Griffin, Hammond, Hannegan, Hopkins, Huntsman, Jarvis, Kinnard, L. Lea, Lucas, May, McCarty, McLene, Mercer, Morgan, J. A.jection from him, the memorials of the last session were Pearce, Pettigrew, Pickens, Pinckney, John Reynolds, Russell, W. B. Shepard, A. H. Shepperd, Shields, Standefer, W. Thompson, Underwood, L. Williams, S. Williams-47. So the House determined to suspend the rules. Mr. BEARDSLEY then moved the foregoing resolution; which was agreed to. BANKS IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. The House resumed the consideration of the petitions presented yesterday by Mr. W. B. SHEPARD, from sundry banks in the District of Columbia, praying an extension of their charters. A motion having been made to refer the petitions to the Committee on the District of Columbia, Mr. THOMAS, of Maryland, moved to send them to a select committee, with instructions. Mr. T. modified his proposition as follows: Resolved, That a select committee be appointed to inquire into the condition of the currency of the District of Columbia, to whom shall be referred all other memorials which may be presented to the present Congress, referred to the Committee on the District; the subject was taken up by that committee, but no investigation was had. He said he then, under a deep sense of duty to his constituents, gave a promise that if this subject was put off to another session of Congress, he would make it his business to examine into the state of these banks. Now, if you send this matter to the Committee on the District, you send it to a committee which has prejudged the question. Under these circumstances, he felt it to be his duty to ask of the House a select committee. He said if it was proper for the House to refer matter in relation to the Territories to a select committee, it was proper, he thought, to refer this matter to a select committee. He said the Chief Magistrate had called the attention of Congress to the question of currency, and he therefore conceived it a very important one, and asked of the House a committee, whose especial duty it should be to make a thorough investigation of the mat ter. Mr. BOULDIN said, as a member of the Committee on the District, he did not wish to take upon himself very arduous duties; but he was as willing to take up and go through with the investigation, as the gentleman. He said the committees were appointed by the Speaker, and he could not see the difference between them. The greatest objection is, that the chairman of the Committee on the District has had this matter before him at the last session. This he thought was a favorable circumstance, because that gentleman must have more knowledge of the business than he otherwise could have. He said that he was ready to go into an investigation without any prepossessions, and was willing to investigate the matter as thoroughly as the gentleman from Maryland or any other gentleman. Mr. VANDERPOEL said that he, as a member of the District Committee, cherished no pride of jurisdiction, and was therefore willing, for his part, to dispense with the pleasure and honor of making an investigation into the past doings of the banks in the District, which was contemplated by the resolution of the honorable gentleman from Maryland, [Mr. THOMAS.] He did not believe that the proposition of that honorable gentleman was founded in a distrust of the capacity of the District Committee to make the necessary examination, nor upon any apprehension that they felt indisposed to do so. The duties of the District Committee were very onerous, and though willing, as a member of that committee, to perform, to the utmost of his humble ability, every duty that might be imposed upon him, yet, as he could, as he thought, be otherwise more profitably employed in his public capacity, he would for his part rather be excused from the labor of inquiring into the details of the past operations of the District banks. He thought that a select committee could be raised, every way competent to execute this duty; and that the Committee on the District, pressing, important, and multifarious as were the calls upon its attention, could spend its time in the execution of duties in a manner better calculated to subserve the public interest, than would be the duty or task of wading for days and weeks, if not for months, through the books and legers of the banks within the District. It would be recollected that some of those banks suspended payment and closed their doors, two years ago. Yes, when the tocsin of alarm and distress and panic was sounded from one extreme of the country to the other, it had been insinuated by some that these banks had lent their still small voices to aid that momentous occasion. He (Mr. V.) would not undertake to state, or even insinuate this. The banks may have had most justifiable reasons for suspending specie payments; but, after what had occurred, it was most emphatically proper that a strict scrutiny should be made into the past doings of these institutions, before we gave them any renewed pledge of our confidence. Should the result prove that the banks in this District should have been improvidently rechartered, the constituents of the gentleman from Maryland, from their proximity to these banks, and from their constant business intercourse with the region where they would operate, would be more exposed to loss than the constituents of those gentlemen who resided at a greater distance; and since the gentleman from Maryland, from a sense of duty to his constituents, seems to be anxious to look into the past doings of the banks within this district, he (Mr. V.) thought it but just and reasonable that he should be gratified. Mr. V. had stated that the District Committee would have a great deal to do. Yes. He was justified in say. ing so, when he stated that the District was reeling and staggering under a debt, to the subjects of a foreign potentate, of nearly two millions of dollars! And he confidently asserted that that committee would be obliged to put in requisition all its industry, and all its inventive powers, to devise ways and means to save this great nation the degradation of having their Capitol sold to the countrymen of his forefathers. They were, to be sure, [H. OF R. the countrymen of his (Mr. V's) ancestors; but still his American feeling was very much disturbed at the idea of being sold out to foreigners. In further proof of the assertion, that the duties of the District Committee were heavy enough to engross all their time and attention, he would state that, a few years ago, a special committee was appointed to revise the laws of the District. They had sat during the recess of Congress, and have reported a code of laws which filled a pretty large volume, and which was not yet acted upon by the House. A few days ago a special committee was raised in relation to that part of the President's message, which relates to the bequest of an English gentleman, made to this District. For these reasons, he would vote to refer this matter to a select committee. Mr. MCKENNAN said he wished to make a few remarks, for the purpose of correcting a mistake into which the gentleman from Maryland had fallen, and into which the gentleman from New York appeared willing to fall also, respecting the course pursued by the Committee on the District of Columbia at the last session of Congress. Mr. McK. had the honor of being a member of that committee, and he had in charge the bills reported by that committee for rechartering certain banks in the District. The gentleman from New York appeared to yield to the charge that that committee had acted precipitately on the subject. To this Mr. McK. did not assent. The charge was not properly founded; there was no precipitancy; and the bill itself would satisfy the House that there was no intention on the part of the committee to recharter these banks without the most searching inquiry into their situation and their conduct. It would be recollected that the charters of the Bank of Washington, the Bank of the Metropolis, the Patriotic Bank, and the Farmers and Mechanics' Bank of Georgetown, expired in March, 1836; and there being no time during the last session to give this subject a full investigation, the committee had reported a bill to recharter those banks for one year only, for the convenience of those cities, and to afford an opportunity to the present Congress to make the most searching investigation. That was all that was done by the Committee on the District, and he begged permission of the House to have that bill read by the Clerk, in order that this matter might be set right. [The bill in question was then read from the Clerk's table.] As to whether this subject should go to the Committee on the District of Columbia or to a select committee, if the members of the former were willing to yield, Mr. McK. had no objection. He believed it, however, a legitimate subject of examination for the former committee; and unless the members of that committee, like the gentleman from New York, yielded, he should feel himself bound to vote that the subject should have that reference, and none other. Mr. W. B. SHEPARD begged the indulgence of the House to make a few remarks in reply. The gentleman from Maryland said that Mr. S. had prejudged this question. Now, he was at a loss to know how he had prejudged this question. As a member of the Committee on the District of Columbia, during the last session, he could not have prejudged the question, because nobody asked them to make these investigations. How, then, could he prejudge the question, when he had neither made, nor been asked to make, any investigation? Why did not the gentleman himself, as vigilant as he seemed to be, submit instructions to that committee then? Mr. S. really thought that the gentleman was laboring under a serious mistake in making that charge upon him. Certainly, Mr. S. did not pretend to the skill in banking the gentleman himself avowedly did; for the gentleman had had opportunities which had fallen to the lot of few members on that floor. Mr. S. remembered very well the gentleman was a member of two committees on the subject of banking, and then saw and examined the "great monster" himself; and he also remembered that one of those committees reported to that House a very voluminous document; and he had no sort of doubt that, if the members of the House had thought proper to read that very voluminous document, they would have been very much enlightened on the subject of banking. He should be sorry to obscure the slightest ray the gentleman shed upon the subject. Mr. S. said, for himself, he had no interest in the question, nor did he care one farthing about it in any point of view; but so long as he was a member of the Committee on the District of Columbia, he would assert upon that floor what he believed to be the rights and privileges of that District, and the rights and privileges of the Committee on that District. It was for the House to say whether that committee was as fit, had as much time, as much knowledge, and as much interest in the welfare and prosperity of the District, as the gentleman from Maryland. Mr. S. could not pretend to as much interest, perhaps, as the gentleman from Maryland, in one point of view. The gentleman tells us that he had a peculiar interest in the question, because the people of his district came down to the District of Columbia to trade, and the money of the District circulated among them. Why, the people of the gentleman's district, when they came down there, sometimes staid at the taverns, and, for the same reason, the House ought to raise a select committee, and put the dram shops under its charge; for it was as much a matter of interest to them. Why not put every matter that touched the gentleman's district under his special charge? However, Mr. S. would only remark that it was a mere matter of fitness and propriety, of which the House was the judge, and which needed no argument from him. Mr. LANE was a member of the Committee on the District of Columbia, and he believed no person would charge him with any particular partiality for these banks, or any other banks in the United States. He must, however, object to the reasons assigned by the gentleman from Maryland [Mr. THOMAS] for taking the subject from the committee to which it legitimately be longed, and sending it to a select committee. The gentleman might disguise his sentiments as he pleased, but it was evident that he had not only reflected, but had made a direct imputation upon the District Com mittee. The gentleman had charged the committee with having prejudged the question. He was mistaken. There were five new members upon this committee, and he could assure him that, so far as he was concerned, he was in favor of a speedy and critical investigation into the affairs of these institutions. It had been contended that the Commitiee on the District was not the legitimate one, because the subject was one of general concern. These banks were local, and the people of the District were more interested in them than those who resided at a distance. But the gentleman had asked, if this subject was sent to the District Committee, when would the investigation take place, and when would it close? He would answer, as soon and as speedily as the untiring industry of the committee would permit. Could more be expected of a select committee? The gentleman from Maryland was a member of four important committees, while the members of the Committee on the District were on no other committee. The gentleman must therefore have four times the ability and four times the industry of himself and associates, if he could perform this duty more promptly. It had further been charged, that the committee, although it had been in existence for several weeks, had [DEC. 30, 1835. not taken up this subject. Mr. L. remarked, that it had not been referred to them, exeept informally; that the committee had met but twice; and when it should be ascertained that they had neglected their duty, it would be time enough to charge them with a direct omission to do so. The gentleman had referred to the opportunities which he had to investigate banking institutions, and had urged an objection to the District Committee, because some of its members resided at a distance. If this argument was good, the gentleman might draw under his immediate charge almost every other ques tion which should be presented for consideration. Reference had been made to the fact that the Michigan question had the other day been sent to the Judicial Committee, instead of the Committee on the Territories. The reason of this was obvious. Legal questions were involved, and that committee was composed of able law. yers, who were more competent to investigate it. The gentleman from Maryland was a member of the Judiciary Committee. Did the gentleman draw an inference from the case, that because his honorable self, and those who might be associated with him upon the select committee, were more competent, that therefore his motion ought to prevail? For one, if the subject should be referred to the Committee on the District, he should be disposed. to spare neither time nor labor to discharge his duty with fidelity. Mr. L. alluded to the remarks which had been made in reference to the course and the solvency of the banks in the District. He was opposed to prejudging the institutions, and in favor of the strictest scrutiny into their operations. If they had acted improperly, let it be ascertained before they were condemned. He, for one, would not attempt to screen them, nor to sanction any abuse which might be fixed upon them. Mr. BOULDIN again addressed the House, in reply to the last remarks of the gentleman from Maryland. In conclusion, he moved to amend the motion of the gentleman from North Carolina, [Mr. W. B. SHEPARD,] by adding the following instructions to the Committee on the District of Columbia, to wit: To examine into the condition of the currency of the said District; to inspect the books, and to examine into the proceedings of said banks; to ascertain whether their charters have been violated or not, and whether any abuses or malpractices have existed in their management; to send for persons and papers, to examine witnesses on oath, and to appoint a clerk to record their proceedings. Mr. MERCER said that it was the duty of the Speaker of the House to appoint the committees, and to distribute the business of the House among the members as equally as possible; and, for that reason, he rose to call the attention of the House to this fact, that if the business was taken from one committee and transferred to another, the labors of the House would be unequally divided; and if you continued to pursue that course you would take from the District Committee all its duties. It was in vain for the gentleman from Virginia to say that he had no feeling in this matter. He had supposed the whole country felt an interest in it. The people in his district felt an interest in this question, and he would say that he felt the fullest confidence in the Committee on the District, and would be pleased to have the matter referred to that committee. He said that the failure of certain banks in the District was an unfortunate occurrence, and ought not to be reflected upon by the gentleman from Maryland. Mr. MANN said he had but a word to say on the subject. It should be remembered that the Committee on the District had all the legislation of this body, in relation to the District, in their own hands; and certainly that committee had as much business as they could |