Treasury being for general purposes under the specific grants of the constitution. Mr. P. continued, that the gentleman from New York [Mr. VANDERPOEL] had said this calamity extended its effects into all the ramifications of commerce throughout the various interests of the country. This (said Mr. P.) is true; and, according to the doctrine laid down by the gentleman, that the consumer paid, if we are to follow out this principle, then the merchant of Cincinnati, who had received his goods through the importers of New York, and should be so unfortunate as to lose them by fire or otherwise, would have precisely the same claims, in justice and principle, for relief from this Government, as those embraced in the present bill. He has paid the duties in his purchases from the importer, or perhaps he may be the importer him. self; and if relief is to be afforded in one case, the same justice should afford it in the other. Mr. P. said, under such a principle, there was not a town or village in any State of the confederacy that could not have the same claims upon the aid of this Government. Any interests injured by the visitations of Providence would claim your relief, and there could be no bounds or limits, as far as equal justice is concerned, to such a precedent; it would, in fact, make this Government the great insurance office for this whole Union. Mr. P. said that the experience of the British Government was against extending relief in such cases, by altering the custom-house or revenue laws, except in specific cases laid down and incorporated into the general law at the time of its passage. Ever since the great fire in London, the practice had been to issue exchequer bills, or make specific grants from the Treasury; but not to vary the revenue laws. Mr. P. said, if the experience of England had found this course inexpedient, surely it becomes us, under our limited Government, to avoid a practice or precedent which she bas abandoned. Mr. P. said this bill proposes relief to merchants alone, while the heaviest losses fall upon the insurance companies; their capital, as he understood, amounted to about $9,000,000, and perhaps the most of it was swept off by these very merchants who had their goods insured. The effect of this would be to extend relief to those who might have suffered least, while it withheld from those who suffered most, and perhaps deserved most, as the capital in these insurance offices might belong to the widow and the orphan. Mr. P. continued, and said that that proviso which provided for a restoration from the Treasury of the amount of certain bonds paid, and indulgence granted on the amount, was clearly unconstitutional, as this was money in the Treasury, to all intents and purposes, and could not thus be drawn back, as a loan, without interest. Mr. P. would not go into a calculation of the benefits New York had received from the immense amount of deposites made in her banks for the last year or two, as this was not the time, under the unfortunate circumstances of the case, to calculate that. He said his objections were upon constitutional grounds; and, he would repeat again, that he regretted he could not vote for the bill. When he looked to that noble city, and thought of her wealth and commerce, he felt, as every man ought to feel who had the heart of an American, the kindest emotions of sympathy for her calamity, and deep regret for her loss. When he remembered her, not in the history of the present day, but in 1765, when she received the first meeting ever held by a portion of these colonies to resist British aggression; when he remembered ber as connected with some of the most consecrated scenes of our Revolution, he felt every dispo sition to follow the impulses of his heart rather than the sound dictates of his judgment. He had given the reaVOL. XII.-139 [H. OF R. sons that would influence him in his vote, and that was all he desired. Mr. MANN, of New York, replied to Mr. HARDIN. He had hoped that this bill would have been discussed without sectional feeling. The people of New York did not come to ask for charity at the hands of that House. They asked only for common, simple, plain justice, not for charity; for that common justice meted out to every other part of the country. Mr. M. defended the course that had always been pursued by the State of New York, for her liberal policy and generous and enlightened principles; because, from her geographical situation, she was the largest commercial State in the Union, it did not follow that she should not have justice done to her. The bill under consideration proposed no bounty, as in the case of Caraccas, but provided nothing more than she had a right to ask, and what was as much for the interest of the country generally as for New York. Mr. M. defended the provisions of the bill, and replied at length to Mr. HARDIN. Mr. M. said it was well known that the larger share of the banking capital of the gentleman's own State came from New York. Mr. UNDERWOOD said he felt a warm sentiment for the people of New York, and he was prepared to give them relief. He was prepared to remit the duties on goods actually destroyed by fire, and that he believed to be the only relief that ought to be granted. He did not look upon the importing merchant as paying the duties. The consumer paid; the importing merchant was the mere agent of the Government. Duties were generally an advantage to the latter, who invariably pay more for the imported goods in proportion to the tax levied upon them. Believing the measure he had indicated to be the only relief that ought to be afforded, he should vote against this bill in every step, but the other he would cheerfully sustain, or he would vote for this bill if it was modified according to what he considered the only prop. er mode of relief. Mr. BEARDSLEY did not believe there was any constitutional objection to this bill. Mr. B. read the two clauses of the constitution before referred to, and argued that there was no inequality or local preference given to New York by this bill. Neither the remission of duties, nor an extension of time for their payment, applied to the prohibition of that instrument. The constitution applied to the law imposing the duties: that they "shall be uniform;" and that no preference was given by this bill to the port of New York over any other. Mr. SUTHERLAND referred to the case of a law passed several years ago, relative to certain importations in the port of Charleston, South Carolina, by which a duty of ten cents tonnage was imposed on all ships entering that port. This case he adduced to show that for a long time past Congress had been in the habit of passing laws with regard to local regulations of duties and tonnage. By the law Mr. S. referred to, the city council of Charleston were authorized to impose a duty of ten cents a ton, for the temporary relief of the sick there, &c. Mr. PINCKNEY was in favor of the bill, and intended to vote for it. He gave a history of the law cited by Mr. SUTHERLAND, which he said was passed to authorize the city council of Charleston to complete a federal work they had, from patriotic and benevolent motives, undertaken at their own cost. Mr. EVERETT moved that the committee rise and ask leave to sit again. Agreed to; and the House then rose, and at a quarter to four P. M. adjourned. FRIDAY, JANUARY 15. WEST POINT ACADEMY. The following resolution, submitted by Mr. HAWES, of Kentucky, on the 7th instant, was taken up: H. OF R.] West Point Academy. "Resolved, That a select committee of nine be ap pointed to inquire what amendments, if any, are expedient to be made to the laws relating to the Military Academy at West Point, in the State of New York, and also into the expediency of modifying the organization of said institution, and also whether it would not comport with the public interest to abolish the same; with power to report by bill or otherwise." The question pending was the amendment of Mr. WARDWELL, proposing to substitute the Committee on Military Affairs for a select committee. Mr. MANN, of New York, said he intimated yesterday, when this resolution was under consideration, that he desired to say a few words upon it. In the first place, he wished his colleague to withdraw his amendment to refer the subject to a standing committee, and to suffer it to undergo the investigation of a select committee. In regard to this institution (Mr. M. said) there was a great disparity of opinions, and the subject was one of very considerable interest to the State he had the honor in part to represent. It was also of considerable interest to the various States surrounding this institution, and he found, to his surprise, during the last session, a strong disposition manifested by that portion of the representatives coming from those States, thus located, to maintain this institution in every one of the charges made against it. At the last session of Congress a committee of twenty-four members, consisting of one from each State, was raised, on the motion of the gentleman from Kentucky, [Mr. HAWES,] to investigate the affairs of this institution. That committee appointed a sub-committee, whose labors had not been yet officially promulgated to this House or to the country. He had the honor to be a member of that committee of twenty-four, but not of the sub-committee; but he concurred partially with the views contained in that report, which was, to say the least of it, an elaborate examination of the institution from its earliest time. He knew that in doing so he incurred some censure from a portion of his own State; but he never had, and never would, flinch from any important duty he felt it incumbent upon him to perform there. Mr. M. said, in the examination of the transactions of this institution he had found much to censure. He believed, if its friends on that floor would take the trouble to investigate it in the same way the committee did last year, they would find more to censure, in the principle of the establishment, than they were aware of. He knew very well that it was necessary to have military officers; they were highly useful at all times. But that was not the inquiry at present. The inquiry was, whether this institution should continue under its present organization. Now, there were abuses in this institution developed in that report; abuses of a character that would not find, he presumed, a single advocate on that floor, when they came to be promulgated. In his opinion, said Mr. M., the principle on which this institution was established and organized was utterly inconsistent with the principle of all the other institutions in the country. But, because he thought so, he did not therefore desire to see its extermination. It was at variance with all our other institutions, because it was exclusive. It formed the only avenue by which the people of this country could approach the offices of the army. It was the gate-way, and the only gate-way, b which any citizen of this country could reach them; and that was not right. It was again objectionable to Mr. M's mind, because he could perceive no reason, he never had perceived any reason, why a single individual out of any part of this Union should be selected by a member representing that district upon this floor, to be educated exclusively at the public expense, although he knew gentlemen would say, as they had heretofore said, that this [JAN. 15, 1836. was necessary, in order to acquire the best amount of military information in the country. There was no doubt that it was necessary to have this information in the country, both in time of war and in time of peace; but could it not be secured by some other means? There was no reason why one individual should be taken and educated at the public expense. But besides the principle, what was it in practice? Why, we saw individuals continually pressing the Government in every quarter for admission into this institution, to be educated professedly for the military service, but very frequently, too generally, with the secret design in their hearts of devoting themselves to the civil pursuits of society. This was another ground of objection in his mind, even if the institution bestowed the military education required, because you sent a young man there with a fraud in his heart; and the course of education unfitted him for the performance of those duties incumbent upon civil life. You sap and destroy the foundations which should form the basis of his future course. Moreover, the system was just such a system as prepared a young man, not for civil, but for a military life; and the first thing he had to do was to unlearn almost every thing he had learnt there. These were some of the objections that presented themselves to his mind. The objection, however, to selecting an individual out of a population of 47,700, and educating him at the public expense, was one that he never had seen satisfactorily answered, for it could not be answered. But, said Mr. M., gentlemen might ask him what system could be adopted by this Government, in regard to that institution, so as to procure that degree of mili tary education they all agreed as requisite and necessary. Why, he thought it very simple indeed. He granted that it was necessary this profession should be in the country at all times. But, in granting this, he did not grant that it should be procured by the means then existing. He would do this, and there stop. He would support an institution like that at West Point, established perhaps on somewhat similar principles, and provide that the Government should erect all the neces sary buildings, and establish the professorships, which should be supported at the expense of the Government, and there he would stop. He would leave it open, as every other institution of the country was of a literary character. He would do away entirely with the privileges which the present institution conferred upon the individuals who had passed through it. He would leave the offices of the army open to honorable competition, so that those best qualified should be selected, by whatever means they had acquired their military knowledge. This would excite a proper competition, and the country would be benefited by it, and, in his judgment, better served than at present. He could see no reason why a man educated at this institution should be more peculiarly fitted for the offices of the army than any other. What did experience, what did history show? Was it not that, whenever the country required the exercise of those powers, that individuals possessing them were always found and elected by their confederates to defend their country?--and those made the very best officers. It surely did not follow that because a young man was educated at West Point, or in the military schools at Paris, that he therefore possessed more courage than any other. As the thing then stood, and as the report, when it came to be promulgated, (which he hoped it would,) would show, this institution cost the country by far too much for the education of these young men. Whether it sprung from abuse or not, such was the fact, when they looked at the utility produced by the expenditure. This, taken in connexion with another fact, offered an additional ground of objection to the institution as it then existed. If Mr. M. recollected the report right, it proved that not more than two out of five of all the persons who ever entered the institution had staid there long enough to graduate, and not two out of five who had graduated ever entered the army. And when it was recollected that not two out of five who entered the army staid in it more than two years, he thought it conclusive that the utility of the institution was not commensurate with its expenditure. If Mr. M's memory served him right, the report showed that every graduate coming from that institution had cost the United States more than five thousand dollars within the last ten years, and previously a much larger sum; and, he believed, within one year the graduates of that institution had cost upwards of thirty thousand dollars. He did not know the cause of that immense expenditure. It might be by mismanagement or misfortune; he cared not; but it showed there were some extraordinary abuses in regard to the institution. Now, if there be any truth in these statements, any truth in the reports that extensively prevailed in the country, the institution was mismanaged and misconducted, and ought to be investigated into and reformed. He therefore made an earnest appeal to his colleague, that he would withdraw his amendment, and permit the subject to go to a select committee. Mr. M. made some further remarks in relation to the duties of the Military Committee, which were too oner. ous to afford them the time necessary for the investigation of this object; in addition to which, many of the gentlemen on that committee had predispositions in relation to it. He hoped the House would send it to a select committee, so that the institution, in all its bearings, should undergo a full and complete investigation. He hoped the friends of the institution themselves would vote for the original motion, and that his colleague would withdraw his amendment. Mr. PIERCE, of New Hampshire, then addressed the House for a short time; but, without concluding, gave way to a call for the orders of the day. DISTRICT BANKS. Mr. THOMAS, of Maryland, from the select committee on the subject of the District banks, obtained the consent of the House to report "a bill to extend the charters of certain banks in the District of Columbia to the 1st day of October next." The bill was twice read. ment. Mr. THOMAS said the bill did not require commitHe was about to ask the House, with the assent of the chairman of the Committee of Claims, to take up and act upon this bill at once. It would not, he said, require any discussion, as there could be no difference of opinion in regard to it. The committee unanimously agreed in asking the House to act on the bill without delay. It proposed to continue unimpaired, to all the banks doing business in the District, all their powers and privileges, till the committee had investigated their condition, and Congress could act upon the question of the renewal of their charters. It was indispensable to the interests of the District that the bill should be passed. He hoped the House would consent to order it to a third reading. Mr. HAWES said he would like to make this inquiry of the chairman of the committee: If the object of the bill was to afford an opportunity for the committee to investigate the affairs of the banks, and for Congress to act upon the subject, what was the necessity of extending the term of the charters beyond the close of the present session? If the charters were to be extended at all, he wished it to be for a shorter time. Mr. THOMAS supposed, he said, that the time fixed would meet every possible objection, so as to supersede the necessity of any remarks. The committee could not [H. or R. anticipate the action of Congress on the subject, nor their own report. They might report in favor of renewing the charters of some of the banks, and against the renewal of others. Congress would not probably adjourn till the 1st of July, and it was important that the banks should have time to prepare for a change so important to the District, if their charters should not be renewed. Mr. MCKENNAN did not rise, he said, to provoke a debate on the bill, nor to oppose it. He wished to congratulate the committee on their arrival at the same conclusion which the Committee for the District of Columbia reached at the last session, on this subject, and presented to the House in the form of a bill similar to this; which, on motion of the gentleman himself, was laid aside. Mr. PARKER said the bill required more attention than the House could now give it, and he moved its postponement till Thursday next. Mr. HARDIN made an inquiry of the gentleman from Maryland; in reply to which, Mr. THOMAS said the select committee had not yet commenced their investigation. They had postponed it till the House decided on this bill. If the bill should not pass, he was instructed to ask of the House permission for the committee to sit during the sittings of the House. If the bill should pass, the committee would be able to attend to their duties in the House, and continue the investigation also. Mr. LANE understood, he said, that the object of ta king this business from the Committee for the District of Columbia, and referring it to a select committee, was, that the select committee would prosecute the investigation diligently and without delay. But now it appeared that, though some time had elapsed, the committee had not commenced the investigation. Sir, said Mr. L., I see something more in this bill than its apparent object. It may be intended to ask for a summer session for the committee. He believed that the Committee for the District of Columbia, setting himself apart, would have performed the business promptly, quickly, and with ability. The motion to postpone was rejected. Mr. HAWES spoke in favor of a shorter time for extending the charters. If the object of the bill was to enable the banks to wind up their concerns [Mr. THOMAS here said he had not stated this to be the object. The object was to afford time for Congress to determine on the propriety of continuing them. While up, he would state that his purpose in calling for a select committee was to prevent the necessity of a summer session of the committee.] Mr. HAWES was willing, he said, to give the banks ample and sufficient time to wind up their concerns, should their charters not be renewed; but he was unwilling to extend the charters, for the purpose of the investigation, longer than the end of the session. He moved to strike out the 1st of October, and insert the 30th of June. Mr. VANDERPOEL, to test the sense of the House on the subject, moved the previous question. The motion was not seconded by the House. Mr. PARKER protested against so much haste. There was no necessity for it; and many errors were not unfrequently committed by too much haste in matters of legislation. He could see no reason why the consideration of the bill should not be postponed until next week. Mr. PEARCE, of Rhode Island, hoped there would be no attempt to apply what was called the gag-law, with respect to this subject. So far as relates to the people of this District, who had no representatives here, there perhaps was no question that could be discussed that involed more considerations in regard to them than the present. He conceived the gentleman who had reported this bill must have had some object in view. Why continue the charters of the banks until the 1st of October next, if it was the object of the committee to procure the action of Congress in relation to them before it adjourned? In what situation would the District be, provided the House had not an opportunity of acting on the subject before the next session, by which time the charters would have expired some weeks? Why, bankruptcy or insolvency must be the consequence. But he might be told, by the honorable chairman, that the committee contemplated action. Well, if action really was contemplated before the adjournment, why the necessity of this bill at all? Let us go on and try if the investigation with respect to these banks can be completed. If malfeasance, or any other act, on the part of any of the District banks, should be detected, the sooner the people here knew it the better. He was told, no longer ago than yesterday, that the papers, accounts, and statements of one bank, necessary to be disclosed, were in preparation for that purpose; and that every thing the committee would require could be furnished by giving three hours' notice. It had been said that the papers necessary to the investigation were so numerous, and the duties so onerous, that the committee could not get through their labors with that despatch some gentlemen were led to suppose. Why, then, he would say, let the papers be referred to the Committee for the District of Columbia, who had nothing to do, and were seeking for business; but until the select committee had made an attempt, and are prepared to say they cannot go through the investigation during the present session, the House cannot consider the propriety of referring the subject to the Committee for the District of Columbia. Mr. HUNTSMAN addressed the Chair as follows: Mr. Speaker, as one of the committee appointed to investigate the situation and condition of these banks, I feel it to be my duty to submit a few remarks for the consideration of the House, in reply to the gentlemen from Indiana, New Jersey, and Rhode Island. It seems to be insisted by the two former, that the House committed a great error in referring this subject to a special committee, and that if it had been submitted to the Committee on the District of Columbia, the investigations necessary would have been at least half through by this time. There is a great deal of sensibility manifested by the Committee for the District of Columbia upon the subject. It would seem, from their continual complaints, that they suppose the House has robbed them of a portion of their rights. I am willing, sir, to admit that the Committee on the District of Columbia possesses more ability, and can transact this business in a style exquisitely genteel, systematic, nice, and scientific-more so than any committee in the House, or that ever was in it. But, notwithstanding all this, upon a full, thorough, and ample discussion, it has not been the pleasure of this House to assign this duty to them. It was thought, for reasons satisfactory to the House, that a select committee should be charged with this investigation. If those gentlemen are dissatisfied with the decision of the House, I know of no way to reverse it, unless they will take an appeal or writ of error; and then I know of no revising power, which can take jurisdiction of it, unless the appeal, or writ of error, is taken to the gallery. The gentleman from Rhode Island [Mr. PEARCE] says that he had a conversation with the President, or perhaps some of the directory, of one of these banks; and that he has the books, papers, and documents, all ready, and that an examination can be made in their houses. I entertain no doubt, Mr. Speaker, that it is these three hours' examinations of banks that has [JAN. 15, 1836. enabled many of them to commit the deepest frauds, and to fatten upon the substance of the laboring classes of society, and then, in a proper time and prudent manner, break very genteelly. There are two characters of breaking in this country-the one is to break very poor, and the other very rich; and a three hours' examination of any bank will enable it to choose between the two modes. In fact, sir, I consider it no examination at all. It is not within the compass of human possibility, it is not within man's power, (the Committee for the District of Columbia always excepted,) to make an examination into the situation and condition of a bank, and the manner and correctness with which it has been conducted, where a large business has been transacted for the last fifteen or twenty years, and digest the information in an intelligent form, such as should be laid before this House, in three hours or three days. It may take weeks. If an examination is gone into, it should be a thorough and satisfactory one. If there has been any foul practices by it, or rotten places now in it, under it, or about it, this should be fully eviscerated and brought before the public; it is an important item to take into consideration, upon the present application to renew their charters. If the affairs of these institutions had been fairly and honestly conducted, it is alike due to the public and the banks that the facts shall be known and set down to their credit. Is it possible that the gentleman from New Hampshire can suppose all this can be done in three hours? It is true, sir, they may bring up the prettiest set of bank books, more neatly bound, and more handsomely gilt, with the finest writing; the t's all crossed and the i's all dotted, which will exhibit a most splendid appearance, and which will answer all the purposes intended by a three hours' examination. But, sir, all things may not be so smooth, honest, and fair, when we get a peep behind the curtain; there may be something rotten in Denmark. I will now, sir, turn to that part of the subject which operated upon the minds of the committee in relation to the extension of their charters until the 1st of October next. There are seven or eight banks in the District; some of those, it is understood, through all the fluctuations of the times, whether produced by those shocks and revulsions which will occasionally happen in the moneyed concerns of any Government, or by the celebrated panic, have sustained their credit and reputation by paying at all times the gold or silver for their notes whenever they were presented, while others (which may, in the examination of the select committee, be considered of the second class) did not honor their notes, but suspended specie payments, much to the injury of the citizens of the community who were in possession of those notes at the time of this suspension. The first inquiry of the committee, in regard to these banks, will be to ascertain the causes which produced this suspension: was it by causes over which the directors of these banks had no control, or produced by circumstances that could not be foreseen, and fairly calculated upon, by exercising a reasonable degree of prudence and precaution? Some reports have gone abroad, quite unfavorable to a portion of those banks in the District which had suspended specie payments. It is unquestionably due to the public and the trading community, to ascertain the truth of these statements, and establish the facts, if they be. It is equally important to the banks so implicated, that a strict examination should be made. If the reports are not true, let them be honora bly acquitted. I consider it due to them as an act of justice. It will require much time to do all this. These charters expire on the third or fourth of March; and although the committee could accomplish the task by that time, if leave was obtained for it to sit during the session of the House, yet it is an alternative to be avoid JAN. 18, 1836.] Slavery in the District of Columbia-United States and France. ed if possible. The members of the committee have important business committed to them, by their own constituents, which requires their attention while the House is in session; which they cannot dispense with without great delay, and perhaps danger of its being lost for want of attention. But, separate and apart from the beforementioned reasons for continuing the charter of these banks until the first of October next, the interest of the banks and the policy of Congress both require it. It is impossible for the banks to wind up their business in six weeks, without great injury to themselves and to the commercial community of the District. If Congress, after a full examination of their concerns, shall not think proper to recharter them, the time specified (the first of October) is as early as they can wind up their affairs, without creating a shock to the moneyed concerns of the District. It is right that a sufficient time be given for that pur pose; therefore, I am opposed to the motion of the gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. HAWES] to restrict the time to the 1st of June. I am equally opposed to the motion of the gentleman from Rhode Island, [Mr. PEARCE,] which proposes an extension of the charter to the 4th of March, 1837. It is the duty as well as the policy of Congress to dispose of the whole subject, and finally, at this session. If we fail to act upon it now, and postpone it to the next session of Congress, which is a short one, it cannot receive the consideration to which it is entitled. And, again, Congress will be harassed with the ques tion some three or four weeks, then much to the detriment of other business. If it shall be the pleasure of Congress, upon a full examination, to recharter those banks, then it will require time to introduce those modifications into the charters which time and experience has afforded, in order to make them as perfect as possible; so that their usefulness may be felt, with as little inconvenience to society as their practical operations will allow, and at the same time to guard against the abuses and frauds of the banking system. I have no doubt this can be done to a considerable extent. This is an enlightened era of the world: the march of improvements and inventions, and of mind, has no former example; it has outstripped the wildest conceit that existed even fifty years ago. There is no science which has received more improvement and accessions of knowledge than that of banking. Take the same men, such of them as are yet living, who framed the bank charter for the United States Bank, and let them now set down to the work, with the additional information and experience they have since acquired, and they can construct one infinitely preferable, so that not one sixteenth part of the frauds which have been charged upon that bank could have been committed, without an easy mode of detection. But to form such a charter it requires time. For myself, I have not much favor for the banking system, much less for its abuses. I have never voted for but one. I had opportunities to vote for many. In some instances it may be a necessary evil. When it is so, the charters should be so framed as to make that evil as light as possible. As to those in the District of Columbia, I have neither partiality for, nor prejudices against, them. I think I can do justice; but, in order to ascertain what is just, I hope the House will pass the bill as it stands, which will afford both time and opportunity to arrive at that end. Mr. GILLET moved to amend the bill by adding a clause providing that Congress shall have the power to repeal, modify, or alter, the privileges extended by this act, any rights which the corporations have under it to the contrary notwithstanding. Mr. HARLAN moved to strike out the 1st of October, 1836, and insert the 1st of March, 1837; which was rejected. [H. OF R. The question was taken on the motion to amend, of. fered by Mr. HAWES, and decided in the negative. The bill was then ordered to be engrossed for a third reading on this day, in the following form: A BILL to extend the charters of certain banks in the District of Columbia to the 1st day of October, 1836. Be it enacted, &c., That the acts incorporating certain banks in the District of Columbia, that is to say, the Bank of Potomac and the Farmers' Bank of Alexandria, in the city of Alexandria, the Union Bank and the Farmers and Mechanics' Bank of Georgetown, in the town of Georgetown, the Bank of the Metropolis, the Patriotic Bank of Washington, and the Bank of Washington, in the city of Washington, be, and the same are hereby, renewed, continued in full force, and limited to the first Saturday and first day of October, in the year of our Lord eighteen hundred and thirty-six. [The bill was subsequently read a third time.] The remainder of the day was spent in the consideration of private bills, till the hour of adjournment; when the House adjourned to Monday. MONDAY, JANUARY 18. SLAVERY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. The subject of the petition from sundry inhabitants of Massachusetts, praying the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia, presented on a former day by Mr. J. Q. ADAMS, was taken up, and, on motion of Mr. HAWES, postponed till Monday next. THE UNITED STATES AND FRANCE. A message was received from the President of the United States, by the hands of A. J. DONELSON, Esq., his secretary, (for which see debates in Senate of this date, ante, page 163.) Mr. MASON, of Virginia, asked the unanimous consent of the House to have the message just received read to the House; and, no objection being made, it was read by the Clerk. Mr. McKEON sent to the Chair certain resolutions relating to the subject of the message, which he offered for the consideration of the House. Mr. MERCER rose to a point of order. The rules had been, he said, suspended only for the purpose of reading the message. Mr. MASON, of Virginia, (chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations,) said it was his intention to submit a motion that the message and documents accompanying it be referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations, and printed. He said he thought it important that the House should have an opportunity deliberately to peruse papers of so much importance, preliminary to any action in reference to them. After some conversation, on motion of Mr. WILLIAMS, of North Carolina, the documents accompanying the message were read. Mr. HAWES rose, and moved that 20,000 extra copies of the message and documents be printed. Mr. MASON, of Virginia, asked that the question should be first taken on the motion, which he now submitted, that the message and documents be referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations. The message and documents were then ordered to be referred accordingly, and the motion to print 20,000 extra copies was agreed to. Mr. McKEON asked the consent of the House to submit the resolutions which he had sent to the Chair, for the purpose of having them printed. Objections being strongly made, by repeated cries of "No! No!" Mr. McKEON moved a suspension of the rules of the House, in order to offer the resolutions, and asked the |