National gazette. — Philadelphia [Pa.], 1793-03-16 00:00:00, page 4

ons. Since the'ofTicer remains unpnniflied,
it is a proof that his conduct has met th
approbation of his principal;in fho-t,hefaid
thehoufc criminate thePrcfidentunlefs they
acquit the Secretary, the house by declar
ing that the Secretary adted without ii
flruftions, declare, that the President has
either neglected or been ignorant of his
duty.
It is a strange supposition, he said, that
the President should not know that the
Secretary was drawing for part ofihe mo
r,ies borrowed in Europe, when not a mer
chant was ignorant of it. Was it neces
sary for the President to have frequented
the cofFee-houfe, as he had been advised by
some of his friends in the pubiic papers,
to have been acquainted with thisfaft, he
sfked ? he imagined not. The Secretary
migpt have received verbal inftruftions on
the fubjeft of the drafts, and what obliged
him to communicate thefc ? He is only
ordered to communicate a copy of his in
ftruftions—this Mr. Smith contended,
could only extend to written inftruftions.
But if he did not receive even verbal, he
had then a discretionary power.
It was, he conceived, thebulinefs of the
President to fee whether the provisions of
the law, the execution of which had been
committed to his charge, had been com
plied with by his agent, and she house had
no right to alk the President whether he
gave inftruftions or rot to the Secretary.
But even if he had received no instruc
tions—he contended there was no need of
any. The law does not require that the'
money be. drawn and applied by the Presi
dent. A3 Coon as the money was borrow
ed it came of course under the fuperinten
danceofthe Secretary as the constituted
financier. Heremaiked, that neither did
the ast fpecify any particular place where
it should be borrowed, nor whither it should
be drawn, to be paid—this was left to the
discretion of the executive officer.
If the other charges are as easily refu
ted as these, and lie believed they are, the
character of the Secretary would lland fair
indeed ; be would not Hand charged with
any ast difgraceful to the man of the pu
reft integrity, and he believed that he
would in the ifTue rife above every calumny
as fair as the purest angel in heaven.
He concluded by observing, that if
there is a sword ofjufticeto punish public
delinquents, he hoped there would be
found a shield of justice to defend public
characters from injurious charges. Those.
he had just discussed could not, he concei
ved, stand after a candid enquiry, and no
evidence is brought forward that can sup
port them.
Mr. Hillhoufe argued, that the interest
paid was not paid out of the 2,000,00 c
loan ; and that the drafts were made a
greeably to the direftio«s of the Presi
dent. He (hewed this by the documents
which had been already referred to.
He put in a clear point of view the pro
priety of avoiding the expence and risque
ps drafts and correspondent remittances,
an.d concluded by giving his approbation
to tiV conduct of the Secretary in the
tranfadv '° ns complained of, and by expres
sing it as his firm belief that a majority of
the comma'tee, from the evidence before
them, would undoubtedly be of opinion,
that the charges brought forward are un
founded."
Mr. Sedgwick rose to- correct a mistake
of Mr. Mercer's. That gentleman had
aflerted, that the Secretary had drawn on
Europe, before the loan obtained by the
commissioners under the old •government
was ratified. This was not the cafe, he
fai!. The loan had been ratified in pur
suance of the provisions of the ast authori
zing it. The President, in his speech on
the Bth of December 1790, fays, " that
agreeably to the powers veiled in him at
the last session, the loans in Holland had
been completed."
By exilting acts of the legislature, and
from express communications from the.
Secretary of the Treasury it appears, that
all the monies borrowed were deemed bor
rowed under the joint authority of both
acts, and not to be solely appropriated for
the payment of the foreign debt.
Mr. Mercer explained, that he had said,
that the Secretary had drawn from the
loan obtained under the authority of the
©Id government, before said loan was le
galized by law. If the legislature had the
right to legalize it, they had the right to
reject it."
Mr. Lee next rose.
He observed that as he found himfelf
under the necefiity of differing from his;
friend who had moved the resolution, with ,
whom h? generally agreed in opinion, and
was aecuftomed to ast, he begged the at
tention of the committee for a few mi
nutes. Mr. Lee observed,
To determine whether the Secretary of
the Treasury had acted legally, it was ne
ctflary to examine whether the authority
from the President and his subsequent in
llruftions authorized him to confoiidate
the loans under the acts 'of the 4th and
12th August, j 790.
On this queltion Mr. Lee observed, that
there seemed to be no obj ftion to fucli a
conftruftion, except that which arose from
the difference of interest allowed by those
acts. That the firll loan was commenced
without any regular authority by a com
pany in Amlterdam—that it received its
authenticity from the acceptance of the
Secretary of the Treasury. The interest
and douceurs on this loan amounled to
more than an interest of five per cent,
which was the only premium contempla
ted by the ast of the 12th of August.—
It could consequently be accepted only
under the ast of the 4th of August, which
gave no limitation to the interest which
was to be allowed. This money seemed
therefore solely applicable to the payment
of the fore'gn debt. Froin his report of
the 24th of February 1791, the Secretary
himfelf seemed to have had this impreflion.
Congress seemed also to have had this im
preflion, as on the 3d of March following
they pasTed an ast authorising the applica
tion of this loan to the object of the ast
of the 12th August 1790. After the 3d
of March 1791, therefore, the Secretary
of the Treasury had a right to bring this
money to America for the purposes of the
finking fund. The interest of the foreign
debt becoming due, for which domestic
revenues were pledged, he thought it
prudent to pay that interest out of this
loan, relying on the domestic revenues to
replace it for the purposes of the finking
fund. This was a mode of bringing the
money here, and he was not limited in
his discretion as to the mode ; an 1 there
fore had a right to follow that whicl) ap
peared to him moll advantageous The
paying of the foreign interest out of this
loan was made after the 3d March, J 791.
Mr. Lee had no doubt as to the legality
of all the proceedings relative to monies
drawn to this country subsequent to the
3d of March 1791 —even the monies bor
rowed for the foreign debt, because an
higher interest than five per crnt. was sti
pulated for, on any of the subsequent leans,
and because the President in his instruc
tions to the Secretary, leaves the mode of
paying the foreign debt to his discretion.
If he judged it for the advantage of the
United States to bring this money, in
the firft place, to America, the legality of
such a measure cannot be queflioned, tho'
the economy and wisdom of it may not
be admitted. On this point Mr Lee ac
knowledged, that he had not time to ex
amine minutely all the statements and re
ports of the Secretary, to judge of those
exigencies which induced the drawing of
all the money which had been drawn to
America.
Whether it had been confident or not
with the interest of the United States, Mr.
Lee was of opinion, that the Secretary
had legally a right to bring all the money
he had drawn for to America, except what
was drawn prior to the 3d of March 1791.
This money was drawn out of the firft
loan ; it was drawn, as declared, for the
finking fund j the firft loan, for the rea
sons before stated, could not be applied,
and consequently, till the ast of the 3d of
March, I 791, this money could not be le
gally drawn for to the finking fund. Per
haps this ast caused the irregularity of
this proceeding.
But is not the Secretary of the Trea
fury fubjeft to blame ? Mr. Lee observed
be thought he was not altogether free
from it. At the meeting of Congress on
the Bth day of Dcc. 1790, the President in
his speech informed both houses, that the
filfl loan had been accepted, and that the
Secretary of the Treasury had directions
to lay the partu ulars before them—But
what did he do ? On the 15th of Dec.
following, he began to'draw money on ac- 1
count of this loan to America, for the
finking fund ; though from his report on I
the 24th of Feb. 1 791 he appears to have '
had a doubt as to the legality of this pro- I
ceeding—he delayed giving information, 1
in conformity to the Prefidcnt's fpeeeh, till <
a few days before the diflblution of Con- ;
grefs. This conduct, Mr. Lee said, seem- ;
ed to argue a dillruft of the legislative t
councils. Mr. Lee dilated on the nectf- i
I fity of the pure (I and mcft conudcntial
• communication between the Secretary of
the Treasury & the Legislature ; and /aid,
though he could not agree to the refolu-
F tion then under consideration, there was
- one, subsequent to it, iclating to this
r point, which he was sorry to find himfelf |
- under the necdTitv of voting for"
Mr. Boudinot considered it as the duty
I of the committee in the discussion of the
charges brought forward to confine t' em
t fclvcs ftri&ly to tlie points in quellion.
i The present examination differed from or
i dinary legislative business. Specific char
' ges are brought forward against a highly
I responsible officer ; the facts brought for
• ward to support those charges Ihould be
: understood and considered, to form a right
■ judgment on them. The Secretary is
charged with having violated a law by
i paying the interest due on a loan oßt of
the principal of that loan. He went into
■ some statements and calculations to shew,
that the moHey paid on account of foreign
loans, as Hated in official documents, could
not have been paid on account of interest
of the late loans, from the difpropoition
of the films.
He need fay nothing more, he conceiv
ed, to shew that the firft charge io the re
solution immediately before the committee,
is unfounded. If what he said was not
fufficient to disprove it, he alked where 16
the evidence to support it ?
He next turned to the second charge in
the resolution ; viz. that the Secretary had
1 made the drafts complained of without the
Prtfident's inftruftions. Here he noticed
; a mistake some gentlemen had fallen into,
• when speaking of the call of the house for
information ; this was a request to ihe Pre-
Gdent, and not an order to the Secretary.
From the information communicated in
i consequence of this call it did not appear,
that the Secretary had adled without, or
contrary to inftruftions, and he infilled,
that he ought to be presumed innocent till
he was proved to be guilty.
He argued, that the authority given to
the President in the business, put it in his
power to draw the whole 14 millions to
this country, if he thought fit; it could not
therefore, be contended, he insisted, that
the amount of the drafts, had pafled the
limits of the authority given. It is not
denied, he proceeded, that there was a
right t® draw for the two millions appro
priated for the redu&ion of the public
debt—well, it has appeared, on a certain
occasion, to the house, that our minister
in France, negociated a contrast with the
National Assembly, or their officers, for
the payment of 800,000 dollars of the debt
due them here; then certainly the exigency
of the cafe required that this sum should
be drawn here for the purchase of provi
sions for St. Domingo, in which this pay
ment was to be made. Here then was a
positive necessity of drawing for 2,800,000
dollars, and as a discretionary power in the
business had been left to the executive,
they might have found it advifeable, per
haps, under an expe&ation of additional
payments in the fame manner, to have
drawn over as much more as they might
have thought prudent.
He adverted to the application of the
Secretary to the legislature to declare whe
ther the loan obtained, for an interest of 5
per cent, exclusive of douceurs, might be
considered as borrowed under the autho
rity of the 2,000,000 aih It was his
(Mr. Boudinot's) opinion, at the time,
that no explanatory law was necessary; and
that tne executive had power to conltrue
the ast in that sense. This was also the
Secretary's opinion, and in consequence of
that opinion, he had drawn bills. He
thought it however right to apply to the
house and have every doubt removed, and
the legislature fanftioned his conllru&ion
of the law.
It had been said, that if the legislature
had a right to confirm, they alio had a
right to reject the conllruftion put upon
the law by the execuiive. Tiik he con
ceived, they would not have been war
ranted in doing, after acontradl, agreeably .
! to that conftrudlion, had been made—such
a proceeding mult have involved a breac>i
of eontraft. '
It had been repeatedly gflerted, and
strenuously insisted on, that the legislature ,
were totally in the dark, as to the drafts
from Europe. To d fprove this assertion, ■
he read fevcral items from sundry reports
of the Secretary, where sums received 011 /
account of loans are fpecilied. It had V
also been said, that there was no evidence '
that any part of the loan was applied to, or
intended for the purchase of the pubic
1 j debt. This alio appears unfounticd from
f a note, dated the 25th of August, 1790.
, laid before the trustees for purcliafing of
- the public debt, which expressly mentions,
s that a loan had been negociated, pait of
> which wasdeflined for the purchase of the
f public debt, and that some points relative
thereto were before the Prcfident for Lis
' approbation. This also (hewed that the
; President had knowledge of fuchinten
• tions. His speech and the report of the
. Secretary in confluence of part of that
- speech, which had been so repeatedly re
ferred to, alio unequivocally prove this
' point.
He recapitulated the heads of hisargu
: ments, and concluded that if nothing fur
t ther could be brought in support of the
5 charges now betore the committee
■ mould have his decided negative,
f The committee then rose, reported pro
> grefs and obtained leave to fit again in the
, Evening. Then the Koufe adjourned.
1 (To be cotitinued.)
I -
METEOROLOGICAL OBSERVATIONS.
March 1793.
D, 11 Bar. Ther. | -7' UI.
Tuesday, 5. 5 19. 4< 51 1 S-.V. Rain.
2 io- 6 52 W. Fair.
WednrJJay, 6. 7 30. 5 3; N N WFair.
2 lo 3 ,50 S. W do.
Tburjduy, 7, ; ~ 7 3.) vVSVV. Fair.
i 2 29. p<; 62 S. W.I do.
briday, i. 7 29. J5 ~ Cloudy.
2 2Q. 60 S. Rain.
Saturday, 9 , 29. 6 ; 26 N. VV. Tan
2 30. c 41 do. j do.
Sunday, iv. 7 30. 5 29 N.NU.ifo/r
2 30. 51 S. Wn
Monday, 11.7 30. 33 43 s Rain.
2 2 9- 7} 55 1 do- do.
" " ■ ' Hi
The Barracks in Perth Amboy,
Late the property of Major Richard Lloyd,
Deccqjed,
berxpofed to public sale on Monday
the firft day ot .April next at the house of-
John Thompson in Perth Amboy aforefaid ; said
barracks arc an elegant large brick building,
containing about 30 rocms, the middle house of
which is three stories high—They are finely fitu
-1 ated commanding a beautiful profpedt of the
1 town and surrounding waters—the lot on which
ihey stand, contains aboi/t one acre and an half in
which are two wells of excellent water—At the
fame time and place will be fold a water lot
and dock lot lying in Perth Amboy aforefaid-—
for all which good lilies (by virtue of an order
of rhe Orphan court of the'courity of Middlesex)
will be given by
WILLTAM LLOYD.
NA'l haniel ker.
siumir.'ijlrator j.
A Hen town, Monmouth county, heo. 25, 1793.
At.law.
FOR SALE.
THE Subscriber wilhes to fell the HOUSE
and LOT in Princeton, now in the tenure
of William Worth y it is an eligible stand, either
for a private family or a tradesman, being' situated
on the North lidr of the street, near the centre of
the town, and a little east of the market house—
The lot contains forty-two feet in front, and up
wards of two hundred feet in. depth ; on the pre.
miles is eredHd, and in good tenantable order, a
two ftorv dwelling house, twenty feet front by 26
in depth ; two rooms on the lower floor, with an
entry fix feet wide j three rooms on the second
floor, and a room in the garret, lathed and plas
tered. In the rear of the house, and adjoining
thereto, is a large kitchen, and the cellar extends
under the wi'iole of the house. ]n the yard, there
is a well of excellent water—the yard and garden
are enclosed with a good pale fence. This house
and lot rn ght be an object to some gentleman who
might wiflr to educate his children either at the
College or the I.atin or English schools, whicU
are conduced upon an improved plan-—The title
is indisputable, and pofTefiion may be had the firft
of April. For terms apply, ts the fublcriber is
Princeton. v
JARED SEXTON.
PRINCETON, Feb. 28. 4 w2aw
THREE POUNDS REWARD.
RUN AW A V from the fublcriber, on Sun
day The 13th of January, an apprentice
lad to the blackfrniths bufmefs, named John Lay
tan, about eighteen years of age, five feet three
or four ?nches high, had cn when he went away,
a half worn fopctfine brown coat, a fiort drab
(urtout , buff cafiim«r breeches a little faded,
.vorfted stockings, his ihoes tied with black wor
ked firings ■, he is remarkably fond of itrong li
quof, is very talkative when a little intoxicated,
and speaks with a coarse strong voice ; whoever
apprehends said apprentice and feeures him, (hall
have the above reward, and if brought home, rea
onable charges paid.
ISAAC WOODLAND.
Georgetown, Kent county, Cross Roads, Ma
ryUnd Feb. 4, 1793 law.
For fate, at the printing office, a few copies
of the fir (I volume of the National Gazette.
PRINTED BY
CIIILDS and SWAINE,
AT THEJROFFICE N0;209, HIGH-STRE2T,
NEAR FIFTH-STR t ET,
PHILADELPHIA.