Gazette of the United-States. (New-York [N.Y.]), 1791-02-19 00:00:00

Gazette of the United States.
PUBLISHED WEDNESDAYS AND SATURDAYS BY JOHN FENNO, No. 69, HIGH-STREET, BETWEEN SECOND AND THIRD STREETS, PHILADELPHIA.
[No. 85, of Vol. II.]
SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 19, 1791.
[Whole No. 189.]
CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES:
AT THE THIRD SESSION, Begun and held at the City of Philadelphia, on Monday the sixth of December, one thousand seven hundred and ninety.
An ACT making appropriations for the support of Government during the year one thousand seven hundred and ninety-one, and for other purposes.
BE it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress Assembled, That there be appropriated the several sums, and for the several purposes following, to wit; A sum not exceeding two hundred and ninety-nine thousand two hundred and seventy-six dollars and fifty-three cents, for defraying the expenses of the civil list, as estimated by the Secretary of the Treasury, in the statement, number one, accompanying his report to the house of Representatives of the sixth inst. including the contingencies of the several executive officers, and of the two Houses of Congress, which are hereby authorized and granted: a sum not exceeding fifty thousand seven hundred and fifty-six dollars and fifty-three cents, for satisfying the several objects specified in the statement, number two, accompanying the report aforesaid, all such whereof, as may not have been heretofore provided for by law, being hereby authorized: and a sum not exceeding three hundred and ninety thousand one hundred and ninety-nine dollars and four cents, for the use of the department of war, pursuant to the statement, number three, accompanying the report aforesaid, including therein the sum of one hundred thousand dollars, for defraying the expenses of an expedition lately carried on against certain Indian tribes; and the sum of eighty-seven thousand four hundred and sixty-three dollars and sixty cents, being the amount of one year's pensions to invalids, together with the contingencies of the said department, which are hereby authorized: Which several sums shall be paid out of the funds following, namely, the sum of six hundred thousand dollars, which, by the act, intitled, "An act making provision for the debt of the United States," is reserved yearly for the support of the government of the United States, and their common defence; the amount of such surpluses as may remain in the treasury, after satisfying the purposes for which appropriations were made, by the acts respectively, intitled, "An act making appropriations for the service of the present year," passed the twenty-ninth day of September, one thousand seven hundred and eighty-nine; "An act making appropriations for the support of government for the year one thousand seven hundred and ninety," passed the twenty-sixth day of March, one thousand seven hundred and ninety; "An act making certain appropriations therein mentioned," passed the twelfth day of August, one thousand seven hundred and ninety, and the product, during the present year, of such duties as shall be laid in the present session of Congress.
FREDERICK AUGUSTUS MUHLENBERG, Speaker of the House of Representatives.
JOHN ADAMS, Vice-President of the United States, and President of the Senate.
APPROVED, FEBRUARY ELEVENTH, 1791.
GEORGE WASHINGTON, President of the United States. (TRUE COPY)
THOMAS JEFFERSON, Secretary of State.
From the CONNECTICUT COURANT.
THE lower house of the Pennsylvania assembly has voted to signify to their Senators in Congress their desire, that no act of Congress for levying an excise, which should be subversive of the liberties of the people, might pass that body.
As good government, order, and public credit are yet in their infancy, it is proper that the meaning and tendency of this vote should be considered.
This branch of the Assembly must intend, by their vote, one of three things—either that the excise act before Congress would, if passed into a law, be subversive of liberty; or that it would not be subversive of it: or, without giving any opinion on that point, they mean merely to caution their senators against assenting to any improper act.
Let us examine the last supposition first—If the Assembly had formed an opinion, it is strange they should conceal it; especially on a matter which relates, as they pretend, to the subversion of liberty, and therefore demands truth and plain dealing. If they had not formed an opinion on the subject, why should they say any thing about it? Why should those offer advice and caution who are themselves in the dark—whose judgment is not yet made up, and who can give common place counsel only, which would fit any public body, or any public act, as well as that in question? The spelling-book, the primer, and the assembly's catechism, abound with useful rules for faith and practice. It is to be hoped that most of our public men have read them, and therefore the Assembly's warning against sin and tyranny, and the excise, might have been saved to adorn the next year's almanac, where it would
be as much in place and season. But if they will give away spiritual advice to Congress, it may be proper to make a case of conscience of it, and to enquire, whether it was right to publish advice which is so very liable to be misinterpreted and abused.
If the Assembly did not mean to express any opinion, with respect to the act before Congress, why did they use terms which may lead some to suppose that they condemn that bill as subversive of liberty, and others to be alarmed with doubts and fears, as if such blind resolutions had given warning that there was a snake in the grass?—We are advised to think twice before we speak once; but here they seem to assert several things without having thought or enquired at all. Does it become men in power to resolve at random? to raise doubts and fears and jealousies in the society? Surely a sense of duty does not demand that they should raise an opposition to an act, which, for ought they know or assert to the contrary, may be a very good one. It is the part of meanness, of a tale-bearer, and disturber of the peace, to deal in blind hints, and cautious slander, which the law will not take hold of. If they know any thing against the bill, why have they not told it? Will the world be the wiser for their doubts or their ignorance?
But perhaps the force of these observations will be taken off by renouncing the supposition, (which we have been examining) that they did not mean to give any opinion for or against the bill, and by setting up the next point, to make it appear that they had formed a decided opinion in favor of the excise bill.
Then why did they not say so?—But cannot Congress give due weight to its doings without a vote of the Pennsylvania Assembly? Has the constitution, or the sense of America fastened that clog upon its legislature? It was, indeed, expected of the arbiters of the union that she would claim a modest share of influence over Congress. The Excise Act, when passed, will appear with only the usual attestations, and we shall be puzzled to find out whether Pennsylvania likes it or not. Many will make bold to think, after all, that an act of Congress is valid without a vote of the Assembly—and they will argue from that circumstance, and from the peevishness of the terms of the resolutions, that they were not intended in praise of the measure, but on the contrary—if a censure of the excise was intended, they deserve a different notice. Honest men!—you who favored the adoption of this government—and you who live prosperously and happily under it, almost without feeling the taxes it has imposed, it is time for you to look about you, and to see what is the tendency of these things. You formed the constitution because you loved your country: If you only love yourselves, you will maintain it.
The power of imposing excises is vested in Congress by the constitution. The Assembly of Pennsylvania either dislike the power itself, as given by the constitution, or the form in which the bill before Congress proposes to exercise it. All men agree that no excise was ever so mild, or so well guarded against abuse. The obnoxious qualities of an excise are excluded from it—surely their modesty will not allow them to say, that their state excise act is to be preferred to it—that indeed is far from being unexceptionable. If they dislike any clause of the bill, why have they not pointed it out, instead of condemning it in the gross?
Will they dare to say, that the bill is as well guarded as it can be, but they are against the power itself, however modified?—Why then did they ratify the constitution?—Why have they since solemnly sworn to support it?—If they are publishing resolutions against the constitution itself, it is proper that we should know how to understand them.
Enlightened people of America! your painful experience has stripped politics of its mystery, and you can judge for yourselves, what is the tendency of two rival bodies debating on the same national measure, in the same street, and at the same time, and each weighing the argument that the revenue was unnecessary, the affairs of the Union not demanding such supply. If they resolve alike, the labor of one body is plainly lost; for why should two be engaged in doing the work of one? If they should resolve differently, as it is probable they will, are not your interests, and peace, brought into danger.
The exercise of the united wisdom and talents of your servants in Congress is your right. Is the Pennsylvania Assembly to revise and superintend their doings? Was that Assembly chosen for the Union? Have the estimates and reports of the public officers been laid before them? Did they carefully discuss the merits of the bill they have condemned—Nay, did they so much as hear it read—or did they decide upon it in the dark?—And yet these are the men—and this is the solemn decision which you are to trust in preference to Congress. Until Congress shall become corrupt and treacherous, their power is your power: But if the Assembly can prevent their acting, or pretend to revise, or to create opposition to their doings, they become the superior body—they make your representatives like a county court, with an appeal to the Assembly.
The people it is very true, may remonstrate against the doings of government; but why should that Assembly do it for them?—All wisdom is not shut up within their walls.—Our people know their rights, and that one of them is, to remonstrate and complain to the legislature, and this right is rendered familiar by long usage. And who gave the Assembly a right to censure the proceedings of Congress? The constitution? That has not said a word about it. Do they derive it from the nature of their office of representatives? Congress also is composed of our representatives, whom we chose because we thought we could trust—Then they have an equal right to pass a vote of censure on the acts of the Assembly, and to tell them to mend their high ways, and to reform their law proceedings.—They may tell them that their neglect of obliging towns to maintain schools, is subversive of the liberties of the people, by keeping them in ignorance of what their liberties are. And what is to be the result of this mutual reproach and fault-finding? More harmony and good order in the society, and a better discharge of duty in both bodies? Or, government against government, a house divided against itself, faction, animosity, civil war and anarchy?
If Congress should do wrong, the people will suffer.—Why should the Assembly interpose as a legislature? If their corporate rights are invaded, they may very properly remonstrate, and seek other measures of redress: The oppression of the excise will not fall upon assemblies, but upon individuals. The right of complaining of personal wrongs, belongs to him only who feels them: It is a right which he cannot delegate, before hand, to another to use for him, at discretion—for the agent might complain when the principal would not. Shall an assembly arrogate to itself the office of judging for men, whether they suffer or not? Even the most stupid can judge of this for themselves. The right of the people as well as the power of Congress is narrowed by this assumed office of the Assembly.—And why is it exercised by the Assembly? Is oppression felt? Are any people in the world more free, enlightened, or prosperous? Why then do they blow the trumpet? Were they chosen by us, to declare, in riddles, the grievances of a people, who are perfectly satisfied? But know, countrymen, that this Assembly, which guards your liberties, unasked, against an excise, has suffered one to operate, without question, in Pennsylvania, near half a century. They forgot the liberties of Pennsylvania, and with a spirit truly national, take care of those of other states.
Is not this intermeddling with Congress subversive of your interests also? Suppose their influence should prevent the passage of the excise act, the revenue must be had to provide for your just debts. If they will not suffer you to provide for them by a tax upon luxuries, and upon the most pernicious of luxuries, spirituous liquors, a tax must be levied upon your lands and houses.
Should discontented persons take courage from this vote to oppose a measure, which, they pretend, is subversive of liberty, with force, what falls short in the revenue must be made up by the people. What possible advantage can the people derive from this conduct of the assembly, thus legislating upon legislation? Will it vindicate their rights? That, the people have sense and spirit enough to do for themselves. Will it come in aid of the laws of the union? Thank heaven the days of anarchy and governing by recommendation are past—or, finally, shall the assembly pass votes to censure and counteract your

national laws? Why shall a power be used at all, which is always pernicious, when it is not useful?
What then will become of the peace of the country? Is it not scattering fire-brands among you, to send abroad your laws with a stigma upon them, to have an ill name go before them, such as the assembly shall think fit to give them? What is the first step towards overturning the government of this country? To destroy the confidence of the people—to convince them that their affairs go wrong, and are managed by men and upon principles which it is a virtue to oppose—a people in whose hands the government is, will delay acting only till they are so convinced. As soon as the county convention, in Massachusetts, in 1786, began to vote the measures of the government grievances, that state was shaken to its centre—It is turning the principle of life into a pestilence—it is arming the right hand against the left. Society cannot be managed but by representatives, chosen to act for the common good—The choice implies trust and confidence—But when one set of representatives set up a cry against another, as tyrants and oppressors, what but uncertainty and confusion can ensue? And what security is there that this cry will not be set up sometimes by an assembly without cause? Will Congress always be in the wrong? Will the body which has information from all parts of the union laid on its table, be more apt to err than another body, which has no such general information, and is not at all bound to make up any judgment upon it? Will the election of a senator or representative to Congress never tincture their resolutions with a party hue? Will envy or fear of the power of Congress, or the ambition to snatch a part of it, never find an entrance within the walls of the state-house? It is a sound principle to be jealous of power—it is equally true that power will be jealous for itself. If it is natural for every body to attempt extending its own jurisdiction, it seems to follow that the assemblies should not pass votes of censure on the acts of Congress—The people only will exercise that power of revision with impartiality—It is their province to watch all their public bodies—For, as the people must govern by their representatives, they will have no inducement to make encroachments upon any of them.
The question concerns the peace of this country—The people have a right to judge, and thanks to our forefathers who established schools, they have sense enough to decide it.—Shall the assembly of Pennsylvania, as it were, snatch the business off the table of Congress? Shall they like reviewers, draw before them a law of the union, and make it depend for its passage, and its execution when passed, on their criticism? Shall the whole be governed by its parts? Congress is a government over governments—Suppose they should all adopt the measures of Pennsylvania, and undertake to decide upon the affairs of the nation, confusion of counsels would be the first effect, as dear experience has already taught us. If we escaped ruin before, it was because the adoption of the constitution saved us from it.—The people will readily see, that the peace of the country requires that the several governments should keep within their respective limits; without suffering one to encroach upon the business assigned by the constitution to the other.
A people, who have so long enjoyed liberty, would be wretched without it—Long may it endure—and what, but breaking the union, can destroy it? The best principle in the politics of this country is, the firm union of its parts under one efficient government. What other barrier is there between us and anarchy? It is our only chance for maintaining our liberties, and for becoming great. Things are in so prosperous a train, that if we preserve our present happy constitution, we can scarce fail of becoming the greatest and happiest nation that ever existed; but if we should so relax the government of the union that the band which binds the states together should be snapped asunder, we should probably become nests of petty barbarians, making spoil upon one another. So degraded and corrupted as to deserve all we should suffer, and sufficiently disposed to perform the work of vengeance for providence, by mutually inflicting all we should deserve.
CHARLESTON, Dec. 27.
Extract from judge GRIMKE's charge to the grand Jury, Camden District.
IT is with much satisfaction that I resume the judicial duties of this district. After so long a period has elapsed since I have had the honor of addressing your pannel, and after the necessary retirement to a northern climate on account of the infirmity of my health, I receive additional pleasure in recommencing the usual functions of my commission.
But grateful as these considerations are to me individually, there are others of a public nature which will contribute to heighten our feelings, and to warm our hearts. The present situation of South-Carolina, whether viewed as a component
part of the federal union, or in its natural independent state under our own constitution affords ample relief to the political eye by the bright prospects now opening upon us. The act of Congress assuming so considerable an amount as four million of dollars of our debt, relieves us from the difficult alternative of overburthening our constituents with taxes to discharge the interest thereon, or of ruining a number of innocent sufferers by withholding that payment from them. It is an act of the first importance to our state. It enables us to maintain our public faith and rescues us from the disgrace of a national bankruptcy; nor will the effects of this statute be confined alone to the public—but each individual will partake of the benefits of its consequences: many in finding the above mentioned sum realized in their hands, and others, that such a value will be stamped on our securities as to give them a currency and circulation through the state. The honest man who finds himself embarrassed in his circumstances if possessed of this paper, will be enabled readily to relieve himself from his unworthy situation: or if his property should chance to be exposed for sale, he will at least have the satisfaction of seeing it purchased at a fair price; for there can be but little doubt that such an accession of paper, with our proportion of the debt due by the United States to our citizens, [besides the annual amount of interest, amounting at least to 250,000 dollars] rising at once in the hands of our inhabitants and serving as a negotiable medium, will augment the price of property in a very considerable degree: and altho' this will not have any immediate effect, nevertheless we shall feel the advantages resulting from it in a year or two, when the interest on our assumed debt begins to be paid. It is with peculiar pleasure therefore that I anticipate the fruits of this wise measure ripening into maturity, and serving as the basis of reconciling to the federal union the minds of those honest citizens, who at first were opposed to the constitution of government under which we now live, and I may add flourish.
As to our domestic state affairs, we may rejoice with uplifted hands and grateful hearts for the peaceable manner in which we have been enabled to alter our constitution, and for the benign and happy spirit of accommodation which discovered itself in the framers thereof. I believe that there were but very few persons, if any in the convention, who were dissatisfied with the principles ingrafted into the constitution. For each party generously sacrificing somewhat of their own opinions, heartily strove by mutual concession to render it as perfect as possible. The result of their wisdom, their deliberation and their liberality was unanimously ratified, the members of every part of our country giving their assent thereto in the most unequivocal manner.
Philadelphia, Feb. 19.
It has been said that the circumstances of the United States are so diverse from those of England, at the time of the institution of the national bank in that country, that no reason for the institution in this country can be drawn from thence. The pleasing prospects of the United States, are said to supercede the necessity of a national bank. But a correspondent observes, that the argument in favor of the institution, in his opinion, derives additional force from the above representation. If a bank, instituted at a time of general distress, has been found to be productive of such extensive advantages, as acknowledged in respect to the bank of England—what benefits may not be expected to result to the United States from a bank-institution, in a time of profound peace, and at the moment when the country is rising in prosperity, encreasing in population, and continually appreciating in its credit, resources and revenue.
A correspondent observes, that the provision proposed to be made by some of the States for the unassumed part of the State debts, is a measure of a dubious complexion; so far as it originates in a tender concern for the State creditors, it is to be applauded—but in proportion as it is founded on the idea of State sovereignty's being essentially connected with making the people feel the concurrent powers of the State and general governments in taxation, it will be found impolitic and unpopular. The State creditors would do well to reflect, whether it would not be more for their interest to depend altogether on the general government; they have no reason to anticipate much from the particular States, from past experience, and their prospects will not be brightened by a division of the power, necessary to doing them compleat justice.
PORTSMOUTH, Feb. 2.
The address of his excellency Alexander Martin, Esq. Governor of North-Carolina, presented to both houses of the general Assembly of that state, on the 2d of November last, contains the following:
"The act of Congress for the assumption of the debts of the individual states without their particular consent, or application of the citizens for this purpose, seems to exhibit at an early period, a new and unexpected precedent of legislation in the federal government: How far the same may involve in it the independence and internal sovereignty of the state, I shall not undertake to discuss; but must presume the principles of pure and equal justice dictated, in that honorable body, this extraordinary measure!"
The Rev. Dr. PETERS, formerly of Hebron in Connecticut, is expected shortly to take charge of the province of Quebec, as Bishop.
The Rev. Dr. BASS, having resigned his election as Bishop; that office will probably be given to the Rev. Doctor PARKER, of Boston, in testimony of the affection and esteem of the Church, and in gratitude for his many important services to her, in days of distress.
The Rev. UZAL OGDEN, of Newark, in New-Jersey, is also a candidate for consecration as Bishop of the Churches in that state.
A correspondent observes, he is happy in hearing that a committee of the honorable legislature of this state are now considering the subject of establishing post-roads and post-riders through the state. The advantages which would result to the citizens at large from such an establishment, are many and obvious—an early and expeditious communication would be kept up—the people would be better informed of the proceedings of their rulers—and a vast saving would be made to the state by having its business increased, owing to the regular intercourse which the establishment alluded to cannot fail of producing—It is notorious that hundreds of pounds are annually lost to the state for want of such an arrangement.
Quere. Is not the general government in a fair way of being superceded in the business of the union?
CONGRESS.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
TUESDAY, Feb. 1.
THE engrossed bill to incorporate the subscribers to the bank of the United States, was read the third time—and on the question, Shall this bill pass?
Mr. Smith, (S. C.) observed, that the bill being taken up rather unexpectedly yesterday, gentlemen did not appear prepared to discuss the subject—It therefore was suffered to be read in committee of the whole, and passed to the third reading in his opinion rather informally—as the members were thereby deprived of giving their sentiments in the usual manner on a bill of the greatest importance. He thought it susceptible of various amendments. The Speaker having observed, that the bill, agreeable to the rules of the house, could not be amended without being re-committed, Mr. Smith moved, that the bill should be re-committed, for the purpose of making sundry alterations, and removing objections which he thought the bill liable to. He then enumerated several objections: Those who are to receive the subscriptions, he said, by the bill are not obliged to give any bonds for their fidelity: He thought the clause which excludes foreigners from voting by proxy, exceptionable—and the time in which subscriptions are to be received, he thought too contracted.
Mr. Jackson said he was in favor of the motion for a re-commitment; but not for the reasons offered by the gentleman from South Carolina. He was, he said, opposed to the principle of the bill altogether. He then adverted to the situation of the United States, and observed, that it was so different from that of Great Britain, at the time the bank was established in that country, that no reason in favor of the institution can be deduced from thence. He adverted to the arguments arising from the facility which banks afford of anticipating the public resources in cases of emergency. This idea of anticipations he reprobated, as tending to involve the country in debt, and an endless labyrinth of perplexities. This plan of a national bank, said he, is calculated to benefit a small part of the United States, the mercantile interest only—the farmers, the yeomanry, will derive no advantage from it—as the bank bills will not circulate to the extremities of the Union. He said he had never seen a bank bill in the state of Georgia—nor will they ever benefit the farmers of that state, or of New-Hampshire. He urged that there was no necessity for instituting a New Bank: There is one already established in this city, under the stile of the Bank of North-America—This proposed Institution is an infringement of the charter of that bank, which cannot be justified. He urged the unconstitutionality

of the plan—called it a monopoly—such an one as contravenes the spirit of the constitution—a monopoly of a very extraordinary nature—a monopoly of the public monies for the benefit of the corporation to be created. He then read several passages from the Federalist, which he said were directly contrary to the assumption of the power proposed by the bill: He hoped therefore that it would be re-committed—and he could not help hoping also, that it would be deferred to the next session.
Mr. Lawrance observed, that the friends of the Institution proposed, had been unjustly charged with precipitating the bill—but he said it had been long in the hands of the members—they have had time to consider it—the usual forms have been observed in its progress thus far—and if those who are opposed to the bill did not see proper to come forward with their objections, it surely is their own fault, and the advocates of the bill are not justly chargeable with precipitancy. He then particularly replied to the objections offered by Mr. Smith, (S. C.) and after considering them said, that those objections did not, in his opinion, constitute sufficient reasons to induce a re-commitment of the bill. He then noticed the constitutional objections of Mr. Jackson, and said, the government of the United States is vested by the constitution with a power of borrowing money—and in pursuance of this idea, they have a right to create a capital, by which they may, with greater facility, carry the power of borrowing on any emergency into effect. Under the late confederation, the Pennsylvania Bank, called the Bank of North-America, was instituted: He presumed that it will not be controverted, that the present government is vested with powers equal to those of the late confederation. He said that he had no doubt its operation would benefit not only the centre, but the extremities also of the Union: The commercial, mechanical and agricultural interests of the United States are so combined, that one cannot be benefited without benefiting the other. He concluded by observing, that he thought the legislature of the United States could not better answer the purposes of their appointment than by passing this bill: He hoped therefore, that it would not be re-committed, but that it would now pass.
Mr. Lee observed, that having been confined by sickness, he was precluded from attending the house yesterday; but sick as he was, had he supposed that there was a prospect of a bill of such magnitude and importance passing without a discussion of its principles, he certainly would have attended, and offered his objections to various parts of it, which he thought very exceptionable. He hoped therefore it would now be re-committed—that a bill which is so unequal and so partial, may undergo a thorough discussion.
Mr. Tucker was in favor of a re-commitment. He acknowledged that those who had their objections to the bill were certainly blameable for not coming forward with them yesterday. He then stated sundry objections to the bill: The time allowed to receive the subscriptions he said is too short, and will benefit those only in the vicinity of the bank: The clause which authorizes the loaning 100,000 dollars to the government, without express provision by law, he thought exceptionable, as the executive will be able by this means to borrow at any time, without being authorized, to almost any amount, of the bank: The loan of 2,000,000 by the United States to the bank he objected to, as diverting that sum from the particular object for which it was borrowed. There is no appropriation said he, of the half yearly dividend of profits accruing to the United States, which he observed, was a very essential defect. Mr. Tucker stated other objections, as reasons for a re-commitment.
Mr. Williamson was in favor of the re-commitment, to give those who say they have not had an opportunity of offering their objections, time to do it; and if the motion is not agreed to, he should not give his vote for the bill: He then adverted to the objections deduced from the constitution, and explained the clause respecting monopolies as referring altogether to commercial monopolies.
Mr. Sherman objected to the re-commitment. He said that tho' the bill could not be amended without its being re-committed, yet it was open to discussion and objection previous to taking a vote on its passing. He did not think the objections offered afforded sufficient reasons for a re-commitment. He replied to the observations offered by several gentlemen who had spoken in favor of the motion.
Mr. Gerry expressed his surprize at the observations of gentlemen who had neglected to offer their objections to the bill before—and said it could only be imputed to their own neglect, and not to any precipitancy on the part of the friends of the bill.—Mr. Gerry noticed the several objections which had been offered, and said if nothing more important could be offered, he thought it would be unjustifiable in the house to go into a committee.
Mr. Madison observed that at this moment it was not of importance to determine how it has
happened that the objections which several gentlemen now say they have to offer, against the bill—were not made at the proper time—it is sufficient for them if the candor of the house should lead them now to recommit the bill, that in a committee of the whole they may have an opportunity to offer their objections.
Mr. Ames replied to Mr. Madison—he said he did not conceive that the appeal now made to the candor of the house, was in point—the gentlemen who object to the bill had an opportunity to offer their objections—the customary forms have been attended to—and the whole question for the re-commitment turns on the force of the objections which are now offered to the general principles of the bill altogether—the candor of the house he conceived was intirely out of the question, and therefore not to be appealed to, but the justice due to their constituents in the proper discharge of the duty reposed in them.—He said it appeared to him absurd to go into a committee of the whole to determine whether the bill is constitutional or not: If it is unconstitutional, that amounts to a rejection of it altogether.
Mr. Madison thought there was the greatest propriety in discussing a constitutional question in the committee of the whole.
Mr. Stone and Mr. Giles were in favor of the re-commitment: They objected to the unconstitutionality of the bill, and to several of its particular clauses.
Mr. Vining said he thought it was a subject of congratulation, that the bill was in its present situation—it had happily passed to the third reading without that tedious discussion, which bills usually receive—the subject has been a considerable time before the house, and gentlemen have had time to contemplate it—the bill is now in the stage to which gentlemen very usually reserve themselves to state their objections at large, and he hoped they would now do it—He was not perfectly satisfied as to the constitutional point—he therefore hoped gentlemen would state their objections, that those who are satisfied on that point may offer their reasons.
Mr. Boudinot stated the process of the business yesterday. He observed that he had then the honor to be in the chair, he had read the bill very distinctly and deliberately, with proper pauses; he thought that the fullest opportunity had been offered for gentlemen to come forward with their objections, he was opposed to the re-commitment, as it would he feared issue in a defeat of the bill this session; he had one difficulty however respecting the unconstitutionality of the bill, this he hoped to have removed—and he hoped that a full discussion of its general principles would take place.
The motion for a re-commitment was lost.
WEDNESDAY, Feb. 16. Sundry petitions were presented, read and referred.
The report of the Secretary at War on several petitions, which had been referred to him, was read and laid on the table.
Mr. Vining presented a memorial from a number of respectable merchants of the city of Philadelphia, praying that no additional duty be laid on goods imported from China. Read, and laid on the table.
A bill providing for the reimbursement of Capt. Joshua Barney's expences, incurred in effecting his escape from captivity, and returning to this country, was reported by the committee appointed, read a first and second time, and made the order of the day for to-morrow.
The committee appointed to enquire into the administration of the late superintendant of finance, made a report, which was read, and ordered to lie on the table.
Mr. Floyd of the committee on enrolled bills, presented the bill for the admission of the State of Vermont, into the Union—A resolution containing the regulations which printers must conform to in printing authenticated copies of the laws of the United States, pursuant to the report of the Secretary of State on the memorial of Andrew Brown, and a third to continue in force an act passed the first session of Congress, for the regulation of processes in the federal courts, all which he reported duly enrolled.
An engrossed bill for the establishment of offices to dispose of certain public lands, was read a third time, the blanks filled up, and the bill passed. The principal blank, (the price of the land) was filled up with 25 cents, hard money.
On motion of Mr. Giles, the report of the committee on the petition of George Gibson, was taken up for a second reading—and on motion for appointing a committee to bring in a bill conformable to said report—it passed in the negative.
Message from the President—read in the House of Representatives of the United States on Monday last.
United States, February 14, 1791. Gentlemen of the Senate, and House of Representatives, SOON after I was called to the administration of the government, I found it important to come to an
understanding with the court of London, on several points interesting to the United States, and particularly to know whether they were disposed to enter into arrangements, by mutual consent, which might fix the commerce between the two nations on principles of reciprocal advantage. For this purpose I authorized informal conferences with their ministers; and from these I do not infer any disposition on their part, to enter into any arrangements merely commercial. I have thought it proper to give you this information, as it might at some time have influence on matters under your consideration.
THURSDAY, Feb. 17. Mr. Sedgwick reported a bill for giving effect to the laws of the United States, within the state of Vermont—read the first and second time, and referred to a committee of the whole house to-morrow.
The petition of Joseph Nicholson—late interpreter to the six nations, in the service of the United States, praying a settlement of his account, for services—was read and referred to the Secretary of the Treasury.
The order of the day being called for, which was, to go into a committee of the whole house on the amendments proposed by the Senate to the new revenue bill,
Mr. Livermore moved that the committee of the whole should be discharged; this being seconded by Mr. Sherman,
Mr. Jackson objected to the motion as contrary to the late rule of the house for committing amendments proposed by the Senate to bills. He adverted to the amendments, to shew from their importance, the necessity of giving them a full discussion.
The question being taken, the committee was discharged.
The house then proceeded to consider said amendments—the principal part of which were agreed to, but the time did not admit of finishing the discussion this day. Adjourned.
FRIDAY, Feb. 18. A resolution for referring to a select committee the several reports on petitions and memorials from the Secretary at War, in order to preparing a bill or bills making provision in the several cases, on which the reports were in favor of the petitions, was, after a short discussion, negatived.
A message was received from the President of the United States, informing the house, that he had received from the Secretary of State, an account of the proceedings of the governor of the Western Territory, respecting certain settlements on the lands in that country.—The papers accompanying this message were read and laid on the table.
Sundry petitions were read and referred.
A message from the Senate by Mr. Secretary Otis, informed the house, that the bill for the admission of Vermont into the Union, has received the approbation and signature of the President of the United States.
The house resumed the consideration of the amendments proposed by the Senate to the new Revenue Bill.—The debates continued till after three o'clock; and an adjournment being called for, took place without completing the discussion. Adjourned till to-morrow.
WESTERN TERRITORY.
PRAY what's the worth of any thing, But as much money as 'twill bring?" A maxim old as Hudibras , And plain as nose on human face; But now the States have lands for sale, This ancient maxim's found to fail; Those lands expos'd to sale for paper, (In fact a very curious caper) Will, when its value's less than gold, Be for that paper only, sold— But up to par —aye, there's the case— The rule assumes a different face: Thus by inversion, new and strange, This rule of common sense, we change; For lands, so learned Sages sing, Are worth much less than they will bring.
PRICE CURRENT.—PUBLIC SECURITIES.
Table with 4 columns: Security Type, Funded Debt (pr. £), Unfunded Debt (pr. £), and Price per cent. Rows include 6 pr. Cents, 3 pr. Cents, Deferred 6 pr. Cents, Final Settl. and other Certificates, Indents, N. and S. Carolina debts.
LAURA and MARY, though a good performance, is not exactly calculated for this paper.
HENRY KUHL,
No. 143, North Second-Street.
FROM an expectation that a mutual advantage would be derived by the dealers in public securities, and a person who should undertake to transact such business on commission only, has concluded to offer himself for that purpose. Being of opinion, that every requisite to convince them and others of his disinterestedness ought to be attended to on his part, he has duly made oath before the Hon. the Chief Justice of the State of Pennsylvania, that he will faithfully execute the trusts which may be reposed in him.
COPY OF THE OATH.
"I Henry Kuhl, of the city of Philadelphia, stock broker, do swear, that I will not be concerned either directly or indirectly, on my own account, in any purchases or sales of the evidences of the debt of the United States or of particular States, but will truly and faithfully execute such purchases and sales on commission only for those who may employ me: that is to say, until I shall announce in one or more of the newspapers printed at the seat of the government of the United States, my determination to the contrary. HENRY KUHL."
Sworn at Philadelphia, February 12th, 1791, before THOMAS M'KEAN."
The commissions he will charge for the present, are— On the specic amount of all sums below 5000 nominal dollars, one half per cent. on do. from 5000 to 10,000 do. one fourth per cent. on do. from 10,000 and upwards do. one eighth per cent. Accounts stated, and certificates funded at the Treasury or Loan-Office of the United States, on moderate terms. N. B. All orders for purchases or sales to be in writing. Philadelphia, February 19, 1791. (85 t. f.)

Report of the Secretary of the Treasury, on the subject of a MINT.
(CONTINUED.)
SIR ISAAC NEWTON, in a representation to the Treasury of Great-Britain, in the year 1717, after stating the particular proportions in the different countries of Europe, concludes thus — “ By the course of trade and exchange between nation and nation, in all Europe, fine gold is to fine silver as 14 4-5 or 15 to 1.”
But however accurate and decisive this authority may be deemed, in relation to the period, to which it applies, it cannot be taken, at the distance of more than seventy years, as a rule for determining the existing proportion. Alterations have been since made, in the regulations of their coins by several nations; which, as well as the course of trade, have an influence upon the market values. Nevertheless, there is reason to believe, that the state of the matter, as represented by Sir Isaac Newton, is not very remote from its actual state.
In Holland, the greatest money market of Europe, gold was to silver in December 1789, as 1 to 14.88; and in that of London it has been for some time past but little different, approaching perhaps, something nearer 1 to 15.
It has been seen, that the existing proportion, between the two metals in this country, is about as 1 to 15.
It is fortunate in this respect, that the innovations of the Spanish mint have imperceptibly introduced a proportion so analogous, as this is, to that which prevails among the principal commercial nations; as it greatly facilitates a proper regulation of the matter.
This proportion of 1 to 15 is recommended by the particular situation of our trade, as being very nearly that which obtains in the market of Great-Britain, to which nation our specie is principally exported. A lower rate for either of the metals, in our market, than in theirs, might not only afford a motive the more in certain cases to remit in specie rather than in commodities; but it might, in some others, cause us to pay a greater quantity of it for a given sum, than we should otherwise do. If the effect should rather be to occasion a premium to be given for the metal, which was under-rated, this would obviate those disadvantages; but it would involve another, a customary difference between the market and legal proportions, which would amount to a species of disorder in the national coinage.
Looking forward to the payments of interest hereafter to be made to Holland, the same proportion does not appear ineligible. The present legal proportion in the coins of Holland, is stated at 1 to 14 9-10. That of the market varies somewhat at different times, but seldom very widely from this point.
There can hardly be a better rule, in any country, for the legal, than the market proportion; if this can be supposed to have been produced by the free and steady course of commercial principles. The presumption, in such case, is, that each metal finds its true level, according to its intrinsic utility, in the general system of money operations.
But it must be admitted, that this argument in favor of continuing the existing proportion, is not applicable to the state of the coins with us. There have been too many artificial and heterogeneous ingredients, too much want of order in the pecuniary transactions of this country, to authorize the attributing the effects, which have appeared, to the regular operations of commerce. A proof of this is to be drawn from the alterations, which have happened in the proportion between the metals merely by the successive degradations of the dollar, in consequence of the mutability of a foreign mint. The value of gold to silver appears to have declined, wholly from this cause, from 15 6-10 to about 15 to 1. Yet as this last proportion, however produced, coincides so nearly with what may be deemed the commercial average, it may be supposed to furnish as good a rule as can be pursued.
The only question seems to be, whether the value of gold ought not to be a little lowered to bring it to a more exact level with the two markets which have been mentioned. But as the ratio of 1 to 15 is so nearly conformable to the state of those markets, and best agrees with that of our own, it will probably be found the most eligible. If the market of Spain continues to give a higher value to gold (as it has done in time past) than that which is recommended, there may be some advantage in a middle station.
A further preliminary to the adjustment of the future money unit, is to determine what shall be the proportion and composition of alloy in each species of the coins.
The first, by the resolution of the 8th of August, 1786, before referred to, is regulated at one twelfth, or in other words, at 1 part alloy to 11 parts fine, whether gold or silver; which appears to be a convenient rule; unless there should be some collateral consideration, which may dictate a departure from it. Its correspondence, in regard to both metals, is a recommendation of it, because a difference could answer no purpose of pecuniary or commercial utility, and uniformity is favorable to order.
This ratio, as it regards gold, coincides with the proportion, real or professed, in the coins of Portugal, England, France and Spain. In those of the two former it is real, in those of the two latter there is a deduction for what is called remedy of weight and alloy , which is in the nature of an allowance to the master of the mint for errors and imperfections in the process; rendering the coin either lighter or baser than it ought to be. The same thing is known in the theory of the English mint, where 1-6 of a carat is allowed. But the difference seems to be, that there it is merely an occasional indemnity within a certain limit, for real and unavoidable errors and imperfections; whereas in the practice of the mints of France and Spain, it appears to amount to a stated and regular deviation from the nominal standard. Accordingly the real standards of France and Spain are something worse than 22 carats or 11 parts in 12 fine.
The principal gold coins in Germany, Holland, Sweden, Denmark, Poland and Italy, are finer than those of England and Portugal in different degrees from 1 carat and 1-4 to 1 carat and 7-8, which last is within 1-8 of a carat of pure gold.
There are similar diversities in the standards of the silver coins of the different countries of Europe. That of Great-Britain is 222 parts fine to 18 alloy; those of the other European nations vary from that of Great-Britain as widely as from about 17 of the same parts better to 75 worse.
The principal reasons assigned for the use of alloy, are the saving of expence in the refining of the metals (which in their natural state are usually mixed with a portion of the coarser kinds) and the rendering of them harder as a security against too great waste by friction and wearing. The first reason, drawn from the original composition of the metals, is strengthened at present by the practice of alloying their coins, which has obtained among so many nations. The reality of the effect, to which the last reason is applicable, has been denied, and experience has been appealed to as proving, that the more alloyed coins wear faster than the purer. The true state of this matter may be worthy of future investigation, though first appearances are in favor of alloy. In the mean time, the saving of trouble and expence are sufficient inducements to following those examples which suppose its expediency. And the same considerations lead to taking as our models those nations with whom we have most intercourse, and whose coins are most prevalent in our circulation: These are Spain, Portugal, England and France. The relation which the proposed proportion bears to their gold coins, has been explained. In respect to their silver coins, it will not be very remote from the mean of their several standards.
The component ingredients of the alloy in each metal will also require to be regulated. In silver, copper is the only kind in use, and it is doubtless the only proper one. In gold, there is a mixture of silver and copper; in the English coins consisting of equal
parts, in the coins of some countries varying from 1-3 to 2-3 silver.
The reason of this union of silver with copper is this—The silver counteracts the tendency of the copper to injure the color or beauty of the coin, by giving it too much redness, or rather a coppery hue; which a small quantity will produce; and the copper prevents the too great whiteness, which silver alone would confer. It is apprehended, that there are considerations, which may render it prudent to establish by law, that the proportion of silver to copper in the gold coins of the United States shall not be more than one half, nor less than one third; vesting a discretion in some proper place to regulate the matter within those limits, as experience in the execution may recommend.
A third point remains to be discussed, as a pre-requisite to the determination of the money unit, which is, whether the expence of coining shall be defrayed by the public, or out of the material itself; or, as it is sometimes stated, whether coinage shall be free, or shall be subject to a duty or imposition? This forms, perhaps, one of the nicest questions in the doctrine of money.
The practice of different nations is dissimilar in this particular. In England, coinage is said to be entirely free: the mint price of the metals in bullion, being the same with the value of them in coin. In France there is a duty which has been, if it is not now, eight per cent. In Holland there is a difference between the mint price and the value in the coins, which has been computed at .96, or something less than one per cent. upon gold; at 1.48, or something less than one and a half per cent. upon silver. The resolution of the 8th of August, 1786, proceeds upon the idea of a deduction of half per cent. from gold, and of two per cent. from silver, as an indemnification for the expence of coining. This is inferred from a report of the late board of treasury, upon which that resolution appears to have been founded.
Upon the supposition that the expence of coinage ought to be defrayed out of the metals, there are two ways in which it may be effected; one by a reduction of the quantity of fine gold and silver in the coins; the other by establishing a difference between the value of those metals, in the coins, and the mint price of them in bullion.
The first method appears to the Secretary inadmissible. He is unable to distinguish an operation of this sort, from that of raising the denomination of the coin; a measure which has been disapproved of by the wisest men of the nations in which it has been practised, and condemned by the rest of the world. To declare that a less weight of gold or silver shall pass for the same sum, which before represented a greater weight, or to ordain that the same weight shall pass for a greater sum, are things substantially of one nature. The consequence of either of them, if the change can be realized, is to degrade the money unit; obliging creditors to receive less than their just dues—and depreciating property of every kind: for it is manifest, that every thing would in this case be represented by a less quantity of gold and silver, than before.
It is sometimes observed on this head, that though any article of property might in fact be represented by a less actual quantity of pure metal, it would nevertheless be represented by something of the same intrinsic value. Every fabric, it is remarked, is worth intrinsically, the price of the raw material and the expence of fabrication; a truth not less applicable to a piece of coin, than to a yard of cloth.
This position, well founded in itself, is here misapplied. It supposes that the coins now in circulation, are to be considered as bullion, or in other words, as a raw material. But the fact is, that the adoption of them, as money, has caused them to become the fabric. It has invested them with the character and office of coins, and has given them a sanction and efficacy equivalent to that of the stamp of the sovereign. The prices of all our commodities, at home and abroad, and of all foreign commodities in our markets, have found their level, in conformity to this principle. The foreign coins may be divested of the privileges they have hitherto been permitted to enjoy, and may of course be left to find their value in the markets as a raw material. But the quantity of gold and silver in the national coins, corresponding with a given sum, cannot be made less than heretofore, without disturbing the balance of intrinsic value; and making every acre of land, as well as every bushel of wheat, of less actual worth than in time past. If the United States were insulated, and cut off from all intercourse with the rest of mankind, this reasoning would not be equally conclusive. But it appears decisive, when considered with a view to the relations, which commerce has created between us and other countries.
It is however not improbable, that the effect meditated would be defeated by a rise of prices proportioned to the diminution of the intrinsic value of the coins. This might be looked for in every enlightened commercial country; but perhaps in none with greater certainty than this; because, in none are men less liable to be the dupes of sounds—in none has authority so little resource for substituting names to things.
A general revolution in prices, though only nominally, and in appearance, could not fail to distract the ideas of the community, and would be apt to breed discontent as well among all those who live on the income of their money, as among the poorer classes of the people, to whom the necessaries of life would seem to have become dearer. In the confusion of such a state of things, ideas of value would not improbably adhere to the old coins, which from that circumstance, instead of feeling the effect of the loss of their privileges as money, would perhaps bear a price in the markets relatively to the new ones, in exact proportion to weight. The frequency of the demand for the metals to pay foreign balances would contribute to this effect.
Among the evils, attendant on such an operation, are these—creditors both of the public and of individuals would lose a part of their property—public and private credit would receive a wound—the effective revenues of the government would be diminished. There is scarcely any point, in the economy of national affairs of greater moment, than the uniform preservation of the intrinsic value of the money unit. On this the security and steady value of property essentially depend.
The second method, therefore, of defraying the expence of the coinage out of the metals, is greatly to be preferred to the other. This is to let the same sum of money continue to represent in the new coins exactly the same quantity of gold and silver, as it does in those now current—to allow at the mint such a price only for these metals as will admit of profit just sufficient to satisfy the expence of coinage—to abolish the legal currency of foreign coins, both in public and private payments—and of course to leave the superior utility of the national coins, for domestic purposes, to operate the difference of market value, which is necessary to induce the bringing of bullion to the mint. In this case, all property and labour will still be represented by the same quantity of gold and silver, as formerly; and the only change which will be wrought, will consist in annexing the office of money exclusively to the national coins; consequently, withdrawing it from those of foreign countries, and suffering them to become, as they ought to be, mere articles of merchandise.
The arguments in favor of a regulation of this kind are—First, That the want of it is a cause of extra expence: there being then no motive of individual interest to distinguish between the national coins and bullion, they are, it is alleged, indiscriminately melted down, for domestic manufactures, and exported for the purposes of foreign trade; and it is added that when the coins become light by wearing, the same quantity of fine gold or silver bears a higher price in bullion than in the coins; in which state of things the melting down of the coins to be sold as bullion is attended with profit; and from both causes the expence of the mint, or in other words, the expence of maintaining the specie capital of the nation, is materially augmented.
Secondly—That the existence of such a regulation promotes a favorable course of exchange, and benefits trade, not only by that
circumstance, but by obliging foreigners, in certain cases, to pay dearer for domestic commodities, and to sell their own cheaper.
As far as relates to the tendency of a free coinage to produce an encrease of expence, in the different ways that have been stated, the argument must be allowed to have foundation, both in reason and experience. It describes what has been exemplified in Great-Britain.
The effect of giving an artificial value to bullion, is not at first sight obvious; but it actually happened at the period immediately preceding the late reformation, in the gold coin of the country just named. A pound troy in gold bullion of standard fineness, was then from 19s. 6d. to 25s. sterl. dearer than an equal weight of guineas, as delivered at the mint. The phenomenon is thus accounted for—the old guineas were more than two per cent. lighter than their standard weight . This weight therefore, in bullion, was truly worth two per cent. more than those guineas. It consequently had in respect to them, a correspondent rise in the market.
And as guineas were then current by tale , the new ones, as they issued from the mint, were confounded in circulation with the old ones; and by the association, were deprecated below the intrinsic value, in comparison with bullion. It became of course a profitable traffic to sell bullion for coin, to select the light pieces, and reissue them in currency, and to melt down the heavy ones, and sell them again as bullion. This practice, besides other inconveniences, cost the government large sums, in the renewal of the coins.
[To be continued.]
New Line of Stages.
THE Subscriber has established a line of STAGES from Hartford to Boston, by way of Norwich and Providence, which will run thro' twice a week during the Winter Season, and three times a week during the Summer Season.
Good Carriages, Horses, and careful Drivers are provided. Passengers pay three Pence per Mile, and are allowed 14 pound Baggage each.—Extra Baggage pays at the rate of three Pence per Mile for every 150 wt. As the Mail is to go in these Stages for the year 1791, fixed hours for starting from the respective Stage Houses is absolutely necessary—from which there can be no deviation.
Norwich, Dec. 14, 1790.
The Stage for the Eastward leaves Hartford—Mondays and Thursdays, Norwich—Tuesdays and Fridays, Providence—Wednesdays and Saturdays, For the Westward, leaves Boston—Mondays and Thursdays, Providence—Tuesdays and Fridays, Norwich—Wednesdays and Saturdays. JESSE BROWN. 69—1w3m
INFORMATION WANTED.
THE Subscriber requests, if any gentleman can give him information of a purchase of Lands made by a Mr. Daniel Richardet, in the year 1781 and 1782, in some part of the United States, he will be so kind as to inform his Brother, by directing a line to him, at the Printer's office. S. RICHARDET. January, 1791.
THE Copartnership of HEWES and ANTHONY having expired the 31st ultimo, they request those, who have any demands, to exhibit their accounts and receive their money; and those who are indebted, are desired to make speedy payment, to either of the Subscribers, at their Compting-House, No. 5, Chesnut-Street-Wharf. JOSIAH HEWES, JOSEPH ANTHONY. Philadelphia, Jan. 15, 1791.
N. B. They have yet on hand, and for SALE, at their STORE abovementioned,
HYSON, Souchong, and Bohea TEAS, Three cases Caffa, Pimento in bags, Martinico Coffee, Muscovado Sugar, A few Cates old Batavia Arrack, One cask of Durham Mufard, New England Rum in hogheads and barrels, A quantity of prime Boston Beef, Spermaceti, right whale and tanners' Oil, Best pickled Mackerel, 6 by 8—7 by 9—8 by 10—9 by 11—and 10 by 12 Window Glass, A quantity of excellent carrot Tobacco, And an elegant CHANDELIER. (2aw6w.)
MANUEL NOAH,
BROKER,
No. 91, Race-Street, between Second and Third-Streets,
BUYS and SELLS
Continental & State Certificates,
Pennsylvania and Jersey Paper Money, And all kinds of SECURITIES of the United States, or of any particular State. Philadelphia, Feb. 1790.
TO BE SOLD,
THE SEAT OF THE LATE GOVERNOR LIVINGSTON,
situate about a mile from Elizabeth-Town, on the public road to Morris Town. The farm contains between 90 and 100 acres of land, 15 or 20 acres of which are wood land; there is also appertaining to the said farm about 19 acres of salt meadow. Particular attention having been paid to the cultivation of fruit; there is on the farm a very large collection of various kinds of the choicest fruit trees, &c. in full bearing; the house is large, convenient, well built and in very good repair.
Enquire of the Printer, for further particulars.
New-York, Jan. 1791.
80 3m
IMPERIAL, HYSON, SOUCHONG, and BOHEA
TEAS;
REFINED SUGARS, COFFEE, and SPICES, &c.
Of the first Quality—by Retail,
No. 17,
Third-Street, between Chesnut and Market-Streets.
N. B. A few TICKETS in the New-York Lottery, which is to be drawn the first of April next, for sale.
TREASURY DEPARTMENT,
JANUARY 25, 1791.
THE Public Creditors are reminded that, in order to the proper dispositions for paying the Interest in the several States, it is necessary that the amount to be paid in each should be previously known at the Treasury. And as the expiration of the first quarter is not far distant, it is wished that those who have not yet done it, may be expeditious in making and signifying their election, pursuant to the act making provision for the debt of the United States.