The national intelligencer and Washington advertiser. (Washington City [D.C.]), 1808-02-01 00:00:00

National Intelligencer.
WASHINGTON ADVERTISER.
VOL. VIII.
WASHINGTON CITY, PRINTED BY SAMUEL HARRISON SMITH, PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE.
NO. 1139.
FIVE DOLLARS PER ANNUM.
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 1, 1808.
PAID IN ADVANCE.
CONGRESS.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
DEBATE.
On the Resolution for requesting the President to cause an enquiry to be made into the conduct of General Wilkinson.
(CONTINUED.)
MONDAY, JAN. 11.
Mr. RANDOLPH having moved the consideration of his resolution,
Mr. CLARK laid upon the table his affidavit accompanying his communication of information touching the conduct of Gen. Wilkinson.
Mr. ROWAN proposed the following resolution, Mr. Randolph having withdrawn his resolution to make way for it:
Resolved, That a special committee be appointed to enquire into the conduct of Brigadier general Wilkinson, in relation to his having, at any time whilst in the service of the United States, corruptly received money from the government of Spain or its agents; and that the said committee have power to send for persons and papers, and compel their attendance and production; and that they report the result of their enquiry to this house.
Mr. BACON said notwithstanding the evidence which had just been read, he would give the reasons why he could not yet vote for this House to act in any manner on this subject, more especially as proposed by this resolution. It was not to be concealed that the impressions made upon his mind by the statement of the gentleman from New Orleans, were very considerable; but the impressions which that or any other statement were calculated to make were very different from the question of what it was their duty to do in relation to it. He hoped that they would not be so much impressed by it (for it contained a great deal he must confess) as to suffer it to impel them into a path wide of their constitutional limits. He did not mean to express a definite sentiment as to the guilt or innocence of the officer involved; he would not under the privilege of his seat, on the one hand, blazon the merits of General Wilkinson to the world, nor on the other declare that he had sufficient evidence of his guilt; he would leave it to the unbiased decision of the proper tribunal.
He observed the other day and would now repeat it that it was not within their power to adopt the resolution then under consideration or that now offered by the gentleman from Kentucky. He then and now conceived that the offence with which General Wilkinson was charged, might be cognizable by more than one department—certainly by the Executive, from his being a military officer. He could say nothing about the enquiry now instituted one way or the other for if the constitution did not authorize them to complete an enquiry they had no right to interfere with it, being the exclusive province of the Executive. It struck him further, that if the facts in this statement should be proven on a full examination to be true (and he did not call its correctness in question for he had heard the same things from other people) he could not see why it was not a case cognizable by a judicial trial. The constitution expressly forbids any person holding an office under the United States to take a pension or donation from a foreign power. The act of receiving money from a foreign power therefore, the charge made against General Wilkinson, was a crime against the supreme law of the land, and cognizable by the judicial authority. If therefore, said Mr. B. we could as proposed instruct, request, or in any manner interfere with the Executive with respect to that portion of the enquiry which appertains peculiarly to the Executive, as the only power competent to remove this officer, why may we not in the same manner interfere with the jurisdiction or cognizance of the supreme court? He could see no dif-
ference; with equal justice they could interfere with one as with the other.
Gentlemen who were in favor of an enquiry in this form could not have considered the subject so maturely as they ought. This was a government of distributive powers. One class had been delegated to the representative body, one to the Executive, and another to the judiciary. If they once began each to invade the other's jurisdiction, the distributive system was destroyed. It has been said, observed Mr. B. that we are the representatives of the people, that it is our duty to see that the republic take no harm. This expression was calculated perhaps to captivate the public ear and acquire popularity as well as to captivate the House; but whatever they might think of what ought to have been provided, they ought to consider what was. I do not think, said Mr. B. because we may on this or any other occasion suppose that we could do a great deal of good, we ought to take any steps towards effecting an object until we contemplate our particular powers in relation to that object. It has been said that this House is the grand inquest of the nation; I do not know what is meant by this expression; but if I understand the meaning of the term, it conveys the same meaning as grand jury. Now Mr. B. said he could not agree to any position that this House was legitimately on general subjects the grand inquest of the nation. With respect to impeachments, and in that case alone were they the grand jury, for then the two Houses acted in a judicial capacity, this House being the grand inquest to inquire, and the Senate being the petit jury to judge of their presentment. Now, if this House were the grand inquest to enquire into this or a similar case in which an enquiry might seem to be conducive to the interest of the nation, and were to present a result, where was the jury to judge of the truth of their verdict? Was it to be tried by the Senate? That was not pretended to be the course.
On all these accounts, therefore, whatever was this impression which the paper the morning laid on the table might be calculated to produce in their minds, he thought they ought sedulously to attend to the constitutional limits of their duty, and not conclude, merely because they might in any case act beneficially that they had the power to act in such case.
He had before observed that he would not express an opinion; but he would say that an enquiry ought to be had; it will, it must be had, and it must be a full and impartial enquiry. If the enquiry which had been instituted were but the semblance of an enquiry, for one it would not satisfy him, or the people or the nation; it ought not to satisfy them. Gentlemen had said that a military court of enquiry would not be competent. Mr. B. did not know what might be their particular power as to sending for persons; but if that court had not sufficient power, it was in the power of the House to clothe it with that power; he thought they might, though he would not say that they ought to do this. As a court of enquiry might have or could be clothed with this power; and, advertising to what he had before said, that it was a case cognizable by a judicial tribunal; and if so that a judicial tribunal had all power that this House could exercise in any criminal case, and more than they had in this; he should vote against every resolution going to express a conviction that this House had any power or right whatever to act on a subject solely within the constitutional right of the Executive or judiciary.
Mr. RANDOLPH said, if the gentleman just sat down, had not given his hasty impressions, but left his good understanding free to operate, his objections to the resolution would have vanished. The great mistake made by every gentleman who opposed this measure on constitutional grounds was this: that they looked upon an enquiry made by this House through the organ of one of its committees as leading to the punishment of the individual implicated, and that where this House was not competent to inflict punishment, it was incompetent to make enquiry—this was the great stumbling-block which had impeded their apprehension. But he would ask the gentleman from Massachusetts whether this House was
not competent to make an enquiry for its own legislative guidance? Was it not competent, as well in its capacity of supervisor of the public peace, as to obtain a guide for its own actions, to enquire into this matter? Was not the House clothed with the power of disbanding the army? Now, suppose a committee of the House upon enquiry were to report perhaps that not only the commander in chief, but the whole mass of the army were tainted with foreign corruption, or were abettors of domestic treason—could any man assign to himself a stronger reason than this for breaking an army on the spot? Did not the gentleman know or rather did he not feel that this House had the right of refusing the supplies necessary for the army—and could a stronger reason be given for a refusal to pass the military appropriation bill, than that they were nourishing an institution which threatened our existence as a free and happy people? Let me, said Mr. R. if it is in order, ask the gentleman from Massachusetts to turn his attention to the proceeding of which we have official notice in another branch of the National Legislature—an enquiry into the conduct of one of its own members. Did they not all know that that man's offence was punishable by a civil tribunal? But the enquiry was not there made with a view to a trial, not to usurp the powers of the judiciary, but to direct that body in the exercise of its acknowledged legislative functions. Inasmuch as they possessed the power to expel one of their own members, to amputate the diseased limb, they possessed the power and exercised it to make an enquiry. Now the gentleman from Kentucky had just as much right to institute an enquiry which might lead to the exercise of the legislative powers of this House which might cause the disbanding of the present army, the erection of another or the refusal of supplies—as to institute an enquiry into the conduct of a member with a view to his expulsion, or of an Executive officer with a view to impeach him before the Senate.
Mr. R. therefore presumed that any enquiry which this House might choose to make into the conduct of any officer, civil or military, was not an interference with the powers of any of the co-ordinate branches of government; they were left free to move in their own orbits. If a crime had been committed against the statute law of the United States by such officer, the judiciary were as free to punish it, as it was free to punish a member of this House into whose conduct, upon suspicion of treason or misdemeanor, enquiry had been made with a view to his expulsion. The Executive likewise was left free to exercise his discretion: he was left free to dismiss this officer, to enquire into his conduct himself, either with his own eyes or ears, or by a military court—to appraise or censure.
Did they take possession of the body of this officer by an enquiry into his conduct? Did they interfere with the court of enquiry now on foot, but totally incompetent to the object? Gentlemen indeed had said that if that court did not possess the power of compelling the attendance of witnesses, we might clothe it with that power. In expressing this opinion the gentleman from Massachusetts had not been more considerate than in expressing his first opinion. Could any one conceive a more dreadful or terrible instrument of persecution than a military court clothed with the power to coerce the evidence and the production of papers of private citizens? Clothe them with this power, said Mr. R. and there is not a man in the United States who may not be compelled to go at whatsoever season to the remotest garrison on whatsoever trifling occasion at the will of a court martial, or a court of enquiry leading to the establishment of a court martial.
In the course of the present year Mr. R. said it had been his lot to receive, from no dubious or suspicious source, information touching—not to be sure the immediate subject on which an enquiry had been moved by the gentleman from Kentucky, but one intimately and closely connected with it. He meant the project, thro' the instrumentality of the army of the
U.S. to dismember the union; and he had no hesitation in saying, and it had been the opinion of a large majority, if not of every one of those of whom he had been a colleague, that the army of the U.S. was tainted with that disease; and that, so far from the army of the U.S. having the credit of suppressing that project, the moment it was found that the courage of that army had failed, the project was abandoned by those who had undertaken it—because the agency of the army was the whole pivot on which that plot had turned! This was in evidence before the Grand Jury who had the subject in cognizance last spring. He said that these conspirators were caressed at the different posts of the U.S. in their way down the river, and by officers of no small rank—that they received arms from them, and the principal part of the arms these men had with them, was taken from the public stores; and under a knowledge of these circumstances was he not justified in the belief that the whole army of the U.S. was connected in the project? He did not mean every individual, for there were some who could not be trusted, and some who were at posts too far distant to be reached. That those who were confidants of the commander in chief were interested in the conspiracy, no man who knew any thing of the circumstances could doubt. He therefore thought that the resolution moved by the gentleman from Kentucky was every way reasonable: indeed he did not know whether the resolution should not be so varied as to embrace not only a charge of that nature, but all whatsoever.
Before he sat down he should have it in his power to give to the House something certainly very much resembling evidence in support of the justice of his suspicions on this subject. On the 26th of January last the House would perceive by the journals a message was received from the President of the U.S. "transmitting further information touching an illegal combination," &c. printed by order of the House, and which he now held in his hand. In this message is contained the following affidavit:
"I James Wilkinson, Brigadier General and Commander in Chief of the army of the United States, to warrant the arrest of Samuel Swartwout, James Alexander, Esq. and Peter V. Ogden, on a charge of treason, misprision of treason, or such other offence against the government and laws of the United States as the following facts may legally charge them with, on the honor of a soldier, and on the holy Evangelists of Almighty God—do declare and swear, that in the beginning of the month of October last, when in command at Natchitoches, a stranger was introduced to me by col. Cushing, by the name of Swartwout, who a few minutes after the Colonel retired from the room slipped into my hand a letter of formal introduction from col. Burr, of which the following is a correct copy:
"Philadelphia, 25th July, 1806. "Dear Sir,
"Mr. Swartwout, the brother of col. S. of New York, being on his way down the Mississippi, and presuming that he may pass you at some post on the river, has requested of me a letter of introduction, which I give with pleasure, as he is a most amiable young man, and highly respectable from his character and connections. I pray you to afford him any friendly offices which his situation may require, and beg you to pardon the trouble which this may give you.
"With entire respect, "Your friend & obedient servant, "A. BURR.
"His Excellency "General Wilkinson."
"Together with a packet which he informed me he was charged by the same person to deliver me in private. This packet contained a letter in cypher from col. Burr, of which the following is substantially as fair an interpretation as I have heretofore been able to make, the original of which I hold in my possession."
Mr. Randolph said he should certainly have abstained from noticing the circumstance he was about to mention, and which he had believed to be of general notoriety, had it not been that, within a very few days past, a gentleman (with whom Mr. R. was in habits of intimacy, and whose means of informa-
tion were as good as those of any member of the House) to his utter surprise informed Mr. R. that he was totally ignorant of the fact.
Mr. R. said he held in his hand an actual interpretation of this cypher letter which was made in the grand jury room at Richmond, by three members of that body, for their use and in their presence—and it was necessary here to state that so extremely delicate was gen. W. that he refused to leave the papers in possession of the Grand Jury: whenever the Jury met, they were put into their hands, and whenever they rose, the witness was called up and received them back again. Here was a copy rather a different one from that which "on the honor of a soldier and on the holy Evangelists of Almighty God" was as fair an interpretation as gen. W. was able to make. A comparison of the two would throw a little light on the subject. In the printed copy of last session might be read "I (Aaron Burr) have actually commenced the enterprize—Detachments from different points," &c. In the original the words had been scratched out with a knife so as to cut the paper—"I have actually commenced"—not the enterprize, but "the Eastern detachments." Now mark; by changing the word Eastern into enterprize , and moving the full stop so as to separate Eastern from its substantive detachments , the important fact was lost, that, as there were Eastern detachments under col. Burr, there must have been western detachments under somebody else! Now, with a dictionary in his hand could any man change "Eastern" into "enterprize," and move the full stop after an exertion of the best of his ability? Again: the printed copy says "every thing internal and external favors views;" the original has it "favors our views." The word "our" perhaps could not be found in any English dictionary! The printed version says again "The project [this is the best interpretation upon oath which a party who had never suffered the papers to go out of his hand could make] is brought to the point so long desired." The real interpretation is "The project, my dear friend, is brought to the point so long desired."
Mr. R. said, exclusive of other and direct evidence, tending to shew the dependence which these conspirators put on the army of the U.S. and that it was eventually their sole hope and support, and that the moment they found they were to be deprived of it, they changed their purpose—exclusive of this, and that the conspirators were received at Massac and the other forts below, and of their there getting arms & stores, there was something in this suppression of words in the letter that spoke to his mind more forcibly than volumes of evidence, the implication of a man, who, had he been innocent, would have given all the evidence in any letter he professed to interpret. This suppression did certainly convey to the mind of Mr. R. an impression, which he had never attempted to conceal, of the guilt not only of the principal but of many of the inferior officers of the army. But guilt is always short-sighted and infatuated. Not content with that dubious sort of faith which it might sometimes acquire when not brought to the trial, it had attempted not only to occupy the middle ground of doubt and suspicion, but to clothe itself with the reputation of the fairest characters in the country, and in so doing, had torn the last shred of concealment from its own deformity. It stood now exposed to the whole people of the U.S.; and he left the House to say, whether they would shut their eyes and ears, as they had been almost invited to do, against conviction.
Mr. SMITH wished to know of the gentleman from Virginia whether there was not a motion before the grand jury to find a bill against general Wilkinson?
Mr. RANDOLPH said he had introduced this subject in order to suggest to the gentleman from Kentucky the propriety of modifying or amending his resolution. He would now give the information required by the gentleman from Pennsylvania and hoped he should not be considered as intruding on the time of the House in so doing.
There was before the grand jury a motion to present general Wilkinson for misprision of treason. This mo-
(Continued on last page.)

Continued from last page. cians who expect pay for doing right.
I come now said Mr. T. to my second grand objection to this measure—that it will interfere also with the judiciary department of our government. Treason and perjury have been alleged against this individual, by what tribunal are these crimes cognizable? Certainly by the courts of law. The constitution has guaranteed to every citizen the right of a fair and impartial trial by his peers, a jury unbiased by his countrymen—will right this be preserved to General W. after the denunciatory speeches which have been uttered on this floor are published? will this right be preserved to him, when the whole continent has been researched not only for all that Burr could collect, but for a new enlistment, a host of witnesses against this man. Your committee of denunciation collects the testimony, the committee makes report of the whole to this House and it is published. I say, will not this be prejudging the man, and condemning him, before he has been brought before your judicial tribunal, to which he is amenable if guilty of all that has been urged against him on this floor? After such a proceeding would there be a possibility of this man's obtaining a fair trial, of his enjoying that right which is secured to him by the sacred provisions of the constitution, and which even in a country far less jealous of the liberties of the citizen than ours ought to be, he would have secured to him?
I come now said Mr. T. to my third objection to this measure—and which is nearly allied to the last—and that is, that in our military courts too you deprive this man of a fair trial. Every observation I have made in respect to the right of a fair trial by jury, I contend applies equally strong to the trials in our military courts. But this man is a soldier, he is commander in chief of your standing army, therefore he is fair game—therefore we must hunt him down. Let us see what power the constitution gives us in this respect—we have the power of disbanding the army at any time by denying the vote of supplies—we are forbidden to part with that power for a longer term than for two years, we can then disband the army, in its climax of misconduct and disaffection, in spite of the Executive. Mr. T. asked was this the object at present? If it was, why did not the gentlemen make the terms of their resolution wide enough to embrace the whole army? But he gave them the credit due to their candor—they drove openly and above board at the man.
There was another power given to the Legislature of the United States by our constitution—to pass laws for the regulation and government of the army. Had this power been exercised? It had. Had the Legislature been restricted in the severity of the laws enacted for this body of men? They would see by looking over them. Mr. T. said he had looked over them. One hundred and one articles were contained in the statute book, every one of which (except about half a dozen) were distinct definitions of crimes. Of the statute book he wished to speak respectfully; the severity of this code might be necessary; but duty compelled him to speak of as he found it. It would seem as if the Legislature in penning this law had borrowed the pen of Draco, dipped in blood. Every step they took from article to article, was marked with blood—with scourges and with death. No less than 16 definitions were there contained of crimes capital and punishable with loss of life. After having armed the courts which, said Mr. T. are appointed to sit in judgement on these soldiers (and remember that not only the standing army, but the militia also are at times subject to these rules,) with the power of life and death, placed in their hands the scourge, the halter, and the musket, for lacerating and destroying the infactors of these articles, the legislature, with all this severity, tempered the whole with one divine, one beneficent principle.—This box of Pandora contains hope—the hope of a fair, impartial and unbiased trial, by their comrades, by their peers. But this hope, by your present resolution, is proposed to be destroyed—as if the gloom around the arrested soldier was not sufficiently dark, you now are about to establish a precedent, which whenever used will shut out every gleam of light. Would it be surprising that men thus proscribed, marked out as the fit objects on which to pour out your vials of wrath, should in time become disaffected, should turn their arms against their country? Yes, by the course proposed you prejudice a citizen—you mark your victim. What despotism can be worse than this?
The pious parliament of England who brought Cromwell into power did this very thing. They were not content with the uncertainty of the proceedings of the criminal courts of that day—They appointed a committee, (as is proposed now, Sir) a court of high commissions, to take care that the courts of law and the military courts, should let none go whom they had marked for destruction. How did this business end? The very pious and country-loving parliament who were so intent upon the public good as to break down and trample on every opposing impediment either of law, religion or morality, and all for the public safety (the very motive we hear now urged) were kicked out by Cromwell, and that very army they had supported at one time, and proscribed at another, and were sent according to the language of that day, to seek the Lord elsewhere. And their degradation produced gratuities from every part of the commonwealth to the protector, and confirmed him in as absolute power as the emperor of the French by similar means has at this day acquired.
Why should I go back, said he, to the days of Cromwell. The effects of the mistake in this respect of a gallant and infatuated nation now exist. History need not record it for our instruction; the fatal error happened in our time. It would be too painful to travel from step to step, and detail the whole of the misfortunes of this gallant people. I will take, I think, the most interesting incident in the French revolution. The point of time which decided that France was not to be a republic. The Girondists, who were the most enlightened, the most virtuous, perhaps the only real republicans in France—denounced Marat. Marat and his friends made head against their opponents and in turn denounced them. Marat was destroyed by an enthusiast, but his party prevailed. Yes, from the rostrum in the conventional hall proceeded the poison, from the national convention was administered the dose which annihilated all true republicanism in that country—the system of prejudging the criminal before his trial. How was this denouncing system improved upon? At first indeed, there was kept up the shew of a trial in the courts below, but the victim was nevertheless as certainly marked, or certainly doomed to destruction. But the orators in the convention, having a long session, and finding nothing better to employ themselves in, multiplied the victims so fast, that to be possessed of an handsome house or estate, a beautiful wife, sister, or daughter, was crime sufficient to incur denunciation—the courts became so crouded with victims, that to expedite the business, instead of formal trials, the courts condemned, en masse, ten, twenty, or fifty, were delivered over to the public executioner, with only the ceremony of passing in review before the judge; a motion of his hand or the waving of his Bonnet Rouge, was a sufficient signal for the executioners to lead the denounced to the guillotine.
We have a constitution (said he)—we have laws enacted for the prevention and punishment of crimes. The rights of our citizens are, I hope, sacredly guarded by the provisions contained in them. Shall we then adopt this revolutionary measure?
All history shows—the experience of all ages ought to have impressed this important truth on our minds—that in religion anathemas, in politics denunciations, in popular assemblies, have led to the same slaughter-house—Fell intolerance and bloody persecution. Shall we now throw aside our chart and compass, and venture in the wide, boisterous, and dangerous sea of expediency?
Look at the constitution—search for this denunciatory power vested in this House. What is it? We have a right to impeach a civil officer for misconduct. What punishment can we demand for him when convicted? Dismissal from office, and disqualification from holding any future office of trust and profit. In nothing does the wisdom, the inspiration of the framers of this instrument more appear than in this restriction. They well knew the danger of introducing personal feelings and resentments, of party rage and fury in this body; of gathering here armed with the power of destroying one another.
I have said on a former occasion, that this House had no power itself; its committee cannot have the power of sending for persons, papers, & records; it is no where directly given; it cannot be derived incidentally, in a case, the cognizance of which is not given to us by the constitution. I then stated the cases where this incidental power is ex necessitate rei derived, viz. 1st, for collecting testimony whereon to form articles of impeachment. 2dly. Testimony may be thus collected in deciding on the expulsion of a member. 3d. Where an election is contested. The gentlemen who support the
resolution have been desired to shew the power of the House for this purpose in this constitution or in any law. They have not done so. They are obliged to resort to expediency, and that expediency, I have contended, will not hold them out. But, say they, the courts of enquiry and courts martial have no power of collecting testimony, and we must do it for them. Will the depositions taken before this House or before your committee, be evidence in your courts? They will not. To sum up the whole, although I must acknowledge that the motives which actuate the mover and myself are, must be the same; I declare I think he means as well as I, the good of his country—Yet I would defy him to instance a more oppressive, a more unfair mode of procedure in the Spanish inquisition than the preliminary trial, for it is a trial of General Wilkinson, now carrying on, on this floor, and about to be prolonged by hanging it up on tenter hooks before a committee. Gracious God! what innocence can withstand this mode? He is charged with being a Spanish pensioner in 1796—again, on the river Sabine—a conspirator with Burr—a perjured man—a conspirator against the liberties of the citizens whom he arrested as traitors and coadjutors with Burr. These denunciations are enforced with eloquence mixed and commixed, compounded and animalverted upon by as great talents as any in the nation. No notice is given to him to attend and make defence. Thus, with accumulated denunciations, but with but one document before us which can look like evidence and that ex parte , this House is to be pressed into a vote which is to fix the stamp upon the character of the man, is to mark him as the victim of the courts below. If he were a demon I would not use him thus unfairly.
SATURDAY, JANUARY 30. Several private petitions were presented.
Two messages in writing were received from the President of the U. States by Mr. Coles, his Secretary, enclosing a Treaty of limits between the U. S. of America and the Choctaw tribe of Indians; and a Treaty made between the Ottaway, Chippe-way, Wyandott, and Pottawattamie tribes of Indians. These messages, with the treaties, were referred to the committee of Ways and Means.
Mr. Holmes, from the committee of Claims, made a report unfavorable to the petition of Charles Minifie, which was referred to a committee of the whole.
Mr. Bacon was appointed a member of the same committee to consider the encouragement of learning and promotion of the useful arts.
The Speaker laid before the House a petition of the New England association of inventors and patrons of useful arts, signed by Benjamin Dearborn, President, &c. praying an extension of the time for patents to discoverers or inventors of useful arts. Referred to the last mentioned committee.
Mr. M. D. Williams, from the committee appointed on the 22d inst. reported a bill for the punishment of certain crimes therein mentioned; which was twice read and referred to a committee of the whole on Monday next.
Mr. J. Montgomery, from the committee to whom the subject was referred, reported a bill concerning courts martial and courts of enquiry; which was twice read, and referred to a committee of the whole on Tuesday next.
On motion of Mr. Helms, Resolved, That the Speaker give information to the Executive of the state of New Jersey of the vacancy in this House, occasioned by the death of Ezra Darby, late one of the representatives from that state.
Mr. G. W. Campbell. It has always been my opinion that in a free government like ours, every department ought to be responsible for its conduct.
The constitution of the U. States was evidently framed on this principle, and the preservation and security of the rights and liberties of the citizen, and the due execution of the laws will be found to rest, in a great degree, on rendering public agents sufficiently and practically responsible for their conduct to the nation. That this is not the case with the judiciary of the U. States has been proved by experience—your judges once appointed are independent of the executive, the legislature, and the people, and may be said to hold their offices for life. They are removable only on conviction by impeachment of high crimes and misdemeanors, and this mode of proceeding has been found in practice totally inefficient, and not to answer the purpose for which it was intended—that of rendering your judges duly responsible for their conduct. They may
therefore be considered, as independent of the rest of the nation, (and they seem to think so themselves) as if this provision in the constitution, relative to impeachment, did not exist. No matter how erroneous their opinions—how dangerous to the public weal—how subversive of the interest of the people—how directly opposed to the laws of your country; yet as it is neither a high crime or misdemeanor or to hold such erroneous opinions, which they seem conscientiously to believe, they cannot be removed by impeachment—they are independent of the rest of the nation.
This subject has attracted the attention of the people in most of the States. The legislatures of several states have passed resolutions declaring the necessity of amending the federal constitution, so as to render the judges, in practice as well as in theory, responsible for their conduct. The most numerous branch of the legislature of the state which I have the honor to represent in part, have declared their opinion in favour of such amendment. In order, therefore, to bring this subject before the House, that the sense of the national legislature may be ascertained thereon, I submit the following resolution.
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, two thirds of both Houses concurring therein, that the following amendment to the constitution of the U. S. be proposed to the legislatures of the several states, which, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the said states, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of the said constitution.
The judges of both the supreme and inferior courts of the U. States, shall, after the day of—be removed from office by the President of the U. S. on the joint address of both Houses of Congress requesting the same, three fifths of each House concurring in such address.
This resolution was referred to a committee of the whole House on the state of the Union.
The House took up for consideration the amendments by the Senate to the bill making appropriations for the support of government.
An amendment allowing the Attorney-General of the U. States five hundred dollars for contingent expenses being under consideration, after a desultory conversation, was referred to a committee of the whole immediately, Mr. Pitkin in the chair, and disagreed to by the committee—Ayes 3.
The committee rose and reported their disagreement. The question being taken on concurrence with the committee of the whole by yeas and nays, there were yeas 101, nays 11.
On motion of Newton, the House went into a committee of the whole, Mr. Bassett in the chair, on the bill to erect a light-house on Point Judith, in the state of Rhode-Island. The blank in the bill for the appropriation being filled with 5000 dollars, the committee rose and reported the bill, which was ordered to a third reading on Monday.
On motion of Mr. G. W. Campbell, the House went into a committee of the whole, on the bill making appropriations for the support of the navy of the United States during the year 1808, Mr. Bassett in the Chair. The bill being gone through and the blanks severally filled, the committee rose and reported the bill, which was ordered to a third reading on Monday.
On motion of Mr. Holmes the House went into a committee of the whole, Mr. Masters in the Chair, on the report of the committee of claims, favorable to the petition of Mary Barclay; which being concurred in by the committee, was reported to the House, and referred to the committee of claims to bring in a bill.
Errata—In Mr. Rowan's speech in the 3d col. of the 1st page of our last, instead of the President having "in so doing given them an illustrious example of the little necessity for delicacy," read "in so doing had given them an illustrious example that delicacy should yield to duty." In speaking of the patriotic language of Kentucky (in answer to a question by Mr. Smilie) Mr. Rowan had allusion to the following resolution of the Legislature of that state; which he then read:
"Whereupon your committee does not hesitate to declare as their opinion that the information given to the House of Representatives is substantially true, and correctly detailed; and that the said judge Sebastian is guilty of having for several years received from the Spanish government a pension paid in cash annually to the amount of two thousand dollars. Your committee further report, as their opinion, that whilst Judge Sebastian was in the exercise of his office in this state, and drawing his annual salary therefrom, he was employed in carrying on with the agents of the Spanish government, an illicit, unjustifiable and highly criminal intercourse sub-
versive of every duty he owed to the constituted authorities of our country, and highly derogatory to the character of Kentucky."
This (said Mr. Rowan) I am proud to say is the language of Kentuckians.
Erratum—In Mr. Desha's observation in our last instead of "The gentleman is mistaken as to the contents of the bill, for there are three instead of two regiments to be raised; and these are essentially necessary, whether we have war or not"—read "there are two regiments instead of two battalions. Although I am opposed to any thing that looks like a standing army, some troops are necessary to be kept up; but to what extent I am not prepared to say, at least the battalion of cavalry is unnecessary."—In a subsequent column, instead of "a great part of the inhabitants" are disaffected, &c.—read "it is said a part are, &c."
WASHINGTON CITY.
Monday, February 1.
The Military COURT of ENQUIRY in the case of Gen. Wilkinson have had two meetings during the past week, without any evidence having been adduced. They meet again this day.
We have received by the last mail from Chillicothe the "Fredonian" of the 12th ult. on the margin of which it is said "Burr and Blamerhasset arrived here last evening."
By an arrival at Savannah a London paper of the 19th of November has been received. The only interesting contents of this paper relate to the impression made upon our minister and the American merchants at London by the recent British orders. Our Minister is said to have expressed his surprise at them, particularly at no intimation of them having been made to Mr. Monroe previous to his departure. Some of the merchants are said to have had an interview with Mr. Percival, and a deputation were, on the 19th Nov. to have met Earl Bathurst, Mr. Canning, Mr. Percival, Mr. Rose & Mr. Huskinson, to ascertain the precise construction which the ministry and their agents meant to put upon the orders of council. Some further orders, of a more hostile character with respect to merchants, are said to have been determined on.
By the ship Eagle arrived at New-York from Cork, papers of that place to the 27th Nov. and London papers to the 20th of Nov. have been received.
These papers state a rumor of the Portuguese fleet, with the Prince Regent and suite having sailed from the Tagus, mention the arrival at Deca of a flag of truce from Calis, on board of which came Mr. Mainz, having left Vienna on the 1st of Nov. with dispatches for the Austrian ambassador at Paris, where he arrived on the 9th, and where a Russian messenger had previously arrived. The arrival of Mr. Mainz in England had caused much speculation, but no facts had transpired.
In addition to these advices, we have received the London Morning Chronicle of the 28th of November. It contains a highly interesting article on the folly of the late British orders so far as they affect this country, which shall be given in our next paper. The only articles of intelligence follow:
LONDON, Nov. 28, 1807.
Intelligence was yesterday received of the arrival at Yarmouth of a vessel from Holland. By this vessel some letters have been received in town, and it is said, that she brought Dutch and French papers, which have not yet reached us. The Dutch papers are stated to be of the 23d instant. Of the letters we have seen, the following extract contains the most important news:
ROTTERDAM, Nov. 18.
"The French Emperor is so much irritated against Portugal, for allowing the English and their property to escape before the arrival of his troops, that he has given orders to detain all Portuguese vessels, and to imprison their crews. His majesty has also commanded, that all Portuguese property throughout France shall be sequestrated; that such persons as have any property of that nation in their possession, shall immediately give it up, and he has accompanied this command, by a menace, that any persons who shall be found to make an unlawful return of such property, shall be imprisoned in irons for seven years. This intelligence we have received from the French post, and whether our government is to follow the example it affords, we are yet to learn, but there is every reason to think it probable.
"All colonial produce has considerably risen in price—the natural consequence of the recent prohibition of foreign supply. Coffee, which is the principal article of demand, and which your state may be had in Eng-

land under 51. per cwt. is here sold at above 101. The enhancement of sugar is not quite in proportion, as our supply on hand is much larger."
Another letter from Holland states, that
"We understand here that Bonaparte has ordered the imprisonment of all Portuguese to be found in France, and that they shall be detained as hostages for the conduct of their government."
Towards the close of 'Change yesterday it was mentioned, that accounts were in town, stating the arrival of Talleyrand and Berthier at Madrid, and that a column of French troops had also entered that city. After the most diligent enquiry we could not ascertain the grounds upon which this statement rested. We could not learn that any vessel had arrived yesterday from any quarter which could originate such a rumor. It was reported at Bilboa on the 14th inst. that a French army had entered Portugal; but that report contained no allusion to Talleyrand or Berthier. If these men be really at Madrid, it must be inferred that the object of the revolution in that city is complete, and that they are gone there to organise a new system of government.
Not the least foundation appears to sustain the report which appeared in a morning paper of yesterday, that any insurrection had taken place at Madrid. The general opinion among the most intelligent Spaniards in the city is, that the recent conspiracy at Madrid was not formed against the life of the king, but against that of the Prince of Peace.
The entrance of the Russian fleet into the Tagus is at least suspicious, and we will venture to say, that few, who are acquainted with the circumstances of the expedition to Copenhagen, expected to hear of its arriving there, after having been moored under the batteries of Gibraltar.
Since preparing the foregoing articles, we have been favored with the following interesting Extract of a letter from on board the ship Powhatan, dated Hampton Roads, January 24:
"Finding that there are no arrivals so late as ourselves from Europe, I embrace the first moment to say that England is at War with Russia and Austria—Portugal has shut her ports, seized British subjects and property."
The same letter contains the following corroborative official statement, dated London, December 3:
"WAR WITH RUSSIA! The ascendancy of French politics at the court of Petersburg is at length complete, as appears from the following official communication published yesterday, addressed to the Lord Mayor:
"Stanhope-Street, December 24. My Lord,
"I have the honor to inform your Lordship that Dispatches have been this morning received from his majesty's ambassador at the court of St. Petersburg, by which it appears that the Emperor of Russia having published a declaration, in which his imperial majesty declares his intention to break off all communication with England; to recall his minister from this court; and not to permit the continuance of a British mission at that of St. Petersburg, his majesty's ambassador has demanded his passport, and is now on his way home. I have lost no time in communicating this intelligence to your Lordship, in order that it may be made as public as possible, without delay.
"I have honor to be, &c. (Signed)
"GEO. CANNING. To the Lord Mayor."
Thus it is, that the English nation, whose resources, genius and enterprize might make her the pride and benefactor of the human race, is arming power after power against her by a deliberate system of injustice that leaves no alternative but submission or hostility.
Extract of a letter dated Norfolk, January 25, 1808.
"By the arrival this evening of the ship Powhatan, from London, 47 days passage, we have certain accounts that Russia has declared war against Great Britain, and that Portugal had interdicted all commerce with her.
"It was expected that Sweden would unite with Russia."
The Governor of Canada, has offered a reward of fifty pounds for the apprehension of a Frenchman of the name of Cazeau or Cassino, who is said to be in that Province, endeavoring to incite the inhabitants to rebellion.
Capt. Michael, of the Brutus, informs that a Packet from England, had arrived at Barbadoes, and brought out a decree of Nov. 27, modifying the operation of the decrees of Nov. 11. This latter decree is conceived upon the principle alluded in a late letter from Amsterdam.
WASHINGTON CITY.
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 1.
On Friday the remains of EZRA DARBY, a member of the House of Representatives, were interred in the Burial Ground on the Eastern Branch. The procession moved from the Capitol at 12 o'clock, and proceeded to the Lodgings of Mr. Darby, whence it moved to the Grave Yard, agreeably to the following
ARRANGEMENT.
 Clergy,  C O R P S,  Pall-Bearers.  New Jersey Delegation, as chief mourners.  Committee of Arrangement.  Sergeant at Arms, of the House of Representatives.  Speaker of the House of Representatives.  Clerk of the House of Representatives.  Members of the House of Representatives.  Sergeant at Arms of the Senate.  VICE-PRESIDENT.  Secretary of Senate.  Members of Senate.  Heads of Departments.  Citizens. 
The committee, appointed by the citizens of Baltimore, to enquire into the expediency of establishing domestic manufactures, have made a long and very interesting report in favor of such establishments, which we regret being unable at this time to republish from the great length & interest of Congressional proceedings. We rejoice to perceive this spirit rising in the United States. The time has certainly come when every effort in our power should be made to render ourselves independent of the nations of Europe, from all of whom we have every thing to expect but friendship.
Extract of a letter from a member of the Virginia Legislature to his friend in this city, dated January 25, 1808.
"Sir, "I observe Mr. Hooe's resolution published in the National Intelligencer, as stated in the Federal paper here, the only one in this city that noticed it. The statement is palpably incorrect. The resolution was thrown out the same day it was presented, by a motion of adjournment, as was determined by the Speaker, and does not "remain to be acted on," nor does it appear on our journals; neither were a majority of speakers in favor of it. Many gentlemen, I know, were anxious to speak in opposition to it, when the motion of adjournment was made and carried. It was never introduced afterwards, which it might have been, and which must be conclusive, that the few friends to it (who were generally Federalists and Randolphites) were sensible, that it would have been rejected by a large majority; I will venture to say by a majority of at least four fifths of the members."
From the Richmond Enquirer of January 26.
At a meeting of a number of members of the Legislature of Virginia, at the Capitol in the city of Richmond, on the 21st day of January 1808, for the purpose of fixing upon a fit character to be supported as President of the United States at the next election; and also for selecting fit characters to be voted for as electors for the choice of that officer, on the first Monday in Nov. next.
Gen. John P. Hungerford was appointed Chairman, and Theodosius Hansford, Secretary.
On motion, Resolved, That James Monroe of Virginia, be supported for the office of President of the United States for the term of four years commencing on the 4th of March 1809.
The names of those who voted in favor of this resolution here follows—amounting to 57—and those who voted against it, amounting to 10.
On the 23rd of January the members again assembled at the Capitol pursuant to adjournment, and proceeded to fix upon proper characters to be voted for as Electors of a President and Vice-President of the United States as follows:
 Littleton W. Tazewell, John Goodrich, Edward Pegram, senr. Mark Alexander, Thomas Reed, Freeman Eppes, Charles Yancey, Christopher Clark, Creed Taylor, John Taylor, James Hunter, General John Minor, Wm. Ellzey, Robert Saunders, Saml. Tyler, General John P. Hungerford, Daniel Carroll Brent, Dr. Robert Mackie, James Dully, John Cunningham, John Coulter, Daniel Sheffey, Linah Nims, John Prunty. 
On motion, Resolved, That a standing corresponding committee composed of five persons, residents of Richmond, be appointed; and that they, or any three correspond with the Electors named, and if they have just reasons for believing that either of the electors on the ticket will not vote for James Monroe as President, that they name some other in his stead.
Whereupon, George Hay, John Clarke, Edward C. Stannard, William Robinson, and John Brockenbrough, were appointed a committee for that purpose.
On motion, Resolved, That a committee of five persons, be appointed in each county, to promote the success of the ticket. If any one shall decline acting, his place will be supplied by the standing committee.
The meeting proceeded accordingly to appoint committees in the several counties of this state, and made some progress therein, but not being able to complete the same this evening, adjourned till Monday evening next, six o'clock.
At this meeting, Andrew S. Warwick, who was not present at the first, appeared and declared himself in favor of the resolution then adopted for supporting col. James Monroe as President.
On the 25th of January, a committee of five persons was appointed for each county.
The legislature of Georgia, at their last session, appropriated 150,000 dollars for the purchase of arms; and directed the State House and scite at Louisville to be reserved for a public arsenal.
Extract of a letter from Washington to the Editor of the American.
The following facts may be relied on: A landsman belonging to the Chesapeake, gave information to the consul at Norfolk, that he, together with two other men on board that frigate were British subjects. The consul informed the capt. of the Statira, who deemed it his duty, under the proclamation of the King of G. Britain, to demand those men from capt. Decatur. They were of course refused. On enquiry, it appears that two of those men were residents of Baltimore, and have families in that city—that one has been a resident for 15 years, the other for 20 years, last past. This shews a disposition to embroil rather than to pacify.
American.
Chillicothe, Jan. 4.
The House of Representatives of this state have been engaged, for nearly three days, in discussing the following resolution:
Resolved, That the judges of this state are not authorised, by the constitution, to set aside any act of the legislature, by declaring the law unconstitutional, or null and void.
A very animated and argumentative discussion took place on the subject: the resolution was ultimately decided in the affirmative—Yeas 18—Nays 12.
New York, Jan. 25.
A letter from Lisbon, of Nov. 13th, to a gentleman of this city, says "We have a Russian squadron here of 5 sail of the line, and 2 frigates; 4 sail of the line more are momentarily expected, so that we hope to be able to beat off John Bull, if he should come to Copenhagen us."
At the departure of a brig in 60 days from Lisbon, lying on Wednesday off the harbor of New London, a French army was within 3 or 4 days march of that city. The Portuguese government had offered to the French emperor, 4,000,000 of livres for permission to trade with G. Britain, but in vain.
Norfolk, Jan. 23.
A British armed schooner anchored in Hampton Roads on Thursday morning, from Bermuda. It is said she is the bearer of dispatches from sir John B. Warren, (arrived at Bermuda) to Mr. Rose, and that she is immediately to proceed to Annapolis.
Pursuant to an order of the Orphan's Court of Prince George's county, will be sold, at Public Sale, at his late dwelling, in Prince George's county, on Thursday the 18th day of February next,
A Part of the Personal Estate of Zachariah Baldwin, deceased, consisting of all kinds of Stock, Plantation Utensils, a quantity of Corn and Corn Fodder, Household and Kitchen Furniture, with many other articles too numerous to mention. The terms of sale are nine months credit, the purchasers giving bond, with approved security, and interest from the day of sale. The sale to commence at 12 o'clock.
HENRY CULVER, Adm'r. January 29—93t
BY AUTHORITY.
AN ACT
To provide for the payment of certain expenses, incurred in the impeachment of Samuel Chase.
BE it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That the accounting officers of the Treasury be, and they hereby are directed to audit and settle the accounts of all persons who may have claims against the United States, for expenses incurred in the enquiry into the conduct, and in the impeachment of Samuel Chase; which expenses may have been authorized by the Committee of Enquiry, or the Managers of the said impeachment: Provided, that the said accounts shall have been first certified by the chairman of the said Committee or Managers; and the same shall be paid out of any monies in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated.
J. B. VARNUM, Speaker of the House of Representatives. GEO: CLINTON, Vice-President of the United States, & President of the Senate. January 21, 1808.
APPROVED, TH: JEFFERSON.
AN ACT
For the relief of Oliver Evans.
BE it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That it shall and may be lawful for the Secretary of State on application in writing by Oliver Evans, to cause letters patent to be made out in the manner and form prescribed by the act entitled "An act to promote the progress of useful arts, and to repeal the act heretofore made for that purpose," thereby granting to said Oliver Evans, his heirs, executors, administrators and assigns, for a term not exceeding fourteen years, the full and exclusive right and liberty of making, constructing, using, and vending to be used, his invention, discovery and improvements in the art of manufacturing flour and meal, and in the several machines which he has discovered, invented, improved, and applied to that purpose: Provided, That no person who may have heretofore paid the said Oliver Evans for license to use his said improvements shall be obliged to renew said license, or be subject to damages for not renewing the same: And provided also, That no person who shall have used the said improvements, or have erected the same for use, before the issuing of the said patent, shall be liable to damages therefor.
J. B. VARNUM, Speaker of the House of Representatives. GEO: CLINTON, Vice-President of the United States, and President of the Senate. January 21, 1808.
APPROVED, TH: JEFFERSON.
AN ACT
To continue in force for a limited time an act, intitled "An act continuing for a limited time the salaries of the officers of government therein mentioned."
BE it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That an act passed on the twentieth day of February, one thousand eight hundred and four, intitled "An act continuing for a limited time the salaries of the officers of government therein mentioned," shall be and continue in force for the term of three years, and to the end of the next session of Congress thereafter and no longer.
J. B. VARNUM, Speaker of the House of Representatives. GEO: CLINTON, Vice-President of the United States, and President of the Senate. January 27, 1808.
APPROVED, TH: JEFFERSON.
SUBSCRIBERS in Arrears are requested to forward without delay their respective dues. As this paper almost entirely depends for support on the regular payment of the subscriptions, this request must be complied with, otherwise the Editor will be constrained, however reluctantly, to discontinue the paper, notwithstanding the deeply interesting nature of the crisis.
A CARD.
MR. GENERES has the honor to remind his friends and the Public that his BALL will be on Monday next, (if fair) and to be continued on the same day every week, at Mr. Stelle's Hotel.
Mr. G. gives lessons at the same place at 11 o'clock in the morning. January 29—3t
NEW PUBLICATIONS.
Just published and for sale, at D. RAINE's book store, on Capitol Hill. THE American Artillerist's Companion, translated and extracted from the best memorials, and most recent publications, on this important branch of military science, by Lewis Tousard. The American Register, or general Repository of History, Politics, and Science. This work will be published semi annually, for which, as well as the preceding work, subscriptions are received at the above store.
A Picture of the Empire of Bonaparte, and his federative nations; or the Belgium Traveller; being a tour through Holland, France and Switzerland, during the years 1804—5, in a series of letters from a nobleman to a minister of state.
Columella on the Foreign Carrying Trade—showing the effects on agriculture, population and morals of the country.
"A Book" without a title—this is a periodical publication of much wit and humor.
The Subscribers to Dr. REES's Cyclopaedia are respectfully informed that the sixth volume of this extensive work is now completed, and the work is rapidly progressing; and it is hoped that those in arrears will be so good as to send for their volumes and pay up the balances due, which will enable the publishers to go on with the work without impediment. February 1—4t
By order of the Orphan's Court of Prince George's county, will be exposed to Public Sale, on Thursday the 18th of February next, at the dwelling house of the late capt. Hezekiah Wheeler,
ALL the Personal Property of the deceased, consisting of Negroes, Horses, Oxen, Sheep, Cattle, and Hogs, Household and Kitchen Furniture, a Waggon and Cart. Part of the above property will be sold under certain restrictions made known on the day of sale. Six months credit, with interest from the day of Sale, the purchaser or purchasers giving bond, with approved security. The sale to commence at 10 o'clock.
HEZEKIAH WHEELER, Ex-cutor. January 25—
All persons having claims against the above estate, are hereby warned to exhibit the same, with the vouchers thereof, to the subscriber, on or before the first day of April next; they may otherwise by law be excluded from all benefit of the said estate.
H. W.
In pursuance of a deed of trust, dated on the 17th day of June, in the year one thousand eight hundred and three, from Isidore Hardey, of Prince George's county, Maryland, to John Francis Hardey, will be exposed to Public Sale, on the premises, on Tuesday the first day of March next, if fair, and if not, the first fair day thereafter,
ALL those two Tracts or Parts of Tracts or Parcels of Land, lying and being in Prince George's county, called GARDINOR's Meadows and TYLER's Advantage, containing 330 acres. These lands are encumbered with the right of dower, and will be sold for cash.
The above tracts of land are situated about 5 miles from Piscataway, in Prince George's county, and are tolerably well improved. A more minute description is deemed unnecessary, as those who wish to purchase will view the premises, either on or before the day of sale.
RICHARD B. GARDINOR, Adm'r of John F. Hardey. January 29—tMar.
STRAYED or STOLEN
FROM the city of Washington, the following HORSES, viz. a jet black MARE with a long bushy mane and tail, about 14 hands 3 inches high, rising 7 years old, trots and canters; she was taken away about the last of August. Likewise a Bay DORSE, dark mane and tail, about 15 hands high, limbs very much in one of his hind legs, 9 years old next spring—he was taken away about the first of September last. Also, a dark Bay MARE with a black mane and tail, about 15 hands high, trots and canters, when rode, and checked with the bridle carries her head very high. The said mare was carried away about the first of December last. I cannot be very accurate as to the description as they were not long in my custody. I will give 20 dollars for the apprehension of the person or persons respectively that stole said horses, and 15 dollars for each by delivering them to the subscriber residing in the city of Washington.
FRANCIS JENKINS. February 1—3t
NOTICE.
THE subscriber having sold his entire stock of Goods in the month of March last, and having declined business in George-town, is now preparing to leave the District. All persons who have accounts against him will be pleased to render them for payment before the 20th of next month; and those indebted to him are earnestly requested to make payment before that time.
JOHN MAFFIT.
Wanted to Purchase, FIFTY SHARES of COLUMBIA BANK STOCK. George town, Dec. 14—p. 140000-1.
COLUMBIAN LIBRARY. The Shareholders in the Columbian Library, who have not paid the annual contribution which became due on the 1st inst. will take notice that their Shares will be forfeited, if payment is not made before the 1st day of February next.
DAVID WILEY, Treasurer. Georgetown, Columbia Jan. 22—t

Continued from first page. tion was overruled upon this ground: that the treasonable (overt) act having been alleged to be committed in the state of Ohio, and general Wilkinson's letter to the President of the U. S. having been dated, although but a short time, prior to that act, this person had the benefit of what lawyers would call a legal exception, or a fraud. But, said Mr. R. I will inform the gentleman, that I did not hear a single member of the grand jury express any other opinion than that which I myself expressed of the moral (not of the legal ) guilt of the party.
Mr. SMITH said he would not detain the House on this subject; he had the other day taken an opportunity to state his sentiments on the subject—that in his opinion there was no power in the House to proceed in the business. The same sentiments he yet entertained; and when gentlemen told him that it was necessary for the public safety that this House should exercise such powers, and at the same time they could not point out a single expression in the constitution vesting the House with this power, he could not consent to vote with them: nor had a single gentleman who had spoken attempted to show that they did possess these powers. The gentleman from Virginia had spoken of their power to disband the army; if the gentleman chose to bring forward a resolution for that purpose, Mr. S. said he would meet him. He had also told them that they had a power to refuse supplies: Mr. S. said he agreed with the gentleman in this: but when they stepped out of the road and assumed a power not vested in them, he could not go along with the gentleman. Was it not the duty of the President alone to enquire, who possessed full power to act on the information which might be the result of an enquiry? Certainly it was. The officer interested in this discussion was undoubtedly subject to trial by a court-martial, and no doubt also by a court of justice; for if he was guilty of the crimes laid to his charge, they were of a high nature and would subject him to the cognizance of the civil law.
But he would ask gentlemen, if they succeeded in passing the resolution upon the table, what was next to be done? Did the House believe that they could remove or punish a military officer for misconduct? If they could not do this, and he presumed no gentleman would contend for this, Mr. S. could see no reason for an enquiry. Were they to become mere juries for a court of justice—mere collectors of evidence, for it was admitted that they could not act upon it after it was collected? He believed the courts of justice were possessed of sufficient authority without this House volunteering their assistance.
Mr. S. remarked what would be the effect of this motion, which was substantially the same as that proposed by the gentleman from N. York, and rejected by a large majority. It would answer the purpose of holding up this man to suspicion for years to come for aught he knew, without producing any other effect. He was willing to enquire; he had seen from the beginning of the business that an enquiry must take place. There had been a number of papers laid upon the table relative to this; he was willing to transmit them to the proper department, there to be made use of, and he hoped the House would go no farther. For in regard to the proceedings which had taken place they had exercised a right which did not appertain to them in proceeding in this business at all; they had no right to beset the character of the man; and he rested his objections on this point, that no man could show him an authority for it.
He was very sorry, because he thought it would produce effects of a serious nature, to hear a gentleman this day denounce the army as corrupted throughout. He must tell that gentleman that he could not credit the assertion. They had tried (without meaning to express any opinion as to the officer now involved) their officers and found them trusty. And to hold them up as unworthy of trust at this time, in a crisis like the present, was impolitic and unjust. If gentlemen knew of any particular officers who were corrupt, why could they not lodge information against them, not by clamor here, but by proof before the proper authority.
Mr. S. in conclusion declared that he should not vote for this resolution; for in any way a procedure by this House on the subject would be incorrect.
Mr. RHEA (T.) called for the reading of the letter of — Duncan contained in the evidence laid before the House this session relative to the late trial at Richmond; it might be satisfactory in explaining the differences between the version of the cypher letter by the grand jury and
the translation made by general Wilkinson.
Mr. LOVE said, that although the form of the question had been varied, by the resolution of the gentleman from Kentucky, (Mr. Rowan) yet the principles of decision remained nearly the same as on the original resolution; the same objections applied, as to the subject embraced by the present form, and so long as it thus remained, those objections would continue to influence his determination.
These grounds of difficulty had been attempted to be removed by the gentleman from Virginia, (Mr. Randolph) by arguing, that the investigation of the subject might lead to measures, which no one would doubt, it was competent, to the house to act on; by pursuing the enquiry, it was said it might be found, that it would be expedient to disband the army, or withhold its necessary supplies: this said Mr. L. is begging the question; the terms of the resolution in their present shape, can not possibly conduct a committee to any such enquiry: It is confined to a single object; it is whether the present commander of the army has been guilty of corruptly receiving money from Spain; the charge alluded to is understood to be of an ancient date; it is not suggested by any one that the army is tainted with this crime, specially set forth in the resolution: the charge, if proven, could not then be a cause for disbanding the army, or withholding the necessary supplies; if an object of this kind is contemplated let it be so stated, and an enquiry into the grounds of such proposition, however strange in idea, would only be the exercise of a constitutional right.
The resolution, Mr. L. repeated, called the attention of the House to a single fact, it exhibited a charge already made penal, both by the military and civil code; it respects a character over whom we have no constitutional control by impeachment or otherwise; if an improper character is commissioned to the command of our armies, and continues so, let the responsibility fall where the constitution has placed it, on the Executive; the attention of the legislature must be called to other things than judging of the merits or crimes of the soldiery. But it is objected that the military tribunal appointed to make an enquiry on the demand of the person accused, and which the House understood was now engaged in the performance of that duty, has no power to compel the attendance of witnesses, or the production of papers: he would not for a moment so far impeach the patriotism of those gentlemen, who have declared themselves possessed of knowledge on the subject of the charge, as to suppose they would not attend the respectful summons of a tribunal erected by our own laws, for the investigation of crimes which they admit are of importance to their country. Those gentlemen surely too well understand the rights of others to object to a cross-examination; but if a military court is not possessed of power sufficient to compel, if it should be necessary, the attendance of witnesses, the common judicial tribunals are so; the civil, as well as the martial code, has cognizance of such offences as are suggested; the same effect as it respects a military officer, would follow the establishment of guilt before either tribunal—if gentlemen object to a military court, which the law has instituted, let them resort to a civil one, it is there they may without apprehension or difficulty make those disclosures, which the good of their country requires: it is not here that a power is found, either to prosecute or punish the offences of military men: he hoped the time of this legislature would be better employed, than in the usurpation of the powers of the judiciary or executive, in the investigation of criminal charges, against military men, whom they could neither hear the defence of, or punish their crime, if proved.
Mr. L. said that as to the truth and weight of the charges made against the military character in question, he felt no disposition to decide; to determine a man guilty of crimes of great enormity, without a hearing, without examination of testimony, and without a possibility of defence, was so hostile to every principle of justice, and common humanity even, that he had not permitted his mind to enter into any investigation of fact, or his feelings to enlist in the prosecution; much detail of circumstance had been used, which ought to put the House extremely on its guard against the influence of feeling in deciding the present question. A gentleman had the other day said, that he felt no delicacy towards a man, whom he had on his oath been obliged to say was guilty of misprision of treason; it was thus intimated that the grand jury of the Virginia district, who in-
vestigated the subject of Burr's conspiracy, had agitated the question of General Wilkinson's criminality; (setting aside the observation which might well be made that Burr's conspiracy was no part of the present enquiry) it appeared to Mr. L. that the question having been agitated, and no presentment being made of the officer now charged, a considerable portion of the grand jury, must have said in like manner, on their oaths, that that officer was not guilty of misprision of treason; but to day the same gentleman has informed us, that the reason why no presentment was preferred against Wilkinson was, that he escaped by a legal exception in his favor: that although the immorality of his act was complete, (as well as he could understand the gentleman at the distance he was from him) the offence could not be located, or some other legal defect. Mr. L. said he confessed he was not well informed of the proceedings of the grand jury, he had heard some noise which he had scarcely listened to about them: he had never before heard, that the principal officers of the army were leagued in Burr's conspiracy: he would say, however, that the grand jury assembled on that occasion, was as able and respectable a one as ever sat on any former occasion of the kind, and he confessed he was surprised to hear they had omitted to exercise a general power, which, when it appeared to them, the officers of our army were actually conspirators against the government, as we are now informed, it became imperiously their duty to exercise, by making a presentment of the dangers of the country: any general civil grand jury may present, if they believe it to exist only in intention. The acts of a legislative body, and some he believed of Congress itself, had been presented by grand juries as of evil tendency; and one instance at least has occurred of a grand jury having presented the very court which presided over it. Certainly such an evil as a general conspiracy of the officers of our army, required some public exhibition of the offence; even if it was such in them as well as the commander, as not to be brought in the opinion of the jury, within the form of an efficient prosecution. Mr. L. said he was sorry that he too had been led into the notice of facts by the surprising things he had heard. He hoped unnecessary delay would be avoided. The time occupied in the discussion of this dispute, had already, he would presume, prevented some of the committees from reporting on subjects of the first consideration. The present eventful and threatening aspect of foreign affairs demanded attention; he particularly apprehended it might have prevented the report of the bill for arming the militia, as well as other subjects of national interest from being taken up. Let us then, said Mr. L. meet this question, decide upon it, and send to the proper departments the information which will enable them to act in the manner we are told they have already attempted, under the laws in existence. The question which they solely ought now to consider was their right to act. He believed there was no man in that House who did not after what had been said, wish a thorough investigation, but certainly the mode to be pursued was obvious and easy. He conceived it would be entirely sufficient if the papers and information were transmitted to the proper department, and should, if the resolution was negatived, be left, if he could get the floor, to offer a resolution, with a preamble, detailing the reasons which governed him in his vote, by which it might appear, that although he felt as much anxiety as any man, that the proper tribunals should act on the subject, yet his objection to the present mode proposed rose to a source above mere matters of expediency or temporary feeling.
Mr. L. then said, as it was not in order in the then stage of the debate, to propose his resolution, he would read it in order that the House might be apprised of his views. He then concluded by reading the following resolution:
Whereas, It is a primary duty, enjoined on the House of Representatives of the United States, cautiously to avoid any encroachment on the constitutional rights & authorities of the other departments of the government: And according to the letter of the federal compact and the acknowledged spirit, and meaning of that instrument, the several departments thereof should forever be kept separate and distinct, so that neither interfere with the powers and duties of the other: And this House being aware, that it is only by the practical observance of fundamental principles, that it can secure to itself and the people of the United States the beneficial effects resulting from a written and well defined form of government;
that to fail in such observance, would be to yield all the blessings, and advantages, which such written and well ascertained form of political institution is calculated to ensure.
And whereas the constitution of the United States, has in no instance vested in this House, the power of instituting or requesting the institution of an enquiry into the conduct of any military officer; but while it has invested those powers in another tribunal, has confined the inquiries of this body to the conduct of civil officers holding authority under the United States, and has restricted the mode of such enquiry to the process by impeachment; and as the powers of a military tribunal, over a military officer, are as competent to all the purposes, which ought to be the objects of prosecution under martial law, as the powers of a court of impeachment are to the purposes which ought to be the objects of such court, and either the civil or military officer is alike amenable for the commission of crimes, to the regular process of law, before the judicial civil tribunals of the country, where all offences of every nature are punishable; And inasmuch as it is the opinion of this body, that regulated by the proper sphere of their duty they have as little right or power to request of the President of the United States, the institution of an enquiry into the conduct of a person supposed to have committed an offence in the army, as they would have to request the head of the judiciary department, to cause an indictment to be preferred against any individual in civil society, or to see to the performance of any judicial duty whatever.
Resolved therefore, That the papers and information laid on the Clerk's table of this House, relative to Gen. James Wilkinson, be referred to the Secretary of the War department of the U. S.
Mr. LYON said, notwithstanding the impression made upon his mind by the statement read this day, he should vote in the same way as he should have done before he heard it, if the power of the House to make an enquiry were not called in question. He would as soon cut off his right hand as to say that this House had not the power to call in question the conduct of the commander in chief. Was this House prepared to say that they had not the power to enquire whether or not the commander in chief had sufficiently the confidence of the people and of the army? He would not commit himself in this way, and after what had been urged as reasons for voting against the resolution, he could not promise how he should vote. The question was altogether varied by the motion now under consideration; the former and original question was whether they would request the President to perform certain duties; it was now moved that they should perform these duties themselves; and he should certainly vote in favor of it, if it were contended that this House had not the power to pass it.
As to the creed of the gentleman behind him, (Mr. Love) he could not subscribe to it; it was too long for his comprehension; but if it were intelligible, he would tell the gentleman behind him that he could not agree with him.
He should be satisfied to see what the court of enquiry would do in this business; and if they did not do what would satisfy the nation, he should be perfectly willing to proceed in the enquiry. He thought that then, feeling as his colleague (Mr. Rowan) must feel, it would come properly before the House. Mr. L. had long had a suspicion of this man, and his mind was much at variance on this subject. None of his feelings would induce him to surrender the right of the House to enquire, and if this were made a general ground of opposition to the motion, he should assuredly vote for it.
Mr. TAYLOR confessed that the importance of the subject was sufficient to claim his ardent attention, and from the consideration he had given it, he was opposed to the resolution and felt it a duty not to give a silent vote on a measure, which by the terms of the resolution offered was not to enquire on a general subject, (which even on this subject unconnected with any individual, but as he might be incidentally concerned might be excusable) but to enquire about the conduct of a single individual; or in short and plain terms to denounce the man, a man too holding an office out of the immediate control of this House, amenable to other tribunals, and liable, if guilty of all that has been asserted against him, to the sentence of death, both by our civil and military courts.
This measure of denouncing an individual whom this House cannot impeach, said Mr. T. is then a new
case, and one which, if adopted, will establish a precedent dangerous to this government, dangerous to the life and liberty, the honor and reputation of the citizen, and calculated in its effects to put at hazard every institution and sacred provision in the constitution under which we profess to act.
We shall in the first place interfere with the Executive Department. With which department the constitution has expressly intrusted the care, the responsibility of watching over the army; and in respect to the enquiry proposed to be made by a committee of this House, when we have made it, we can pass no sentence, we can ground no impeachment against the denounced; we should then have to come back and acknowledge our imbecility, by asking, requesting the President to do that which we found ourselves unable to perform.
We assume to ourselves the responsibility which properly attaches to that department. I rejoice that here the maxim is monstrous and exploded; that the Executive can do no wrong; that here the ministers are not liable for the acts of the superior, but the superior accountable for the acts of his ministers and agents. If Gen. Wilkinson is the monster in iniquity his enemies state him to be, if the President has continued him in employment after he had evidence positive of his guilt, or if, as he has been charged, he has turned a deaf ear to the proof about to be offered by an ardent, a disinterested friend to his country—Why has not this blazing patriotism burst out in a direct and not an indirect impeachment of the Executive. But the sense of the nation is too well known to venture at this thing. No, say the advocates of the resolution, this has nothing to do with confidence in the Executive—and yet if the executive has a spark of that patriotism which he ought to possess, if he is not the protector and upholder of a known traitor, would he dare to disregard the information if legally substantiated, which the gentleman from Virginia and the delegate from Orleans have laid on your table? If confidence has nothing to do with this, why did not these gentlemen hand in to that department of the government which had the constitutional cognizance and final control of this business, all the information they had on this subject? Why make this House the great gun from which to thunder their denunciations and fulminations against an individual, when there was a shorter and more easy way of getting at their object. A corrupt Executive would desire the very measure proposed. Interfere with his functions, assume his responsibility, what would be the result? You denounce the agent, the tool of such an Executive (the col. Vernon of Cromwell, for example). You order, or you request, that his conduct should be enquired into. Well, in obedience to your order this corrupt Executive appoints a corrupt board of officers. The conduct is enquired into, and the accused comes out glossed over with an honorable acquittal from this court, & ready & more fitly prepared to execute the ambitious designs of his protector. Ask of the Executive why is this so. He answers I have obeyed your orders, the responsibility is yours and not mine. This will be the effect of our travelling out of our defined orbit and taking upon ourselves what never was intrusted to us by the constitution under which we act—already, when gentlemen say, that we are not to know that a court of enquiry is ordered in this case, but which every one does know, is now sitting—I say, already do they anticipate the result, and in a fore-handed way make it a theme of abuse against that Executive, with which they tell us confidence or diffidence has nothing to do in this question.
But to be done with these words so offensive to the chaste ears of the supporters of this measure, Mr. T. said he would ask these gentlemen if they would allow, their own judgement, views and conduct to be judged of by those who by duty were compelled to decide upon the measures they proposed. They surely not claim that infallibility which they denied to others. Well then, said he, place them in the one scale, with all their acts or with any particular act, and place the Executive in the other, with all or with any of his acts. Nay, sir, take the present subject only as a criterion. Let the nation hold the balance. I have no hesitation in saying their scale would kick the beam. This I am compelled to say; I have more confidence in the present administration than I have in those who brought forward & now support the present motion. I seek for nothing but truth—I would not kiss my hand for any thing that the Executive could do for me or mine. I am not one of those polit-
(Continued on second page.)