The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1807-12-19

rfSnc nave been but he did not wish to re-
lject IT. He spoke at large against its refer
ence, because he thought tiIat AS they Were
on the.eve Of war, it was possible a delibe-
ration on this law would affect their situat-
ON. He did not consider the propriety of re-
pealing 1t or not forhe conceived that would
ldepend altogether on the nature of the dis
patches which might be received. Bat or
nearing this memorial read q second time,
me perceived a sentiment. contained in it,
which farther induced him to view il as not
couched in respectful terms. "FroIn the
wisdom and patriotism OF the National Le-
glstatnre, they conceive the expectation to be
welf founded, that tue commercial interest
OF the u. S. with which the common welfare
is. inseparably connected. will not be COM
United by an unyielding adherence to doubt
t,,t orlinsettied principles" Was it a doubt
ful principle 1,at national vessels should not
De searchcds lie had ALWAYS thought that
IT vas not a doubtful principle; he thouqht
such ships could not be touched; that COM
mander could not be Intercepted as to his
crew or the orders from his government
Was this one eff the doubtful principles to
which the petition alluded On this subject
gentlemen could not differ. Re did not mean
| to go into an enquiry into the propriety or.
imPropliety of passing the non-importation
law. He thought it proper measure when
| 1T passed, though he wished to have gone far
Their; he was enc of those who wished to
pass total non-importation law. II was
well known why such a law did not pass
ne would not enter into consideration of
that now; but many men, agreeing with him
! In political sentiments at that time, and he
presumed they did so now, conceived that a
partial non-importation law was more pro-
per He yielded and voted with them. He
thought the House would treat the petition
ers with that respect which was due to them,
! II they were to refuse reference of their
memorial to the committee of Commerce
and Manufactures, and suffer it to lie on the
table.
Mr. Randoihh said the gentleman from
Massachusetts had greatly misconceived him
IN one respect. He had not alluded to that
gentleman as one of the dcpunciators of his
friend from Philadelphia, but as endeavcring
to make this party question, which he tho't
{ was both Unfair and inprudeat. He still
| thought so. With what propriety could gen
tiemen be represented as the friends of q pro-
position, merely because they were willing
10 consider and discuss it, The denunciati-
ON o. his IrleEd was in the recollection of the
House. Was itprudeyt, for the mere graft
fcatioa Of personal or part spleen, to he'd
up those who should vote for the reference
rs djsattected TO the caasc Of our national
wrongs! When persons OF a different Eoliti-
cal character held he reirs Of government,
petition after petition was poured into that
House, complaining of its acts During the
time that Mr.. K. held seat in it, these peti-
tons were always referred and discussed,
although they were rejected. Although the
scdition law Of unconstitutional memory was
enacted and re-enacted, and the legislature
had repeatedly expressed its opinion Of its
Justice and eXpediency, and although it was
scarcely possible to draft a memorial against
that detestable act without uttering harsh
things, at least by implication, against its au-
thols, yet it was not held to be presumption
~ the petitioners, which dcrcgated from the
dignity o. the House, to question it's infailiSi-
litY. Tho petitions We're received and pro-
duced elaborate replies by way of report, be-
fore they were rejected.
! Mr. Z. thought the gentleman from Mas
sachusetts totally mistaken in supposing the
/ petitioners to consider the clair, to search
ipublic armed ships IS a doubtful principle
On the contrary they wished the national no
nor to be maintained. But they might be-
| lieve doubtful principles to have been blend
ed with an undoubted one; and even this DO
sit:on is advanced with hesitation. If the
gentleman himself would exchange few OF
his ccrtaihties for doubts, he would not be q
less useful politician. As TO the non-impor-
tation Law y" you'd in pity spare it--Jut it
could not be forgotten shat wonders had been
| promised from it, and that oHiy at the last
session, the gentleman himself had boosted
that It's potent spells and incantatons had in
| duoed Great Britain, who had as ubstinately
refused to hear us, rs the gent oman himsel
! fid this petition, 70 open her gracious ears
l@nd listen 70 I'll our demands, which Fere in
| = fair way Of being complied with. Because
| gentlemen differed i'll opinion with TIE pet,-
ttioners--he himself dihsred with them-he
deemed the repeal of the law of no sort of
tconsed1encc---was that rcason WHY they
should net nc heard were not petitions e.
very dav referred that, had been hundred
times rejected? <hat we're known TO be bar
red by tic act Of limitaticn' Was it ever
ldeemed an Insult upon their dignity that Oil
liver Pollock, or Stephen Sayre, would take
no refusal from them, but persisted in pcti-
Uoning until they got their money! Most
lccrtainly not.
The question on rcfcrcnee to thc Commit
&c Of Commerce and Manufactures, was then
taken by yeas and NAYS, as follow:
'YEAS.--Mcssrs. 2ibb, Champion, Chitten-
den, J. Clay, Cobb, Culpcpcr, Dana, Daven-
port, Elliot, Wv, Gardiner, Garnet, Gray,
Harris, Hester, H1gc, Jenkins, Jones, Kellv,
Hcnan, Key, Kirkpatrick, Lewis LLOYD
Minor, Z Moore, Ier. Morrow, Moseey
Pitkin, Portei, Ounce, Randolph, Rea, (Pl
!! Richards, M. Richards, Russell, Smelt,
Stanford, Stedmar, Strrges, Taggart, Tall