Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1808-03-18

IPhiladelphia.
Mr. Ciapton FROM the select committee,
reported ga bill TO continue in force for a
further time the act for the more effectual
preservation OF peace in the ports and har-
5ors g. the ". 5. and in the waters under
their Jurisdiction" Referred to commit
tee ct the whole on Monday.
MIR. Dawson from the committee to whom
was referred the bill from the senate "for
raising an additional MILITARY force"
reported their agreement TO the same with
one amendment (of a traing nature) Or
dered TO lie on the table.
The "bill authorising detachment from
the militia of the u. States" was read the
third time and passed. MIR. Stanford NOV
ed that it be entered on the journal as ha-
wing "passed unanimously Lost.
The "bill extending the time for issuing
and locating military LANDMARK
RANTS" was read The third time and
passed; also the bill from the senate "for
the erection of light house aud placing
huoys at the places therein mentioned, with
an amendment" also the "bill concerning
the sale of lands of the u s. and for other
purposes"
The "bill concerning COURTS MAR
iTIAL AND COURTS OF INQUIRY
was read the third time. Mr. Gartlnercal-
led for the ayes and noes on its passage.
Mr. Elliot spoke at length against the
bill. He opposed it on the ground that II
was erroneous in principle, that it would
be notifications in its operation, and OPP
pressive on the citizens He said that to
admit the military 10 be CO ordinate with
the civil authority. was laying the axe to
the root 81 liberty; and that to make it su-
perior was the very essence ofdespotism
That il the military had to make a demand
on the civil power for writ to compel the
attendance of witnesses, it ought to be in
the humble tone of supplication, and not in
the imperious language OF command and
this bill would place the officer and soldier
on very unequal grounds giving the former
/ privileges which Is denied to the latter
| Mr. johnson supported the bill on the
ground, that the object of it was to extend
privileges 20 the soldiers which they did
not now enjoy. He disclaimed the idea of
this bill being introduced merely on account
of the recommendation in the presidents
message respecting the court of inquiry
lately held here. He regretted that it was
not in their power further to exempt the
soldiers from the penalties of the articles
of war, particularly as the! militia might
soon be subject to them.
| Mr. Randolph said, that one observation
caiitandu5l vuigus, was certainly intended
TO catch the feelings of the middle class of
citizens, on whom we should ultimately
have to rely for the defence of the country.
But he contended that the provisions oe the
bill could not affect the militia in time of
war, as the very essence of courts martial
at such times was that their proceedings
should be summary--Thatt this bill would be
equal to reaeal of the mutiny act, and
that it would tend TO the dissolution of the
army. He observed, that it wouldt tend TO
exalt he military over the civil authority
that the constitutional privilege of citi-
zen's being exempt from military duty was
as much violated by dragging man 100
miles as 5000--That a mans wife, his sister
or his daughter might be forced amidst the
vice and prohigacy of a camp TO give evil
dence before court martial that in the
early stages of his political life, salutarv
Jealousy had been inculcated on the ambition
OF the federal government, whenever it at
tempted any encroachments, and vet the
! bill on the table would tend to Increase the
executive and military power by encroach
/ ing OH the privileges OF the citizens. He
said, that this bill was evidently intended TO
remedy particular case. A resolution had
been brought forward by gentleman from
Kentucky, and passed, requesting the pre-
sident to institute an enquiry into the con.
duct OF certain great officer of the army.
He meant no disrespect to the president,
but he would state fact; the president did
not institute the enquiry he told the house
that he bad instituted an enquiry, and him
! ted that tie court did not possess sufficient
power. Upon this they were now legisla-
tingj every section of the bill was only
lame attempt TO remedy the defect in that
particular instance. When this bill was
first introduced, he reflected on what kind
ot reception II would have met with from
certain description of persons ten years
ago. IL would have thrown the continent
into fame. Much as he detested the a.
lien and stdition laws, he would rather have
had them tban this law.
MIR Rowan also spoke at length AGAINST
the bill. He was followed at some length
by Mr. Love, in favor Of it. as soon as
Mr. l.. ceased, motion was made to ad-
journ, and carried.
SATUREAT, March 10.
Mr.. Morrow reported bill authorship
the loan Of arms to the state of Ohio, which
was twice read and referred to commit
tee Of the whole.
The bill concerning courts martial and
courts Of enquiry was again taken up. The
question being on the passage Of the bill,
Messrs. J. Montgomery, Holland, Nicholas,
and Fisk, supported the bill and Messrs.
Sloan, Pitkcn, Randolph, and j. Clay, op-
posed It, When the question was taken by