The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1808-02-06
CONGRESS.

HOUSE OF REPREHEN'7.d71YEs,
THURSDAY, Jan. z.
DEBATE
On the Resolution for requesting she Pre-
si6ent TO cause an enquiry TO be made into
the conduct Of Gen. HIikinson.
(coNrINvED.)
Mr.. Macon said he had not intended when
he first spoke on this subject, though he
might have expressed himself inaccurately,
to express an op inion on the guilt of general
Wilkinson. His object was to give no opinion
on the subject. He had then stated as rea-
son why the House ought to adopt the resell
ution, that the observations which had fall
len from the gentleman from Kentucky, CIr.
Johnson) would have been sufficient ground
Tor It, He wished to express no opinion on
the merits or dement's of this affair.
Mr.. Lope said his principal object in ris-
ing second time, was to know whether he
had understood the precedent, read from the
journals OF former session by the gentleman
from North Carolina (Mr. Macon) and rcli-
ed ON by the gentleman from Virginia Mr.
Randolph.) For if he had understood the
Journals right, without intending any disre-
spect, TO either of those gentlemen. he must
acknowledge, they did not in this instance.
seem to have exercised, the powers of dis
elimination, which he had supposed thei,
| minds to be endowed with: Ifhe had heard
| distinctly the reading of the journal, it stat
ed that, resolution had been introduced
requesting the President, to enquire into the
causes of the defeat, the American arms had
| sustained under general Sinclair; which was
| nesatived by large majority-but, that on
motion to refer that enquiry, to commit
tee OF their own body, it was agreed to: The
resolution which was adopted and Is said to
form the precedent for this, was notlnne
more, than that committee should enquire
into the causes of this defeat; this said Mr..
| l.. was surely proper, it related to subject
| which Congress might properly feel it it's
duty, and for its own eXculpation, to enquire
| INTO; 1t did not contemplate as the original
| resolution in this case does, an enquiry into
the conduct of any military officer, but such
an enquiry as would enable Congress itself to
shew, that the terrible defeat our armies had
| suffered, was not attributable to any impre-
per conduct on their part, in withholding the
necessary means of victory, or the proper
supplies for our army: really said Mr.. l.. the
selection of this precedent seems to be an I'M
fortunate one for those who rely on it, one
which he should gladly have adduced for the
very opposite purpose for which it had been
! adduccd.
But a contradictory conduct MIR. l.. said
had been attributed to those, who protested
a Willingness to adopt the present resolution,
| ana at the same time commended against the
power OF acting on the subject: if there was
such scmblance of contradiction, surely
moments reflection would satisfy any gen
tieman it was not in reality so. This subject
had been obtruded on the House, how proper
| ~ would be hereafter Judged of, they had so
lar entertained and acted on it, he was now
| willing to take such steps as would enable
them to get rid of it; but the resolution he
advocated the adoption of, was of nature
totally different from the one originally pro-
posed, aud contained in it no infracton of the
constitutional right of another department of
the government: The most that can be said
OF this is that it may produce an unpro6ta-
bic waste OF our time, and that we ought on
ly to act on it, in order to yet clear of a giea-
ter evil; the other is of dangerous kind
Mr.. L.. said he was astonished at the manner,
| in which this subject had been treated in
stead OF an attempt to reply to the objections
urged against the original resolution, the
House had been occupied in listening topper
sonai lnvectlve, and general, underlined, vague
charges against military character, who
had not here the power of reply, it would
certainly have been more proper, and in e.
very respect more correct, to address the I'M
derstandlng on the subject, introduced to the
| consideration of Congress, and to have endea-
jected to the right ofentertaining it.
Mr.. Roman was opposed to this resolution,
not because OF the extent of power which it
assumed, but because it was Short of the DOW
err which ought be exercised on this occa-
son; nor was he opposed to enquiry, because
its effect would be to place solitary indivi-
dual against a host, when in fact the host
was in his favor. If information was neces-
sary, at all, why confne it ? IF necessary,
why not procure all within their power
BY admitting that Daniel Clark should lay
on the table the information in his possession,
they admitted that it was proper to have in
formation; then why not admit all the infor-
NATION requisite to clear understanding and
fair decision of this question,
lhave another objection, (said Mr.. R) to
this course of proceeding: this House will
have gone into discussion OF the subject of
an enquiry the testimony adduced may not
be relevant, and the character of the man
will shine the brighter after the discussion
and Why Because testimony will have been
collected No. Because a discussion under
color OF an enquiry will have taken place
without effect. 1t will serve only as an addi-
tional buoy his character. Make the So
luton ample; go into full enquiry. You
have power, exercise it and you shall have
| my feeble support. But it was said that there
was no precedent for this case. How were
prccedents formed in the first instancep
har D.