Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1818-12-12


not referred TO lis consideration. He al
luded TO the subject Of the Seminole war.
That war involved our relations with
foreign power, which were committed TO
the committee ofioreign relations, but an
important incident III that war, the execu-
ton OF Arbuthnot a. Ambristsr, WAS confid-
eel 10 the military committee aud in pro-
ceeding on one subject. they could not
weh avoid the other. The committee of
foreign relations did moi, therefore, know
well now TO proceed, unless they had the
whole matter before them and in offer
ing the following motion, il was not done
without an understanding 10 that effect
with the committee on military affairs
Mr.. Ii. then submitted the following:
RcSotred, That the coinmRitiee on Military
Affairs he discharged from the further coDsi-
deratlon OF so much OF the Presidents Message
as relates to the execution OF Arbnthnot and
Ambrister, aid the conduct of the war with
the Seminole Indians and that the same he
referred to the committee OF Foreign Relations.
MIR. JOHNSON OF Ky. said he had not
been apprised, ill this morning, of the
difficulty which existed on tins subject
He cheer!ully acqulesced in the motion
and IL had been the intention OF the com
mitfee on military affairs 10 ask Ia be dis.
charged from the subject referred to in
the resolution. The military committee
would still have abundant business 10 oc.
cupy them, in the military affairs of the
county.
Mr.. T. NJ. Nelson objected TO this
course. as he thought the examination of
the Seminole war, and particularly OF the
execution of Arbuthnet ami Ambrister,
belonged properly aud exclusively to The
military committee: and he was, there
I'm t1E Sl,a ct,l, lrnF
their hands.
Mr.. POINDEXTER moved to amend
the resolution, by changing the word
+" execution" for the word " trial." as it
was the word in the original reference Of
the subject TO the military committee.
MIR. HARRISON suggested whether ii
would not be better TO retain both words.
Mr.. PoINDEXTER stated, that his OBJ
ject was only TO preserve consistency in
the proceeding, by retaining in this reso-
luton the words used by The President in
his message on the subject, and in the
original reference of il. The President
had said nothing about the erecation of
these men, aud OF course the resolution
proposed TO refer 10 Il committee sub
iect of the Presidents message, which
was not msntioned in The message, &c.
The amendment was agreed to-ayes
&C, noes "a.
Mr.. HARRISON then moved 10 add the
word erecuiion, iliat the reference might
embrace both the trial and execution.
Mr.. HoPKINsoN thought this would
be Improper for although he was near
iy Indifferent about the question, il was
certainly improper to refer TO comr1it-
Tee, as a part of the Presidents message,
what the message did mol contain, land The
message was entirely silent about the ex-
ecution of The individuals named.
The amendment proposed by MIR. Har-
'isOn, was agreed TO,
Mr.. w. p. MACLAY suggested wheth-
er the object of the resolution might not
be got at better by simply referring those
documents 10 The committee on foreign
relations. so far as they were connected
with foreiga affairs. The trial Of those
men seemed 10 him subject peculiarly
proper for the investigation of the militia
~ committee, and ought not 10 be with
drawn from il, &c.
Mr. BARBOUR, as member OF the
committee of foreign relations, stated
"a ha had been done IN the committee, IN
relation 10 this subject. they had found
that, in investigating our relations with
one of the powers OF Europe, the Semi
mole war necessarily constituted an I'M
poriant link in the enquiry, but that this
subject was referred to another commit
tee. Ii was then proper TO ascertain the
sense OF the house how they should pro-
coed. The committee wished neither TO
infringe on the duties of any other COM
mittee, nor TO shrink from their own. As
TO what had been said OH the amendment,
he observed, incidentally, that il the com
mittee weRt into an investigation of the
trial, il would be proper TO pursue it to
the fruits of that trial. As tothe question
of reference, he should be satisfied in
whatever way il was decided, &c.
Mr.. JOHNSON, OF Kentucky, had readi-
ly consented 10 this transfer of the sub
iect, because he thought the military
question was not so important as the pc
litical question. The military inquiry
could result in nothing but report of
facts, not i'll any specific recommends
ton. The President had the power TO
act when AN officer errs, even TO striking
him off the roll of The army. He asked
If circumstances, seeing that the Presi-
dent had refra,Ded from any exercise of
his power in Ills case, had moi shewn that
the conduct of the officer was thus tar
sustained hy the Executive Ii so, the
committee could not interfere between
iiIfm. The political enquiry was of a dit
fereni character. That was TO ascertain
hos az the nation has acted with justice
and Ia soud faith towards foreign pow
or and I'M what or where II had failed in
lis duties 10 that power. II, however, the
House thought proper TO refer the militia
nv question, or any other, to the military
committee, he would promise for them
that iheywould discharge theirduty faith
fully.
Mr.. HARRISON supported the view
taken by MIR. Maciay. II would certainly
be highly improper TO take from tie mill
tary committee this subject altogether-a
subject which was so strictly military
one already referred TO it, and one which