Burlington free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1827-1865, 1838-03-09

United States and the higher officers OF
the Government.
About l25 carriages followed the re-
mans to the grave, and probably more than
SIX thousand people. The two flag. over
The two wings Of the capitol, were KEEP, at
bali mast during the day, and the city
seemed to have been almost a city Of the
| lead.
The Judges Of the Supreme Court refu.
! srd TO attend Mr.. C;llcy's funeral, giving
as reason, the fact that he was killed in
a personal rccontre.
| WAsHINGToN, Feb. 90. In the HOUSE,
the committee on foreign affairs reported
back to the House, the original Neutrality
as i. came from the Senate. But, though
the committee as a committee could not
| agree upon any amendments, H0mard aud
| Patton, members Of it, commenced with
moving great number; among tho rest,
they got in clause providing, that nothing
in the bill should De construed as restricting
the trade in arms allowed under the law of
nations Some discussion took place upon
these amendments, and liually Patton and
Legare began an attempt to frlghten the
House into an immediate passage of the
bill, because. if the bill was no, passed
Great Britain would DO offended, and we
ought to be very cautious and careful how
we offended Great Britain.
BMdie Pennsylvania protested again4,
urging the bill through the House, BY
such arguments as these. Whatever
| our natural relations, oDr neutral duty
might require, that he was wiling TO do:
, bu, he would not 60 one step further. by
the law Of nations, as 1t was admitted on NJ
haUds, the trade IN arms was no viola, ion
OF neu llty. If Britain chose to prohoil
that trade. she had a right to copf-ca'e
the goods OF those engaged in u. when she
could seize upon them within her own
territory Bot why call upon Us enforce
| her revenue laws? Way should we leri,.
| late in her bchal' Certainty we Ought
! no, to do 50, for fear, lest # We did not,
| Great Britain might b. offended! Tina,
was not proper argument 10 be used ~
this House, aud he never would vote for
any measure under the pressure of such an
argumon'.
| .Vea(ce pursued the same train Of rta.
sonln,. Whatever our duties required, he
vas az ready a any man to dn. But he
/ nAd no Inclination - 90 any tur'hcr. Tbs
/ bIIl had now openly assumed The character
Of n bill 10 suppress bGnon IN the Canads7
! He would no, vote for any such bl Il. He
] ,ttb n ,,n T.
the government had excepted lis neutral
duties rowards MfxIco. when he was called
10 order by H1clrd and stopped by the
Speaker, for wandering from the poiur
under discussion, the custom b ing on
the Adoption o. n certain amendment to q
certain am.ndmen'.
j. @ .lIaals requested to know wha, the
onesr,on wa; and after great many pro-
posed amendments had been read, bv way
1T explaining he nature ot the point before
the House. .ldlms said that he would not
trouble the clerk to read any further, tor
the more he read, the more difficult be
found it to understand the mater before
the House. The amendments were numcr-
Oh, and complicated, and must be printed
IN ordnrto BE- understood Bur he had this
did not meet The case PM in the president :
mossaae, and to meet which case this b II
had been introduced. The president =
message began with complaining of lufrac-
uons Of our neutrality on the southern from
<ller for two years past, which the existing
AVS had proved inadequate to prevent, and
then went on to speak of the existing
;, troubles in>Cannda. But in the course OF
II the debate, T>>had been openly avOwcd,
J., Tint There was n6>Inton'ion 80 apply the
I, provisions of this blIIra the case Of Texas
ank Mexico. but to canItNe it entirely To
!, the case of Canada. Such was, the char.
ac'er of most O! the amendments proposed :
, aud if they were adopted, the bill ougITt>l 70
p have COR ia llrlc, "A 5l'i to put down in
, snrcction in Canada. Gcntcm n had at
/ tempted to draw distinctions between
4 Canada and Texas, because Texas was an
lndopendant nation acknowledged by u' to
hc so. Bat the same duty Of neutrality,
, which would prevent rs from interfering IN
/, the CANADIAN civil war, ought to prevent
us from interfering in the international war
, between Mexico and Texas. 1t was not
fnr ~ 10 dcnounce the Canadian ingurgeuts
os rebels. Neutrality ought to prevent US
from taking side with either party, There
? was an appeal to war, the last resort for
! tho settlement of civil and national disputes
:. aud pending tina, appeal, 1t was not for us
IL the exercise of our duty Of neutrality,
A to take side with either party. In any
0 fermer case, so far as any leaning on the
Dart Of our government, was dlscernlbIe, il