Supplemental Journal.-Embargo Bill.

tend, is not so terrific and almighty as is ima-se. Although inconvenient, it is not to be viewed gined. only as to its hardships. As connected with another part of policy, it is very important. He said, in proportion to his worldly substance, no one pro rata will suffer more by it than himself. He resided with a patriotic set of men, who will join in opposing a noble front, and who are determined to avenge our wrongs.

Sir, we have intelligence by the last mails from the Capes of Virginia, that the vessels of that nation are capturing our's, from the Chesapeake to France, within two leagues of our coast, laden with produce of our own soil, and not contraband of war. Mr. M. said, he was of opinion this measure ought to be accompanied with another-with letters of marque and reprisal. We ought to let the cannon accompany the flag. The voice of the cannon ought to speak the voice of the nation, under the stripes of the nation. We ought to have no party feelings. He wished the country might be united-that all petty divisions about ins and outs may be put aside, and that an united front may be opposed.

He said, he gave his assent to the measure, less under the correctness of his understanding, than from a respect to the authorities of the country. When it came recommended by the Executive, he did not feel proud enough to differ. He, therefore, yielded to what he thought the rational, proper wish of others. As a Republican, he would comply with the opinion of the majority. It is upon our divisions, and the imbecility of our Councils, that our enemy builds her hopes. He believes, that gentlemen who have opposed our measures, have done it from honorable motives; but our measures are good enough if we are united. All we want is to form a phalanx. If united, the work is done, and we could then take a rank among the nations. But how are we as a nation? We cannot even get a national song, without depending on others. He hoped we might not verify the observation of that illustrious commentator, the "Federalist," that our danger is not from tyranny in the head, but from anarchy in the end. He knew that an embargo would be an unwelcome prescription; but is a disagreeable prescription for a violent disease to be rejected? Are we not told from high authorty, that if thy member offend, cut it off? He considered this as an efficient measure. He said we were living in a land flowing with milk and honey. It is better to keep our wheat and flour at home, than to let it go abroad, and be taken. He may be asked, is he willing to withhold supplies from, and starve the people of that country? He would deliberately answer yes, when by rescinding their decrees they can so easily do us justice.

He desired the House to look at the condition of the Island of Barbadoes-the situation of the planters, who are obliged to substitute beets for cane. In the most plaintive terms they represent their situation as desperate. They have not a stave for a rum puncheon. In consequence of the mortgages on their estates, and the danger of insurrection of their blacks, they are reduced almost to despair.

When you talk of the omnipotence of that nation, look at their impotence. We are as different from them as angels are from infernal spirits. He knew that this measure is not desirable per

Mr. RANDOLPH said, he had listened with attention to the observations of the gentleman from New York, (Mr. MITCHILL.) The gentleman's reasons, if there is any weight in them, are in favor of letters of marque and reprisal, but not in favor of the ruinous measure now under consideration. When the gentleman justifies himself, in shielding himself under authority, in his approbation of the measure, he should have supposed he ought to have been influenced by the authority of a respectable gentleman, (meaning the Vice President) first in war, first in peace, and first in the hearts of his countrymen, within the State of New York, who is now insensible of the distresses of the country. The gentleman says, we ought to take our stand among the belligerents. We cannot take this stand. We are but a young people. We are just emerging from a Revolution-a Revolution, which was soon succeeded by an European war, which has been to us like the draining of a farm-yard, which has enriched us beyond measure, which has raised our hamlets and villages to first-rate cities. To this we owe our present greatness. To this we owe the language the gentleman has this evening used. Sir, what has been the fate of those nations who have undertaken to take their stand among the belligerents? They have become, like the humble gunboats, in the wake of European belligerents. What has become of Prussia? She is extinct. What of Russia? She, with a territory and population far beyond ours, has been anxious to take the stand which the gentleman wishes, but she dares not. Sir, we may become parties to the war, under the name of allies: but we shall be the first servants of those whose cause we espouse. We may escape this conflict with honor. What is honor in a nation? Is it honor to cope with those who are so greatly our superiors? It is our duty and interest to wait. He very well knew, that in times of feverish-anxiety and impotent restlessness, nothing is more irksome than to preach up patience, and that we ought to wait for events.

Mr. R. said, he did not pay much regard to the argument that the belligerents calculate upon our divisions. It is an old, and if he might be permitted to say, a stale apology, calculated by Ministers to unite a people. The charge of the majority, which is so often made against the minority, is futile. It is ridiculous for them to urge it. The President of the United States can indisputably carry his measures in Congress, as much as any Minister ever did. No minority is, or ever has been of any effect. All experience proves it. He would exhort both Houses of Congress to follow the dictates of their own minds, and not adopt the sentiments of the gentleman from New York. There is no danger

Supplemental Journal-Embargo Bill.

Supplemental Journal.-Embargo Bill.

|

miah Morrow, Anthony New, Thomas Newton, Ste- vier, Adam Seybert, Samuel Shaw, John Smilie, phen Ormsby, Israel Pickens, William Piper, James George Smith, John Smith, Philip Stuart, William Pleasants, jun., Benjamin Pond, Peter B. Porter, John Strong, John Taliaferro, Uri Tracy, George M. Troup, Rhea, John Roane, Jonathan Roberts, Ebenezer Sage, Charles Turner, jun., Leonard White, David R. WilEbenezer Seaver, John Sevier, Samuel Shaw, John liams, William Widgery, Thomas Wilson, and RichSmilie, George Smith, John Smith, William Strong, ard Winn. John Taliaferro, Uri Tracy, George M. Troup, Charles Turner, junior, David R. Williams, William Widgery, and Richard Winn.

NAYS-John Baker, James Breckenridge, Elijah Brigham, William Ely, Richard Jackson, jun., Lyman Law, Joseph Lewis, junior, Timothy Pitkin, junior, NATS-John Baker, Abijah Bigelow, Harmanus Josiah Quincy, John Randolph, William Reed, Henry Bleecker, Adam Boyd, James Breckenridge, Elijah M. Ridgely, Daniel Sheffey, Richard Stanford, Lewis Brigham, William A. Burwell, Epaphroditus Cham- B. Sturges, Benjamin Tallmadge, and Laban Wheaton. pion, Martin Chittenden, John Davenport, jr., William A division of the question was called for by Ely, James Emott, Asa Fitch, Thos. R. Gold, Aylett Mr. PITKIN: Whereupon, it was taken on conHawes, Richard Jackson, jun., Joseph Kent, Philip curring with the said first amendment of the SenB. Key, Lyman Law, Joseph Lewis, jun., Robert Le Roy Livingston, Nathaniel Macon, Archibald Mc-ate, and it passed in the affirmative-yeas 56, Bryde, James Milnor, Jonathan O. Moseley, Hugh nays 53, as follows: Nelson, Joseph Pearson, Timothy Pitkin, jr., Elisha R. Potter, Josiah Quincy, John Randolph, William Reed, Henry M. Ridgely, William Rodman, Adam Seybert, Daniel Sheffey, Richard Stanford, Philip Stuart, Lewis B. Sturges, Samuel Taggart, Benjamin Tallmadge, Laban Wheaton, Leonard White, and Thomas Wilson.

YEAS-Willis Alston, junior, William Anderson, Ezekiel Bacon, David Bard, William W. Bibb, William Blackledge, Adam Boyd, Robert Brown, William A. Burwell, John C. Calhoun, Langdon Cheves, William Crawford, Roger Davis, John Dawson, Elias Earle, Wm. Findley, Thos. Gholson, Peterson Goodwyn, Isaiah L. Green, Felix Grundy, Bolling Hall, R. King, Abner Lacock, Joseph Lefever, Peter Little, Obed Hall, John A. Harper, John M. Hyneman, Wm. Aaron Lyle, Nathaniel Macon, Alexander McKim, Jeremiah Morrow, Hugh Nelson, Thomas Newton, Stephen Ormsby, Israel Pickens, William Piper, James Pleasants, jr., Benjamin Pond, Peter B. Porter, John Rhea, John Roane, Jonathan Roberts, Ebenezer Sage, Ebenezer Seaver, John Sevier, Adam Seybert, John Smilie, Richard Stanford, William Strong, John Taliaferro, George M. Troup, Charles Turner, jr., David R. Williams, William Widgery, and Richard Winn.

Mr. STANFORD was then about to debate the
question upon the concurrence with the Senate in NAYS-Stevenson Archer, John Baker, Burwell
their amendments, when he was stopped by the Bassett, Abijah Bigelow, Harmanus Bleecker, James
Speaker, and informed that it was inadmissible Breckenridge, Elijah Brigham, William Butler, Epa-
to discuss the question, and that it must be forth-phroditus Champion, Martin Chittenden, Matthew
with put without debate.

Clay, John Davenport, junior, Joseph Desha, Samuel
Thomas R. Gold, Aylett Hawes, Richard Jackson, jr.,
Dinsmoor, William Ely, James Emott, Asa Fitch,
Richard M. Johnson, Joseph Kent, Philip B. Key,
Lyman Law, Joseph Lewis, jr., Robert Le Roy Living-
ston, William Lowndes, Archibald McBryde, Samuel
McKee, Arunah Metcalf, James Milnor, Samuel L.
Mitchill, Jonathan O. Moseley, Anthony New, Joseph-
Pearson, Timothy Pitkin, jun., Elisha R. Potter, Josiah
Quincy, John Randolph, William Reed, Henry M.
Ridgely, William Rodman, Daniel Sheffey, George
Smith, John Smith, Philip Stuart, Lewis B. Sturges,
Samuel Taggart, Benjamin Tallmadge, Uri Tracy,
Laban Wheaton, Leonard White, Thomas Wilson.

From which decision of the Speaker, an appeal was made to the House by Mr. STANFORD, and being seconded, the question was taken, "Is the decision of the Chair correct?" and passed in the affirmative-yeas 86, nays 17, as follows: YEAS-Willis Alston, jr., William Anderson, Stevenson Archer, Ezekiel Bacon, David Bard, Burwell Bassett, William W. Bibb, William Blackledge, Harmanus Bleecker, Adam Boyd, Robert Brown, William A. Burwell, William Butler, John C. Calhoun, Epaphroditus Champion, Langdon Cheves, Martin Chittenden, Matthew Clay, William Crawford, Roger Davis, John Dawson, Joseph Desha, Samuel Dinsmoor, Elias Earle, William Findley, James Fisk, Asa Fitch, Thomas Gholson, Peterson Goodwyn, Isaiah L. Green, Felix Grundy, Bolling Hall, Obed Hall, John A Harper, Aylett Hawes, John M. Hyneman, Richard M. Johnson, Joseph Kent, Philip B. Key, William R. King, Abner Lacock, Joseph Lefever, Peter Little, Robert Le Roy Livingston, William Lowndes, Aaron Lyle, Nathaniel Macon, Archibald McBryde, Samuel McKee, Alexander McKim, Arunah Metcalf, Samuel L. Mitchill, Jeremiah Morrow, Hugh Nelson, Anthony New, Thomas Newton, Stephen Ormsby, Israel Pickens, William Piper, James Pleasants, jr., Benjamin Pond, Peter B. Porter, Elisha R. Potter, John Rhea, John Roane, Jonathan Roberts, William Mr. CRAWFORD, from the Joint Committee for Rodman, Ebenezer Sage, Ebenezer Seaver, John Se-Enrolled Bills, reported that the Committee had

The second and last amendment of the Senate to the said bill was then again read and concur red in; and Mr. CALHOUN and Mr. WILLIAMS were appointed a committee to deliver a message to the Senate, and inform them that the House of Representatives have concurred in their amendments to the bill aforesaid. The doors were then opened.

SATURDAY, April 4.

The House was cleared of all persons, and the doors were closed.

Supplemental Journal.—Additional Brigadier Generals.

examined an enrolled bill, entitled "An act laying an embargo on all ships and vessels in the ports and harbors of the United States for a limited time," and had found the same to be truly enrolled; when the SPEAKER signed the said bill, and Mr. CALHOUN and Mr. WILLIAMS were appointed the committee to carry the same to the Senate, for the signature of the President.

ADDITIONAL BRIGADIER GENERALS. The House resumed the consideration of the bill authorizing the President of the United States to appoint additional Brigadier Generals, &c.

ART. 15. To provide for calling forth the militia, to execute the laws of the Union, suppress insurrection, and repel invasion.

For these three purposes, and no other, have the Federal Government authority to command the militia.

ART. 16. To provide for organizing, arming, and diciplining the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively the appointment of the officers and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress.

The second article of the amendment to the Constitution: "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

Mr. SAMMONS.-Mr. Speaker: If those officers are intended to command the militia, I trust in In this is explained how far the Convention God this bill, will not pass. What! shall our mil-gave power to Congress to organize, discipline itia be commanded by officers, commissioned by and govern the militia, who might be called into the President? Can the President be as well the service of the United States, agreeably to the acquainted with the qualifications and abilities three enumerated articles, and the States reserved of officers in the militia as the Governors of the respectively the appointments of all their officers States? It cannot be expected. What spirit can without any exception. Congress having power be in the people to support the war if the Federal to prescribe the mode or manner of deciplineGovernment takes away the right of the States the States reserving to themselves the training to appoint the officers for commanding their mil- and disciplining of the militia, as Congress shall itia? If our Government takes away our liberty, prescribe. is it necessary to contend with a foreign Government for our rights? In former times the officers were appointed in such parts as the men were raised that is not the case now. Some time in the session, I was told by some of the Southern members, we will give you officers if you will find the men." It is a fact, that, before our New York troops were raised, a Major from North Carolina was appointed; and was ordered to take the command of troops enlisted in New York. Governor Hull's son, from Detroit, is appointed to the command of one of our companies, and is on command with his father as his aid. Where is the justice? Shall we have companies without captains, or shall the United States pay for two captains? (for Hull is returned in Colonel Schuyler's regiment as captain.) He cannot belong there. In such proceedings I almost tremble for the consequence to my country.

There is no necessity or propriety in appointing more Generals, in my opinion, at present, for our regulars for the President is directed to appoint eight Brigadiers and two Major Generals. I believe they are not all appointed, and of those that are appointed, I hear one is sent home because they have no command for him. If this bill passes, our Government will be as bad as that of Great Britain before the Revolution. In the Declaration of Independence, we complain of the King, that "he 'has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent 'hither swarms of officers to harass our people ' and eat out their substance." But if those ten Generals are not sufficient, this House has passed a bill at the request of the President of the United States to commission and appoint the officers for fifty thousand militia volunteers. There are limits empowering how many he shall appoint he may appoint twelve Brigadiers and four Major Generals-will not that be as many as he wanted? The Constitution of the United States gives no more power to Congress over the militia, than is enumerated in three articles:

So long as we are governed by this authority we are free, and no longer. When the Federal Government exceeds those bounds we are no more free. What! shall the President appoint officers for militia? I hope not-I hope we will yet remain free. If it shall come to that, that militia officers are appointed by the President, I am a militia officer-I will never surrender the State rights-I would not be commanded by themand I say, so help me God if I do! Is it not as plain as it can be that the militia are State troops, to all intents and purposes? not United States troops; for this article is explicit and plain-that well regulated militia are necessary to the secuMilitia were rity of a free State, not States. never intended for the United States, but for the individual States, to defend their State rights. I hope, on due reflection on the subject, this bill will not pass the House.

A question was made, whether the provisions contained in the bill were of such a nature as to require secrecy in the discussion; and, on motion of Mr. CHEVES, the bill was again ordered to lie on the table.

Mr. CRAWFORD, from the Joint Committee for Enrolled Bills, reported that the committee did, this day, present to the President of the United States, for his approbation, an enrolled bill, entitled "An act laying an embargo on all ships and vessels in the ports and harbors of the United States, for a limited time," and that the committee were instructed by the President to inform the House that he had approved and signed the said bill.

A motion was then made by Mr. GRUNDY, and seconded, that the injunction of secrecy imposed by this House on their proceedings relating to

Supplemental Journal.—Violation of Secrecy.

the bill, entitled "An act laying an embargo on all ships and vessels in the ports aud harbors of the United States, for a limited time," be now removed: And the question thereon being taken, it passed in the affirmative.

The House then again resumed the consideration of the question, whether the provisions of the bill authorizing the President of the United States to appoint additional Brigadier Generals in certain cases, were of such a nature as to require secrecy in the discussion: And, on motion of Mr. ROBERTS, the bill was again ordered to lie on the table.

And the doors were opened.

MONDAY, April 6.

On motion of Mr. PORTER, the House was cleared, and the doors were closed.

Mr. PORTER, from the committee appointed on that part of the President's Message, which relates to foreign relations, presented a bill to prohibit the exportation of specie, 'goods, wares, and merchandise, for a limited time; which was read the first time: When a question was made and taken, whether the subject-matter of the said bill required secrecy, and passed in the affirmative yeas 56, nays 49, as follows:

YEAS-Willis Alston, junior, David Bard, Burwell Bassett, William W. Bibb, William Blackledge, Adam Boyd, Robert Brown, William A. Burwell, William Butler, John C. Calhoun, Matthew Clay, James Cochran, John Clopton, William Crawford, John Dawson, Joseph Desha, Samuel Dinsmoor, Elias Earle, Wm. Findley, Thomas Gholson, Peterson Goodwyn, Isaiah L. Green, Felix Grundy, Bolling Hall, Obed Hall, John A. Harper, Aylett Hawes, Jacob Hufty, John M. Hyneman, William R. King, Abner Lacock, Joseph Lefever, Peter Little, Aaron Lyle, Alexander McKim, Samuel L. Mitchill, Hugh Nelson, Anthony New, Thomas Newton, Stephen Ormsby, Israel Pickens, James Pleasants, jun., John Rhea, John Roane, Jonathan Roberts, Ebenezer Sage, Ebenezer Seaver, John Sevier, Samuel Shaw, John Smilie, John Smith, John Taliaferro, Geo. M. Troup, Robert Whitehill, William Widgery, and Richard Winn.

has been any, and, if any, what, violation of the secrecy imposed by this House during the present session, as to certain of its proceedings, made the following report:

The committee, to whom was referred the resolution directing an inquiry to be made whether any, and, if any, what, violation of the secrecy imposed by this House during the present session, as to certain of its proceedings, have, according to order, proceeded in said inquiry, and beg leave to state, that, under the authority with which they were invested by this House, they have caused to come before them four witnesses, whose testimony on oath is as follows, to wit:

Charles Prentiss, 'states, that he furnished to the editors of the Spirit of Seventy-six (a paper printed in Georgetown) the paragraph giving an account of the proceedings of the House of Representatives, while sitting with closed doors on the subject of the embargo; and he further says, that he did not receive the information, or any part thereof, which enabled him to write said paragraph, from any member of Congress, or officer of this House. Upon being interrogated, he states, that he received the whole of his information from Nathaniel Rounsavell, one of the editors of the Alexandria Herald; that he received it on Wednesday, late at night; and he asked Mr. Rounsavell, whether the injunction of secrecy had been removed. Rounsavell replied that he had not inquired. On Thursday morning, the witness spoke to some of the members on the subject, and from their conduct he was satisfied the injunction of secrecy had not been removed; notwithstanding which the witness sent the paragraph above alluded to, to the editors of the Spirit of Seventy-six on Thursday.

John M. Carter, and James B. Carter, editors of the Spirit of Seventy-six, state, that they received from Mr. Prentiss, in writing, the statement which appeared in their paper; that they received no information on the subject from any member or officer of the House.

Nathaniel Rounsavell, upon being interrogated, says, he composed the paragraph which appeared in the Alexandria Herald of Friday last, containing a statement of the secret proceedings of the House of Representatives upon the subject of the embargo; and that he, on Wednesday night, after the adjournment of the House, derived a part of the information on which he NAYS-Stevenson Archer, Ezekiel Bacon, John Bawas enabled to give the detailed account from the conker, Abijah Bigelow, Harmanus Bleecker, Jas. Breck-versation of members of the House, with whom he acenridge, Epaphroditus Champion, Langdon Cheves, cidentally fell in company; that he was acquainted Martin Chittenden, John Davenport, junior, William with the members, and they with him; they knew he Ely, James Emott, James Fisk, Asa Fitch, Thomas R. was present; he partook, in some degree, in the conGold, Richard Jackson, junior, Joseph Kent, Joseph versation. Lewis, junior, Robert Le Roy Livingston, William Lowndes, Nathaniel Macon, Archibald McBryde, Samuel McKee, Arunah Metcalf, James Milnor, Jeremiah Morrow, Jonathan O. Moseley, Joseph Pearson, Wilham Piper, Timothy Pitkin, junior, Benjamin Pond, Peter B. Porter, Elisha R. Potter, Josiah Quincy, John Randolph, William Reed, Henry M. Ridgely, Adam Seybert, Daniel Sheffey, George Smith, Richard Stanford, Silas Stow, Lewis B. Sturges, Benjamin Tallmadge, Uri Tracy, Laban Wheaton, Leonard White, David R. Williams, and Thomas Wilson.

The bill was then read the second time, and committed to a Committee of the Whole to-day.

VIOLATION OF SECRECY.

Mr. GRUNDY, from the committee appointed, on the fourth instant, to inquire whether there

Question by the committee.

From the conversation of what members did you collect the information of which you have spoken? The witness refused to answer the interrogatory. Question 2d. At what place was the conversation held?

Witness refused to answer.

Question 3d. Have you seen the members alluded to, or any of them, since you first appeared before the Committee on Saturday last?

Witness likewise refused to answer this interrogatory.

Whereupon, it is ordered by the committee that the Sergeant-at-Arms detain the said Rounsavell in his custody until the pleasure of the House of Representatives relative to the conduct of said witness can be ascertained.