objectionable part of the act of 1817. If such a decision had been made by the Supreme Court, Mr. C. said, he did not know but he would go along with the gentleman; but such a decision had not been made, and, he thought he had shown, could not be expected. H. OF R. Mr. C. said it would be time enough to amend the act of 1794 after a decision against its competency to the present state of things by the Supreme Court of the country, to whom the Agent of His Majesty Ferdinand VII. knows very well how to go. The President had placed the parties to the war on an equal footing: if they were equal for one object, they were for another-and, being equal in our ports, and equally entitled to the rights of belligerents, they must be placed on an equal footing in our courts. The gentleman from Maryland, Mr. C. said, or himself, was totally mistaken as to the case of the Eagle. The Power of St. Domingo was not then considered as a State-[Mr. SMITH explained that he had not referred to that case with any view to that point.] Mr. C. said he had it from The honorable gentleman from Maryland had unquestionable authority, that in the case of Mr. discovered, however, that we have no claim for Collector Gelston and the Eagle, the court had territory against Spain. [Mr. SMITH explained, refused to grant the necessary evidence of the that he had said we have possession of all we fact, "that there was probable cause" for the de- claim, and it is Spain who disputes that point tention of the vessel; and that officer was conse- with us.] When, Mr. C. asked, did we take posquently left to the operation of the law on a session to the Rio del Norte ? he believed there naked trespass. But, Mr. C. repeated, again and was an immense tract of country extending westagain, that the gentleman from Georgia would wardly to that river which we were not in posfail in the attempt to confound the virtuous strug- session of. Although Congress had been told of gle of the Patriots of South America with that an order given to suppress the establishment at of the contest of St. Domingo. There was a dif- Galveston, to this day not even a movement had ference in the facts, as there was in our laws and been made by the United States to that quarter policy respecting them. There was, in the case of the country. But, it seems, said Mr. Ĉ., that of St. Domingo, an absolute prohibition of inter- we have nothing but spoliations to complain of course, which took place, he admitted, at the in- on the part of Spain. When did the honorable stance of the French Minister; and we had not gentleman discover this? When was that gross recognised the war as a civil war, &c., or in any insult on the American flag, committed in the manner so regarded it, as that a case arising case of the Firebrand, on the Gulf of Mexico, under it in our courts could be viewed in the repaired? When was the insult on the flag of same light as a case occurring in the existing the United States in the case of the frigate Essex conflict in South America. In reply to the gen- in the Gulf of Valparaiso atoned for? Let not tleman from Virginia, who seemed to think that the gentleman escape from that by saying that that Power could not be considered as independ- the patriot flag was flying there; for Spain is ent, whose independence had not been recognised responsible for all acts committed on territory she by the United States, Mr. C. said that was not claims-for, Mr. C. said, he had no idea of this a clear case; because there were many Powers in modern doctrine of inability on the part of Spain the world, with regard to which we have no to prevent the wrongs which we are therefore to diplomatic relations whatever. Mr. C. anticipa- submit to from her territory. We have suffered ted the suggestion he perceived his friend was enough, God knows, Mr. C. said, from all the about to make, that, the South American pro- Powers of Europe; but on the subject of this vinces having been once a part of Spain, there contest with Spain, he thought there was a senwas in that circumstance an exception to the sitive delicacy displayed not often felt. He would, general rule. In reply to that argument, Mr. C. he said, prevent our citzens from committing depsaid, that whilst the power of Napoleon was at redations on her commerce; but he had no idea its extent, it had stretched over and absorbed in of succumbing to every little potentate in Europe, his empire many Powers to which the act of the King of Naples, for instance, because in the 1794 would have previously applied-Powers in course of the existing war some little injury the heart of Germany; several Powers there were might be done to our commerce. Recognise the from whom we had never received a Minister-independence of the patriots, said Mr. C., and among others, that of Murat, to whose late Government we have recently sent a Minister on one of those fruitless errands on which we too often send Ministers, &c.-[Mr. C. here gave way for an explanation by Mr. TUCKER, and then proceeded.] With regard to the case which had lately arisen in the Circuit Court of the United States at Boston, Mr. C. remarked, that he had heard from Judge Story himself, that he had entertained no doubt of the legality of the commission; but, as other questions had arisen in regard to which there was a difference of opinion between the judges, they had chosen to introduce that question into the case, to bring it before the Supreme Court. After some further remarks, they will do you justice in this respect. In regard to the independence of the Southern Republics, Mr. C. said, that Buenos Ayres had not only declared but had maintained her independence; and, acknowledged or not, was as "independent as any Power in America. Venezuela and Chili had also declared their independence. Although in the war now raging, some little injury might have been sustained by our commerce, yet, as far as his information extended, less injury had been done to it in the present war than in almost any other which as neutrals we have witnessed. He appealed to his honorable friend from Louisiana-and it would be recollected that New Orleans was one of the most suspected cities-what had been the official report of the attorney for that district? Why, that, after the most careful inquiry, he could find no instance of such offences as were charged. The fact was, Mr. C. said, he believed, with regard to these depredations, that some of the merchants engaged in the Lima trade, under the favor of the Spanish Government, disliked the interference of the patriots; and that the act of 1817 was not so much necessary to protect our commerce as the enterprises of those who enjoyed a valuable trade with the Royal authorities, and were afraid lest the patriot flag might capture and condemn their vessels. Mr. C. concluded his remarks by saying that the act of 1794 was all sufficient for every necessary purpose, connected with our neutral attitude; but, after any decision to the contrary by the highest tribunal of the country, he would go along with gentlemen and make it applicable. But with regard to the bond and security required by the law of 1817, at the discretion of every petty collector, urged on by the Spanish agents throughout the country, he hoped to see the law containing that provision expunged from the statute book. Mr. SMITH, of Maryland, replied to Mr. CLAY. There was no nation on earth, he said, whose interests required from it a fair and honorable conduct as a neutral, so much as this. Britain alone had a more extensive commerce than us; but with it had a larger marine, and was not so much bound to delicacy in its neutral deportment. We should from this consideration be careful how we relax our measures calculated to enforce it. As to the case of the Eagle, Mr. S. said the Speaker was right as to facts. But, if the law of 1817 had existed, the collector would have kept clear of that difficulty. As to the distinction taken between St. Domingo and the Spanish provinces, Mr. S. said that the flag of the former is admitted into our ports, in the same manner as the flag of any other country. With respect to our controversy with Spain, Mr. S. went on to say, he had not expected from the Speaker the remarks he had made. I know very well, said he, that we claim to the Rio del Norte. We have always avowed and held that claim; and, if we have not actual possession farther than the Sabine, it is because we are not ready to go beyond it. We hold the right, and occupy the soil as far as we find it agreeable to do so. Consequently our claims on Spain are for spoliations only. As to the case of the Firebrand, if proper explanations had not been made on that transaction, there was no doubt the President would have resented it as he ought, and that the nation would have known of it. As to the scene which occurred at Valparaiso, though the patriot flag was flying there, it appeared that Spain must be considered responsible for that. Had the Executive ever complained to Spain of that act? If it had, he had never heard of it-and he presumed it would not have been overlooked if it could be properly charged to her account. With regard to the plea of inability, to prevent violations of our rights from MARCH, 1818. her territory, the Executive had acted on the ground taken by the Speaker, in taking possession of Amelia Island. That position having become a resort for smugglers and buccaneers, it was incumbent on the Executive to put them aside, and he had done it. He was glad that, on this point at least, the honorable Speaker agreed with him. [Not at all, not at all, said Mr. CLAY.] As to the occurrences of the war, Mr. S. said we had some reasons to complain of the manner in which it had been carried on, on the part of the patriots. One of the causes of the war we lately waged with Great Britain, was the system of paper blockades. By the laws of the United States, and the proclamation of Spain, permitting the trade to all neutrals, a trade was open to us from the Rio del Norte to Mexico and had been very beneficially carried on for a number of years. But Admiral Brion, a patriot commander, had undertaken, by a paper blockade, to forbid trade to a coast two thousand miles in extent, and our vessels daring to. trade there were thus subjected to capture-the consequence of which was, that nobody attempted it; the trade is given up. Something had fallen from the Speaker, in the course of his remarks, which might produce an impression, doubtless not intended by him, that there was something in the act of 1817 which forbade the exportation of munitions of war. Nothing of the kind, said Mr. S.: on the contrary, our vessels constantly load and go to Buenos Ayres, to Chili, to Oronoke, &c., and there is no obstruction whatever in their way on our statute book. We know that contraband of war, bound to one belligerent, is liable to capture by another, and we run the risk; but our laws never have forbidden that trade. While ever a trade is open, the merchants of the United States will pursue it, whether it be to ports of Spain or of the pa triots; if the merchants think it a fair trade, they will pursue it. And yet the Speaker is offended because we pursue a little trade to the Spanish colonies. If the ideas of the Speaker are to prevail, said Mr. S., that, because our affections are with the opposite party, we shall not trade with Spain, what would now be the price of flour? Instead of ten dollars per barrel, it would be some five or six. The port of Havana alone, Mr. S. said, took one-sixth of the whole of the flour shipped from the United States for foreign consumption. Previous to the French Revolution, it had been circuitously supplied by the produce of this country; but from fifteen to twenty years that port, one of the most important in the world, had been open to us. And, Mr. S. asked, was it a crime to trade there? It is no crime to trade wherever the laws of the country permit; it is not only no crime, but it is honorable and useful to the country to open a new trade to any quarter; and he trusted it would not be long before we should have another trade open equally beneficial as any we have heretofore possessed, &c. Mr. S. concluded by some general remarks on the state of trade, which he thought as good as we had any reason to expect after the general peace in Europe. A division of the question having been called on Mr. CLAY's motion, the question was taken on so much of it as proposes, in effect, to repeal the act of 1797, and decided in the negative. For the amendment 67, against it 79. Mr. CLAY then withdrew the remainder of his proposed amendment, under the impression that this vote indicated the opinion that the act of 1794 did not apply to the existing war; and moved an amendment, the effect of which was to repeal the act of 1797, and the second and third sections of the act of 1817. After some remarks between Mr. FORSYTH and Mr. CLAY, against and for the motion The question was taken thereon, and decided in the negative. For the amendment 63, against it 65. Mr. CLAY, then, understanding these votes as evidence of the sense of the House that, until the Southern independent governments were recognised by the United States, they could not be by our courts, and therefore that commissions issued by those governments would be deemed unlawful, rose to move an amendment, going to place the Patriot governments, in fact, on the footing of equality, on which it was the declared wish of the Executive to place them. At present the Executive receives their flags; but if, when they come into the United States, those sailing under them were liable to be prosecuted as pirates, this injustice should be obviated. Such was the object, he said, of the amendment which he moved to add to the bill as a new section, to this effect: "That neither the persons nor the property of persons sailing under the flag of any colony, district, or people, in amity with the United States, should be subject to the penalties attached to piracy in the courts of the United States, for or on account of the Government of the United States having omitted to acknowledge the sovereignty and independence of such colony, district, or people.' It being late in the day, the Committee then rose and the House adjourned. THURSDAY, March 19. H. OF R. a distribution has been made of the journals and documents published under the order of the Senate and House of Representatives, respectively, pursuant to the joint resolution of the 27th of December, 1813, and what further provision is necessary to insure the transmission of the said journals and documents, according to the said resolution. Mr. SPENCER Submitted the following resolution, which was read, and ordered to lie on the table: Resolved, That, unless otherwise specially directed by the House, six hundred copies shall be struck of all such matters as may be directed to be printed, except bills and amendments. 200 That the said six hundred copies shall be disposed of, and distributed in the following manner, to wit: Two hundred copies shall be retained in the printing office, and at the close of each session be disposed of and distributed, conformably with the provisions of the resolution of the 27th of Dec., 1813 The remaining four hundred copies shall be deposited by the printer in the post-office of the House, from time to time, as the work may be executed, pursuant to his contract, and shall be promptly distributed by the Doorkeeper of On the desk of each member and delegate, one the House, as follows, to wit: To the Commissioners of the Navy Board To the Register of the Treasury To the Postmaster General To the Commissioner of the General Land Office lost, &c. Mr. JOHNSON, of Kentucky, from the Commit-To the Commissioner of Claims for property tee on Military Affairs, reported a bill for the relief of Frederick Brown; which was read twice, and committed. Mr. JOHNSON. from the same committee, reported, without amendment, the bill from the Senate, extending the time for obtaining military land warrants, and for other purposes; which bill was ordered to a third reading to-day, and read a third time accordingly, and passed. Mr. TAYLOR Submitted a joint resolution, authorizing the transportation by mail, free of postage, by the members of Congress, of the documents lately communicated by the President, respecting our relations with Spain. The resolution was twice read, ordered to be engrossed for a third reading to-day, and subsequently read a third time, and passed. To the Commissioner of the Public Buildings To such foreign Ministers as reside at the Seat of Government, or Consuls, in case of no resident Ministers, two each, supposed to amount to nine To the public printer The residue to be bound up, at the end of the session, to be deposited in the Clerk's office, as heretofore 187 2 50 aaaaaaa8 ANNG 25 1 2 25 600 A message from the Senate informed the House that the Senate have passed bills of the following titles, to wit: On motion of Mr. SPENCER, the Secretary of 1. An act to adjust the claims to lots in the State was directed to inform this House, whether I town of Vincennes, and for the sale of the land appropriated as a common for the use of the habitants of the said town. 2. An act for the relief of John Small. 3. An act respecting the surveying and sale of the public lands in the Alabama Territory. 4. An act to defray the expenses of the militia, when marching to places of rendezvous. MARCH, 1818. in-imous exertions in favor of their cause; but this 5. An act for the relief of Ashael Clark. 6. An act to authorize the Secretary of the Treasury to repay or remit certain alien duties therein described; in which bills they ask the concurrence of this House. The first and third mentioned of the said bills were, respectively, read twice, and referred to the Committee on the Public Lands. The second mentioned of the said bills was read twice, and referred to the Committee on Private Land Claims. The fourth mentioned of the said bills was read twice, and committed to a Committee of the Whole. The fifth mentioned of the said bills was read twice, and referred to the Committee on Military Affairs. The last mentioned of the said bills was read twice, and referred to the Committee of Ways and Means. The resolution from the Senate, "directing the distribution of the laws of the fourteenth Congress among the members of the fifteenth Congress," was read the third time, and passed as amended. THE NEUTRALITY BILL. The House then again resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole, on the bill in addition to the "Act for the punishment of certain crimes against the United States, and to repeal the acts therein mentioned." Mr. CLAY's motion to add a section exempting vessels sailing under the flags of unrecognised governments entering our ports, from the penalties of piracy, being still under consideration Mr. CLAY offered a few more remarks in favor of an amendment, whose objects he thought so clear and proper. As to the vote of thanks which it was said he had received from the Mexican Congress, he had no knowledge of it; but of such a distinction, if it were so, he should feel proud. If, however, said Mr. C., I have deserved such an honor from the patriots for my exertions, I submit it to my friend from Georgia, whether he does not deserve a vote of thanks from the opposite party, for his exertions on that side? Mr. T. M. NELSON replied to Mr. FORSYTH, and disclaimed any views in the votes which he gave here, other than the good of his country and mankind. He was unwilling to involve his country in war to benefit any people or Government, but he would not, from any apprehension of war, be deterred from doing equal justice, and particularly when his feelings as a republican, a philanthropist, and a christian, impelled him to wish success to every struggle for liberty, such a struggle, as he believed, was now going on in South America. Mr. N. said, the amendment proposed would involve the United States in no quarrel; it simply called for the practice of the impartial neutrality which was professed. It would not have the effect of screening from punishment depredations on American property, as Mr. FORSYTH had apprehended; it would merely not make Mr. CLAY declined taking up the time of the the punishment depend on the acknowledgment Committee any further on this motion. He would of sovereignty. The persons and property comonly say, that his object was to place the Patrioting into our ports under the Spanish flag, were flag on precisely the same footing in our ports, as not liable to punishment in our courts, and it was that of the opposite party. He disclaimed any not impartial that those sailing under the flag of intention, as he learned was presumed by some, the South American patriots should be, only be of producing by this motion an indirect recogni- cause their independence remained unacknowltion of South American independence. When-edged by our Government. The people of this ever he should bring that question before the House, as he assuredly meant to do, it would be in a way open, direct, and unambiguous. Mr. FORSYTH Opposed the motion, and entered into various arguments to show the impropriety of placing upon this footing the flags of governments purporting to be organized and independent, which might have no existence, and to whom there could be no appeal for the misconduct of those acting under commissions from their pretended authority. As an example, he mentioned the Mexican Patriot Government, of whose Congress we had some time ago heard, and which, it had been reported last year, had passed a vote of thanks to the honorable Speaker for his magnan country, Mr. N. believed, were not willing to make so flagrant a difference in favor of a Ğovernment alike intolerant to the claims of humanity towards its colonies, and regardless of the claims of justice made on it by the United States. He hoped the amendment would be agreed to. Mr. MIDDLETON spoke as to the reputed fact in the trial of a case of capture adjudicated in the district court of South Carolina, referred to in the debate. Mr. SMITH, of Maryland, spoke, to show that the amendment was not necessary to the correct adjudication of cases coming before the courts under the law. Mr. LOWNDES had no objection to the object of the amendment, but spoke some time to show that it was not sufficiently definite. It would be a monstrous injustice to subject to punishment individuals making captures and bringing them into our ports, under the flags of Governments so well established as some of the South American States-that of Buenos Ayres, for instance; but the words of the amendment would admit vessels under any flag, even such as that of a few individuals who should assemble on the obscure island of Juan Fernandez, and fit out their cruisers. It could not be the intention of the House to permit captured property to be brought into our ports, and their legality sanctioned under such authority. In these cases there ought to be either an individual or a national responsibility; in the obscure and unknown establishments to which he had alluded, this resposibility could not be national; then the responsibility ought to apply to the individual. It was said, the amendment was to apply to such flags as were admitted by the Executive, and not to such as were excluded by the Executive; Mr. L. denied that the Executive had the power, either by the Constitution or by law, to exclude any flag from our ports-that power was vested in Congress alone. The amendment would, therefore, recognise the flag of any country, however ephemeral, and thus go to destroy that individual responsibility for crimes, in our courts, which ought not to be relinquished. Mr. CLAY had no objection to any modification of his motion, which should limit its application to the independent States of South America, and he should have inserted such words himself, had he not deemed it expedient to adopt the precise language of the law of last session, in which there was no designation of any particular States. He differed, however, from Mr. LOWNDES, as to the power of the Executive to exclude any flaghe believed the President had that power; but, to settle that question, he had no objection to confer that power by the law, and let him decide what flags should be admitted, and thus come under the amendment. Mr. TUCKER, of Virginia, moved to modify the amendment to read as follows. It would not change the effect at all, but only the language; and, if adopted, it would be competent for the courts to say whether any flag in question was that of a colony, district, or people, within the meaning of the section: H. OF R. piracy, which could be committed with as well as without a commission, &c. The question was then taken on Mr. CLAY'S amendment, as modified, and carried-ayes 87. Mr. FORSYTH then said, the adoption of this section went to authorize every colony, district, or people whatsoever, to issue commissions, and to recognise such commissions in our ports. He wished that the section might be confined to responsible Governments, and not recognise any handful of men who might imbody and issue commissions to capture property on the high seas. He, therefore, moved to add to the section the following proviso: "Provided, That the colony, district, or people aforesaid, have organized an existing independent Government at the time of the commission of the fact of which the persons are charged." which might be made to this motion, said it was Mr. CLAY, after waiving the objection of order improper, because it would require too much. Venezuela, for example, which had achieved an imperishable fame by its noble and unparalleled exertions in the cause of liberty-he did not know that this State was actually independent, though it so well deserved to be, and had no doubt it would soon be-yet the flag of this Government, so much entitled to our respect and admiration, would be excluded from our ports by the proviso. On motion of Mr. TUCKER, of Virginia, the proviso was amended, to read as follows-ayes 85: "Provided, That the colony, district, or people aforesaid, have organized an existing Government, claiming to be independent at the time of the commission of the fact, of which the persons are charged.” Mr. FORSYTH moved to insert the word "responsible," after the word "existing." Mr. CLAY objected to this, as a phrase vague and unusual, applied to a nation, however definite and intelligible applied to an individual. What was a responsible Government? Some might think the Government of Spain itself, of the adored Ferdinand, not responsible. It was a term of too doubtful construction to be proper here. Mr. FORSYTH said, the word responsible was of definite and precise meaning, as applied to nations or individuals. There was a pecuniary responsibility certainly, but the Speaker understood perfectly well there were other responsibilities, too, with respect to nations. His wish was to "And be it further enacted, That in prosecutions permit the courts to judge whether the Governeither against persons or property, sailing under the flag ment, claiming to be independent, was so constiof any colony, district, or people, which shall be admitted tuted as to enable the United States to make it into the ports of the United States, it shall not be answerable for the conduct of those sailing under deemed ground for the punishment or condemnation its commission. Before the end of the present of such person or property, that the sovereignty of session of Congress, he hoped to be permitted to such colony, district, or people, has not been acknowl-show to the Speaker how the adored Ferdinand edged by the Government of the United States." might be made responsible for the conduct of Spain to the United States. Mr. CLAY expressed his thanks for this information, and the pleasure it gave him. Mr. FORSYTH's motion was lost, and the proviso was then agreed to, as modified by Mr. TUCKER. The Committee then rose, and reported the bill |