497 FEBRUARY, 1803. HISTORY OF CONGRESS. District of Columbia. 'buildings." Now, he took it that the power of Congress extended equally and alike to all these places accepted in consequence of the cession of particular States, and it was equally absolute upon Congress to retain all, the one as well as the other. He was apprehensive that the argument of gentlemen, if it proved anything, proved too much. He doubted whether gentlemen would contend, that when Congress once accept a piece of ground for an arsenal or a dock yard, they thereby oblige themselves to retain the exclusive jurisdiction forever. The practise of the House this very session disproved it; for they had very lately passed an act giving away the corner of a navy yard. But the words of the Constitution are not imperative; they do not say that Congress shall exercise exclusive jurisdiction over the places thus ceded by the States. What is the situation of the territory at present? The laws of the States from which it was ceded, are still in force in some instances. It is said to-day that this District was ceded to Congress under a contract. But this contract was not made by the individual citizens, but by the States. If, then, by this contract between Congress and the States, Congress have obtained their Jurisdiction by the common consent of the parties, it may be done away; and this is all that is proposed by the resolutions. H. OF R. The same gentleman has expressed his aston- Mr. B. terminated his remarks by observing, that as he had heard of no advantages derived to the United States from retaining exclusive jurisdiction, as there was nothing in the Constitution repugnant to a retrocession, as it was clearly authorized, with the consent of the contracting parties, as it would not in the least affect the question of removal, as the citizens of the Territory would be benefited by it, and as a great expense of time and treasure would be saved, he considered it expedient to make the retrocession, provided it received the consent of the contracting parties. Mr. RANDOLPH said that, whatever reasons might be advanced on the ground of expediency against the adoption of the resolutions, he wished to say a few words on the Constitutional objections which had been offered to them. The gentleman Gentlemen have observed that this and every from Delaware (Mr. BAYARD) told us, on a very other similar motion have the effect of depreciat-late occasion, that the power to create involved ing property in this place. This Mr. B. doubted very much. If he were a citizen, he would consider his property more valuable under the jurisdiction of laws, in the formation of which he parHe ticipated, than when he had no participation. thought, therefore, that the adoption of his resolutions would rather appreciate property, by placing those who held it on the same broad basis as to the possession of political rights with the other citizens of the United States. The gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. GREGG) conceives that the decision of this question will affect the permanent seat of Government. But it could have no such effect. The continuance of this place as the seat of Government was connected with a contract made with individuals, which was binding on the Government to remain. The Government had received from the individuals a valuable consideration, and had, in return, given the individuals the consideration attached to their remaining here, and the Government could not remove without a violation of this contract. This was his idea. The Government could not remove without the consent of these individuals. the power to destroy; and although I may not be The gentleman from Maryland (Mr. DENNIS) has observed that all the advantages contemplated by Congress from an exclusive jurisdiction, would be frustrated by the adoption of these resolutions. But he has not named a single one of these contemplated advantages. Though called upon to He must, name them, he had not named one. therefore, conclude that no one had occurred to him; and, until they were named, he must doubting rescinded? whether the United States derived any benefit from the exclusive jurisdiction. Mr. R. said, that he was of the number of those H. OF R. District of Columbia. FEBRUARY, 1803. who voted against assuming the jurisdiction of the aggression of large and powerful States. Hapthis territory. He did it from a predilection for pily, our security is more amply provided for; it those principles in which the American Revolu- results from the command which has been given tion originated. From the firm belief that men us over the sword and the purse of the Union. ought not to be bound by laws in whose forma- Our protection is not in a mathematical linetion they had no influence. It was the violation which would oppose but a feeble resistance to an of that principle, and not the extent to which it invading foe. But let gentlemen ask themselves, was carried, which laid the foundation of our in- why the inhabitants of this District should be dependence. For, let it be remembered that the less formidable if disposed to insurrection, because demand of Great Britain went only to a pepper-under our own jurisdiction? Look at Paris! was corn; but that we disdained the admission of so the insurrection of the fourteenth of July, which odious a doctrine, and commenced a determined humbled into the dust the ancient monarchy of and successful resistance. But it is denied that France, the effect of a want of jurisdiction; of a this territory is in a state of slavery, because, says want of power in the Government over the lives the gentleman, it implies that we are tyrants. and fortunes of the people? Did the city afford The term slavery, sir, excites in the mind of man the Government a defence? No, it was in insuran odious idea. There are, however, various spe-rection. Did the military send its aid? On the cies of this wretched condition. Domestic slavery, contrary, it joined the insurgents. What was the of all others, the most oppressive; and political fact at Philadelphia? That Congress was insultslavery, which has been well defined, to be thated by its own troops. Would the civil jurisdicstate in which any community is divested of the power of self-government, and regulated by laws to which its assent is not required, and may not be given. Nor have I ever before understood that slavery, particularly of the last description, necessarily implied tyranny, although it too frequently is productive of it. But, so far from being slaves, the people within this territory are, it seems, our children, who are to experience every indulgence at our hands. Sir, the form of government, such as has been described, however mild and beneficent it may be in its administration, places those subjected to it in a state of political slavery, and they are as completely divested of self-control as the infant who is dandled on the knee of its parAs to the existence, then, of this species of slavery, it mattered not whether the people within the limits of this District were regarded as the favorite son, and feasted on the fatted calf, or were exposed to the cruel rigor of a stepmother. ent. tion of the town have repelled the bayonet? No, it was not in parchment to afford this defence. It has left us an awful lesson against standing armies; and if we shall ever be so infatuated as to multiply armies about us, we may rely in vain on the lines of circumvallation which the limits of our exclusive jurisdiction form. The Constitution, therefore, has failed in its endeavor to give to Congress any other security than that which public opinion and the command of the national resources afford. At a But, whilst I have no doubt on the subject of our Constitutional right. I am opposed to the resolution on the ground of expediency. It appears to have disseminated a great alarm among the people of our immediate neighborhood. proper time, when great unanimity can be obtained, it may be carried into effect. If now passed, it is irrevocable; and I have no indisposition to give the question the most mature deliberation, and to give An idea had been held out from a very respect-it a fair operation on the public mind. I could able quarter that this District night, in time, be- wish, indeed, to see the people within this District come a State. As to Congress, what difference restored to their rights. Men in such a situation will they find between being under the jurisdic-are, as it had been wisely and eloquently said, fit tion of the State of Columbia, or the State of Ma- instruments to enslave their fellow-men. This ryland. But, if this objection were removed, it is species of Government is an experiment how far impossible that this territory can become a State. freemen can be reconciled to live without rights; The other States can never be brought to consent an experiment dangerous to the liberties of these that two Senators and, at least, three electors of States. But, inasmuch as it has been already President, shall be chosen out of this small spot, made, inasmuch as I was not accessary to it, and and by a handful of men. as, at some future time, its deleterious effects may be arrested, I am disposed to vote against the resolutions. I view them as a fatal present to this House, although I respect the motives in which I believe them to have originated; as tending to disunite those who ought ever to act in concert; and I have no hesitation on a question of expediency to declare my disposition to concede something to the wishes and fears of those around me. In their present shape, at least, I shall therefore The Constitution seems to have intended, by its provision on this subject, to guard the General Government against the undue influence of any particular States wherein it might sit. An insurrection in Philadelphia is mentioned by some gentleman as having given rise to this clause in the Constitution. The Constitution, no doubt, had a wise end in view, but it has failed in the means of attaining it. No man has a higher respect than myself for the talents of the framers of that in-vote against the resolutions. strument. But let it be remembered, that they were making a great experiment, and to have failed in but a single object, is the highest proof of their wisdom. The physical force of this small District would prove but a poor defence against Mr. EUSTIS was opposed to the resolutions, for the reasons which had been stated, and for other reasons not mentioned, though they might have occurred to the minds of gentlemen. He thought it right to express a difference of opinion with the 501 FEBRUARY, 1803. HISTORY OF CONGRESS. District of Columbia. H. OF R. this question was disposed of, he would lay some Mr. THATCHER said, he was not prepared to go fully into the subject, but he wished to add a few ideas to those which had been already expressed. He considered these resolutions as having a tendency to distract and obstruct the operations of business in the territory. Congress had experienced considerable inconveniences in this place; but they had been calculated upon when the Government was removed; and he believed, if similar questions had not been so frequently agitated, the accommodations of Congress would, before this time, have been much better. He hoped this would be the last time such resolutions would be offered. His colleague (Mr. BACON) had suggested the expense and trouble of legislating for the District. As to the expense, he did not see any; and as to the trouble, the business was not managed in the best way. He understood that it was contemplated to give the citizens a local Legislature to manage their own concerns. But gentlemen say, the people of the territory are now deprived of their rights. But this remark was extraordinary from a gentleman who had offered a resolution for transferring them, like so many Polish or Russian surfs, without their consent. gentleman from Virginia, (Mr. RANDOLPH.) on an important question, the exclusive jurisdiction of Congress to the ten miles square. He was not prepared to pronounce the provision of the Constitution on this subject deficient or unwise. It rather appeared to him to be founded in the nature of the Government. A Government on parchment, and without force, was no Government at all. It had been stated this provision grew out of a transaction at Philadelphia, and asked what dependence was to be placed on a military force when that force was itself the aggressor? But that transaction suggested a different result. Had the militia been well equipped and ready for service, and under the immediate control of Congress, would the military force have been suffered to overawe them? This very case furnished an argument for investing Congress with the complete command of the militia force of the territory, to screen them from insult, and to protect them from the application of force that might destroy deliberation. They had already taken a course calculated to prove the soundness of this mode of protection. Their laws had recognised the militia of the territory; and some measures had been taken to organize them. The militia was the physical force Congress must rely on. Suppose that militia were under the command of MaryMr. T. went at some length into the discussion, land, and Congress was about to pass a law obnoxious to that State. Suppose the militia of Mary-and coincided in opinion with the gentlemen who land to be mutinous, and to surround these walls. had preceded him in their opposition to the resoluMust you resort to Maryland for protection, and tions; and concluded, with saying, that he was wait on her measures? No; the situation of the clearly of opinion, that Congress ought not to territory and your immediate power over the mi- retrocede the territory. He felt as great personal litia must furnish you with the means of protec- inconvenience, as well as his constituents, from But he tion. He therefore thought it one of the best pro- the distance of their residence, as any member on visions of the Constitution, to submit the physical the floor, or his constituents could feel. force near the Government to its direction. The pledged himself and his constituents, that, howsame reasons that give a command over the mili- ever great these inconveniences, they would subtia to the States apply to the Federal Government mit to them, in order that they might have a more strongly, and dictate the propriety of the common Capital, and afford security to the Govmeasure by a more imperious necessity. What ernment. has happened may happen again. Congress may chance to pass laws obnoxious to the States, or the territory. He would ask if, to-day, they were about to pass such an obnoxious law, and there was no organized militia, where would be their protection? He hoped the Government would give support to the system for organizing the miTitia of the District, so that they may be an efficient and respectable protection. The principle on which the militia was founded, was, as far as practicable, a sound one; it was a democratic principle, which put arms into the hands of every citizen, and placed him under the command of the Federal Government. He acknowledged the difficulties of legislating for the territory. But it was a duty which they could not forego, until the government of the people was provided for in some other way; and that, he thought, should be by an internal Legislature. As to the retrocession of the territory, it was impolitic, in point of time. He hoped that Congress would, before they rose, by some act, show that they were impressed with an obligation to make this the permanent seat of Government. After Mr. CLAIBORNE spoke in favor of the said resolutions. Mr. SOUTHARD rose only to make one observation, which had been touched on but lightly in the course of the debate. It appeared to him that when Congress assumed the exclusive jurisdiction of the ten miles square, they had, in the first instance, entered into a contract with the Legislatures of Virginia and Maryland. He had no doubt that, if the contract had ended here, they might, with their consent, make a retrocession. The second step, however, taken, was a contract between the agents of Government and the proprietors, in order to obtain the soil. This contract appeared to him to be solemn and binding. In entering into the contract, the proprietors gave the General Government sites for the public buildings, and half the residue of the land within the city plot. He conceived that this was a contract founded on express stipulations that Congress should exercise exclusive jurisdiction. The proprietors had no idea, at the time they made the contract, that their property would be retroceded; and the Government had since received more than one million's worth of real property which they now enjoyed. He would ask, whether a retrocession, under such circumstances, would not have a retrospective effect, and impair those obligations which the United States were bound to observe? For this reason, he thought a retrocession improper, as it would be a violation of contract with the people of the territory. It appeared to him that, while they were satisfied, the General Government ought to be satisfied. FEBRUARY, 1803. was the fit time to retrocede the territory he did not know; but he believed the time would come when the citizens of the territory will be in favor of it. It appeared to him that the ideas of his colleague (Mr. EUSTIS) respecting the militia, ought to be repelled. He has said that, unprotected by physi cal force, Maryland or Virginia may bring a force against the Government, and overawe it. Every man, however, knows that the whole militia of Various inconveniences had been stated, to which the United States are under the control of the the Government was exposed; and the people of United States, and the President has now as full a the territory had been represented as in a state of command over the militia of Maryland or Virginia, slavery. But he looked forward to the time, as as over the militia of Columbia. There was no not distant when they would have the right of difference between them, unless the militia of Cogoverning themselves through a territorial legisla-lumbia were to be used by the Executive in cases ture; in which event there would be no time lost where there was neither invasion nor insurrection. to the councils of the nation. How far they would be a proper instrument to carry particular plans of the Executive into effect. gentlemen must determine for themselves. The gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. BACON) has compared the proposed transfer to that of a little piece of soil for a turnpike road. But the cases were not parallel; as, in the last instance, there were no individuals to be transferred. Mr. V. did not know how true it was, that the United States had received one, two, or three millions of dollars. But if it were so, it was so apMr. S. had but one more observation to make. | plied as not to render any use to the Government. Such resolutions tended to destroy the confidence It was certain there were great piles of buildings of the people in the Government. When their erected; but every gentleman who looked through proceedings fluctuated and became unstable, the them will be of opinion that they would be more Government became unhinged, and the liberties valuable if the materials of which they were comof the nation ceased to be secure. From the ten-posed were thrown down, than to remain as they dency of these resolutions he did expect that, before this time, another resolution would have been brought forward, to remove the Government. But he hoped these resolutions would be rejected by so decided a majority, as to prevent the proposition of any similar ones. Mr. VARNUM called for the reading of the document alluded to, as he had never seen it. Mr. SOUTHARD said, he did not know that there was any such official document; but he had seen such a statement, of the authenticity of which he entertained no doubt; and he presumed the gentleman was as well possessed of the facts as himself. Mr. VARNUM doubted the reality of the observation of the gentleman from New Jersey. He suspected there was no such contract in existence. It was not the interest of the Government of the United States to do anything that would injure this District. He therefore supposed that every gentleman who voted on this occasion, would act for the interest of his country. If he thought it possible for Congress to legislate for the territory, he should have no objection to retaining the jurisdiction. But, when he considered that Congress were appointed to legislate on great objects, and not on minute local concerns, he did not think them competent to legislate for the persons situated in the Territory of Columbia. He did not know whether, if the jurisdiction was retained, it would not be proper to indulge the citizens with a territorial legislature. But to this, the people themselves object. Virginia objects to a union with Maryland. There were, manifestly, hostile interests which could not easily be united. And if there shall be a territorial legislature, still Congress has a right over their acts. Whether this now do. It was true that these buildings were, in great part, erected with money derived from the sale of lots; but it was also true that large sums had been granted from the Treasury. Look at the situation of the territory-there were three incorporate bodies. But what was the situation of the other parts of the territory? Are they under any government at all? Do we not see, too, that the citizens of the incorporations are directly opposed to each other, from their peculiar situation. From these inconveniences, Mr. V. said, he wished to relieve them; and he perceived no way so effectual as by a retrocession. He had no doubt of the Constitutional power of Congress. But still, as the people are not willing to enjoy the benefits, in his opinion, to be derived from a retrocession, he was willing to wait until they were prepared for it. Messrs. BAYARD and RANDOLPH spoke a second time against the resolution. Mr. SMILIE stated the circumstances of the case at Philadelphia, which had been so often alluded to by gentlemen. At the close of the late war there had been a mutiny among the troops. who had surrounded Congress. Not a drop of blood had, however, been spilt. This was the mighty incident of which so liberal a use had been made. He would ask whether, in countries over which the Government had complete jurisdiction, worse things had not happened? He would ask, whether this menace of Congress were to be compared with the mob of Lord Gordon in a country over which the Government had an entire jurisdiction? The question was then taken on the first resolution, for receding to Virginia the territory originally attached to that State, and lost-ayes 22. 505 FEBRUARY, 1803. HISTORY OF CONGRESS. District of Columbia. H. OF R. When the question was taken on the second the people of the territory were ceded by Mary- The Committee rose, and reported their disagreement to the resolutions. The House immediately took up their report. Mr. NICHOLSON called for the yeas and nays. Mr. CLAIBORNE spoke in favor of the resolutions. It was proposed to take the question upon both resolutions together. Mr. DAWSON moved to divide the question. He said he should vote for the first resolution that retroceded to Virginia that portion of territory originally attached to her; and for the second, with the exception of the City of Washington, which, he thought, ought to be reserved. Mr. ELMENDORF observed, that of the Constitional power of Congress to retrocede the territory, he had entertained no doubt. He therefore viewed the present question as a question of expediency; and, in this view, he could not conceive how a single gentleman could conceive it expedient to continue to legislate for a people who were not represented. Mr. RANDOLPH said, as he believed the House incompetent to legislate for the people of Columbia; as he believed the interests of the several parts of the territory were as hostile as any in the Union, as it was manifest there was an Alexandria, a Georgetown, and a city interest; and even, within the city, a Capitol-hill interest, and a President's-house interest-which were irreconcileable; he should vote for the amendment of his colleague, (Mr. DAWSON.) To attempt to legislate for the District was, in effect, to constitute the chairman of the committee, or, at any rate, the committee itself on the affairs of the territory, the Solon or Lycurgus of the place. It was well known that the indolence of the other members, or their indifference, inseparable from the situation in which they were placed, would prevent Congress from legislating with a full understanding of the objects before them. He, therefore, thought it expedient to retrocede all the territory, excepting the City of Washington. This disposition of the territory would leave entirely untouched the question which arose from the interest of individuals who had made purchases of property under the faith of Congress retaining the jurisdiction. It was probable that, in such event, a corporation might be established in the city that would answer the ends of Government, without two-thirds of the time of the National Legislature being consumed. Mr. S. SMITH said, he had listened with great attention to the arguments of different gentlemen during the debate. The gentleman from Virginia (Mr. RANDOLPH) had told the House, in that debate, that Congress were not competent to legislate for the territory; and yet he is now about to legislate for them in a concern of the utmost importance by giving them away, without their consent, to the States. Mr. HOLLAND spoke in favor of a retrocession. Mr. BAYARD asked, what the gentleman from Virginia meant by consent? The people had been ceded, with the consent of their Representatives in the Legislatures of Maryland and Virginia. He was opposed to the proposition of the gentleman as it could not relieve Congress from any of their present difficulties. But, to relieve Congress from the trouble they experienced, he had drawn a resolution, which, at a convenient time, he would propose-to authorize the President to appoint three persons, learned in the law, to report to Congress a uniform system of legislation for the territory. Mr. S. SMITH.-The gentleman from Virginia says, if the people of the territory were ceded without their consent, they may be retroceded without their consent. I do not know that the gentleman can carry his recollection back to the period of the cession. But other gentlemen would recollect that the people of Alexandria were very anxious to be admitted into the ten-miles-square; and they were admitted. If he recollected right, there had been many petitions to that effect from different portions of the District. He believed, therefore, that the people had been ceded with their consent. Before he could vote for the proposed measure, he must be first certain that the people wish to be ceded; when, if the States likewise agreed, he would not withhold his consent to a retrocession with the reservation of the city. But he would object to any such measure, until these things were shown. Mr. RANDOLPH.-We are told the people of this territory were ceded with their consent; and wherefore? Because the Government, of which they formed a part, agreed to the cession. And what follows? That we, who represent the whole people of the United States, in their confederate capacity, and the States who represent them in their individual capacity, have an an equal right to retrocede. With respect to the remark of the gentleman from Maryland, (Mr. S. SMITH,) I reply that I consult the interests of the people of the whole United States; and I believe, also, that I consult the true interests of the people residing here. Mr. BAYARD. The gentleman from Virginia first told us the people of this territory were slaves. Now, it seems we are their representatives. If so, they are not slaves. The people, in the act of cession, were represented in the only way that they can be represented in this country. The question was then taken by yeas and nays, on concurring with the Committee of the Whole, in their disagreement to the first resolution, and carried-yeas 66, nays 26, as follows: YEAS-Theodorus Bailey, James A. Bayard, Thomas Boude, Richard Brent, Robert Brown, John Campbell, John Clopton, John Condit, Manasseh Cutler, Samuel W. Dana, John Davenport, Thomas T. Davis, William Dickson, Peter Early, William Eustis, Abiel Foster, Calvin Goddard, Edwin Gray, Andrew Gregg, Roger Griswold, William Barry Grove, John A. Hanna, Daniel Heister, William Helms, Joseph Hemphill, Ar |