who spoke on the subject seemed to argue what were the rights of that body upon the subject of Treaties, as it no question had already been had on the occasion. [APRIL, 1796. a conversation which had taken place betwixt a gentleman then in the Cabinet (now no more) and himself, which confirmed his opinion of the propriety of the measures. A bill for regulating commerce in such a manner as to make it the interest of Britain to refrain from injuring us, and redress the wrongs we had suffered by spoliations, was agreed to by the House, but negatived in the Senate. So far from being then afraid of war, they were more and mcre convinced that it was in their power to make it the interest of Britain to refrain from their acts of violence towards us. The gentleman from New York [Mr. WILLIAMS] spoke of the respectable character of the PRESIDENT and Senators who had approved of the Treaty ; but he could not agree that that was proper argument for that House, merely on account of their wisdom and respectability; because, in order to give that argument fair play, it would be necessary, after displaying all the perfections of the PRESIDENT and Senate, to weigh the talents and virtues of all those who were opposed to, and in favor of the Treaty, and strike a balance betwixt them, which, it must be allowed, would be a somewhat tedious business. For it must be admitted that many illustrious men, who were distinguished for their understanding and early patriotism, had joined in condemning the Treaty before them. He should wish, therefore, to waive this as an argument. It had been insisted upon, notwithstanding the decision which had been had, that a Treaty was a law when it came before that House, and they had no power but to appropriate to carry it into effect. He said this opinion was directly contrary to the opinion held on the Constitution at the time it was accepted in Pennsylvania. Moral discretion, he said, was necessary to be exercised in every decision of that House, except the Constitution had prescribed to them some positive rule of action. In ratifying the Constitution in the State of Pennsylvania, this was the understanding of it. The minority in the Convention did not wish so much power placed in the Executive, and he appealed to gentlemen in that Convention, if this was not the doctrine asserted by the majority in answer to the objections of the minority. Indeed, if they were not to have exercised a moral obligation upon the Treaties, the Con titution would have expressly said so, as in the case of the PRESIDENT's salary, the pay of the Judges, Army appropriations, &c. If they had not been limited in these articles by the Constitution, they certainly would have had the power to have changed them if they had thought proper. But, passing over this consideration, there had been pretty large views taken of the manner in There were many other arguments used which which the Treaty came before them. The gen- he thought unworthy of notice; amongst such was tlemen from New York and Virginia had entered the prosperity of New York and the number of into the subject. He must beg leave to differ from houses built there, mentioned by the gentleman the gentleman from New York as to the matter from that State. He did not think the Spanish of fact relative to that House in the concerns of Treaty was interesting only to the people on the Government two years ago. He had no appre- Mississippi, and did not like to hear such expreshension at the time the Envoy was sent to Britain sions as these: "You have sanctioned a Treaty to negotiate a Treaty, that Britain would have for the people on the Mississippi, and will you not commenced a war if that measure had not been carry into effect one for New York?" He neither adopted; so far from it, that a majority of that before nor since believed that one or other of the House thought differently. He had no doubt that Treaties would apply specially to those places. war, and the destruction of liberty altogether, had Would the Spanish Treaty be of use only to the been meditated by Great Britain; but before the people living on the Mississippi? He might say negotiation was commenced, circumstances oc- it would raise the price of the lands they were curred which caused her to give up this extrava-about to dispose of. But would not New York gant design. Before the negotiator was appoint- enjoy advantages from the Mississippi trade? ed, it is well known that the plundering Order of Surely it would; for it could not easily be conthe 6th November was revoked. The gentleman ceived the quantity of European goods consumed from Virginia [Mr. GILES] had given a very good in that country; and he apprehended that New narrative of events in Europe, which fully show-York would stand the best chance of getting the ed the cause of this change of conduct. That trade from thence, if it possessed all the advantagentleman had also gone through the Treaty, ar- ges which the gentleman described. It was well ticle by article, in a manner so much to his satis-known, that whatever trade was carried on there, faction, that he should not attempt to follow him. Before the negotiation took place, we had suffered considerably by British spoliations, and that House thought of various means to make it the interest of that Power not to continue their depredations. First one plan was proposed and then another. It need not be mentioned that amongst these was the plan of sequestration, the future power of doing which this Treaty proposed to deprive them of. It was discussed in the House, but no question taken on it, to show that negotiation was not thought necessary. He mentioned it must come through the Atlantic States, chiefly through New York or Philadelphia. He only mentioned this to show the absurdity of using such arguments. As far as he could judge, the Spanish Treaty would be of service to the United States at large. Whilst he was speaking upon this subject, it occurred to him what had fallen from the gentleman from Rhode Island, [Mr. BOURNE.] in reply to the gentleman from Virginia, [Mr. PAGE.] with respect to the Commissioners appointed by the British Treaty. That gentleman charged his APRIL, 1796.] Execution of British Treaty. [H. OF R. would have the same means of influencing still. The gentleman from Massachusetts seemed to have in view, when speaking of these posts, the getting of money only. This he could not compare with the object he had in view, viz: peace on the frontier. Would not that nation, who subsidized almost all Europe, have it in her power, if she thought it her interest, to cramp or discourage our traders in that quarter, to raise up the Indians against them? Would any gentleman say they would not? It was not for any profit they reaped from it that the British held Canada; they had other views. For this reason, he did not put such value upon the Canada trade as to barter peace and security to obtain it. What he wanted was peace with the Indians; but while the McKees, the Girties, &c., continued with them, peace would be insecure. He had no idea of friendship from the British Government; he believed all such reliance would be ill-founded. friend from Virginia with inconsistency, because he had voted for the Spanish Treaty, which has its Commissioners the same as the British. But though the Commissioners in the two Treaties for determining on the spoliations were of the same kind, those appointed in consequence of the British Treaty for deciding on the debts due to the British merchants were of another description, and it was these he supposed the gentleman from Virginia intended. The subjects referred to their decision had either already been adjudged by our own Courts, or were subject to the final decision of the Supreme Court of the United States, of which it was declared in the Constitution that even Congress itself could only erect Courts inferior to it. The Treaty vesting the Commissioners with original and final powers in cases competent exclusively to the Supreme or Inferior Courts, has erected a Court superior to the Supreme Court. The spoliations are not subject to the jurisdiction of our Courts, and are There had been a great deal said about the reproper subjects for special Commissioners, and imbursement of spoliations, the payment of Brittherefore no subject of complaint. He was not ish debts, and recompense for the negroes. He about to determine absolutely whether the office had not an opportunity of hearing the whole of was unconstitutional or not; but if it was not, he the observations of the gentleman from Connectiknew not where to draw the line. But, while he cut, [Mr. HILLHOUSE.] being called out of the would leave it to others to determine whether it House on business; what he heard, he had heard was unconstitutional or not, he would give his with pleasure. That gentleman said, the claim opinion that it was certainly inexpedient. If there for recompense for negroes was not well founded. was security in conducting the inquiry, his objec- He allowed that there was plausible ground for tions would be less; but he knew no mode of set- the assertion, and he had taken that ground; but tlement more insecure. The insecurity was also he believed there was proof within reach that all on the side of the United States. It had been would prove the justice of the claim. He believalso said that there had been made bankrupts, ed that when Mr. Laurens was released from the whose cases would be attended with difficulty. Tower of London he was employed in an embassy, The manner of taking testimony, as it had been and instructed to receive compensation for nedescribed by the gentleman from Virginia, [Mr. groes. That the subject was then taken up, and NICHOLAS.] was certainly loose, and he had heard that the negroes and book debts were considered no one say it was not so. The bankrupt being a as opposed to each other. If so, the gentleman's party in the decision, though not in the payment, assertion must be unfounded. He believed the might make his fortune by collusion with the Brit-claim for recompense for negroes was as strong ish creditors. as that for the recovery of the British debts, and as equitable. He would take a glance at a few of the articles in the Treaty, and confine himself as much as possible to the observations which had not already been noticed, though he knew the difficulty of doing this. The Western posts, he said, were produced to balance every evil in the Treaty. The gentleman from Massachusetts, [Mr. GOODHUE,] who had certainly spoken most rationally upon the subject, dwelt upon the great commercial advantages of these posts. Commerce, Mr. F. said, was not the sole object which these posts were wanted to produce-it was peace, which they wished to be secured by them. If it was merely having these spots of earth, these forts, where was the difference to them whether the British had these posts or others a mile from them. Was there any reason to believe that the British would not continue to have as much influence as ever among the Indians? Was he to make a sacrifice for anything, it would be for the posts. They knew that the British had had emissaries there ready to do their purpose, who had influenced the shedding the blood of our people. Those who had instigated the Indians to make war upon them I With respect to spoliations, he presumed that they should get no greater amount than the Laws of Nations would entitle them to, though he had little faith in the British construction of that law, and did not wish to go to war for them. He did not know what the amount would be of the whole spoliations committed; and if he did, he should have more difficulty to say what part of it was likely to be reimbursed by the Treaty. Nor did he know the amount of British debts to be paid, It might not, perhaps, be so great as had been represented; but, from what information he had received, he believed it would be much greater than the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. GOODHUE] had made it. He was informed of one house, out of the State of Virginia, which owed almost as large a sum as that gentleman had mentioned for the whole. He had never heard before of a Legislature being laid under an obligation to pay the debts of individuals, agreeably to such a decision as is not regulated by the laws, nor adjudged by the Courts subject to which the debts had been contracted H. OF R.J Execution of British Treaty. but by a mode of liquidation, as if we had no Courts of law. This he thought highly inexpedient, especially as no estimate could be made of the amount. This was one weighty reason against carrying the Treaty into effect, though not exclusively of other reasons, perhaps a sufficient reason for rejecting it. He knew gentlemen said that they were obliged to pay these debts, be the amount what they may, as their payment had been prevented by legal impediments. These deits, however, would be greatly increased by the war-interest, if it were to be paid, and they could not reckon upon this not being the result. This probably would depend on which of the parties would have the choice of the fifth Commissioner. With respect to the spoliations committed upon their merchants, he had felt much for them. He could not say what would be the amount of these; but he said there would be so much of the insurance to deduct from the amount as had been paid by the consumers in the price of the goods. As the British ought to make those losses good, this could argue no abatement in favor of that nation, that might be an argument in abatement of that claim it it was made against our own citizens. In reference to sequestration, it having already been well explained, he should say but little. It was parting with the power, not for two years, but forever. It was parting with a power which, by the terms of the Treaty, we could not recover even in the event of a war, and that with respect to a nation against whom it could only be of use. That nation might take all our vessels, before we could make any reprisals at all. It was stripping them from every effectual defence. He knew some merchants who wished the Treaty to be carried into effect, though none of them believed it good, but they wish it on account of the property which the British have taken, and which they expect to be paid for, and from an apprehension, if the Treaty be not carried into effect, war will be the consequence. These merchants do not like the plan of sequestration; they say, that private property ought to be sacred, and that no advantage could ever arise from it. He looked upon the measure himself as the last resort, either to prevent or commence war with advantage. He did not like to exercise it, neither did he like to fight; but he would not give away his arms, because they were the means of security from its being known he had them. He did not know the amount of money owing from this country to Great Britain; but, from information from contending parties he found the estimate to vary from half a million to fifteen millions. It was also continually increasing. The power of sequestrating this money would prevent the British Government from exercising her plundering system to any alarming extent; and would be a means of preserving peace and preventing war, which he could not think gentlemen were serious in asserting, would be the consequence of not carrying the Treaty into effect. Several members are candid enough to acknowledge that this would not be the result. [APRIL, 1796. Our articles of export, said Mr. F., being of the first necessity, must be had when they are wanted, and Great Britain will not purchase them, except she be in the greatest need. She took no flour but when in absolute want. Nations were obliged from necessity to take our produce when they are in want; but it was not so with respect to British exports. They have, indeed, by their industry and management, got their manufactures celebrated all over the world. They are an artful people, and it behooves us to be careful how we conie into their power; for he believed no nation that ever was in their power ever escaped without injury. If the present Treaty went into effect, they should give up to Great Britain many important advantages without return. And he did not see any necessity for this, since we were the most valuable customers she had, and it would be her interest to keep on good terms with this country upon reasonable conditions, in order to have their manufactures consumed, and get our money. He would admit that the Treaty with respect to the East Indies was not highly objectionable; but he did not agree with the gentleman from Massachusetts that it was the most advantageous commerce in which this country was engaged. He did not compare the trade to the East Indies with that to the West Indies. The latter took the produce of the country; but the former took no produce, cash only was carried there to purchase East India goods. They knew the effect of the East India trade. It was of doubtful advantage to the country, particularly when.cash was scarce in the country, and every body was pressed for hard money to send out there. The articles brought from the East Indies were articles of convenience; the trade was in some degree valuable, but by no means to be compared to the West India trade. The Treaty originally gave the United States the privilege of trading to the British West Indies; but it was upon such conditions that the Senate chose rather to have nothing than trade upon such terms; but having lost this article, something was wanted in its stead. To obtain a permanent interest in the West India trade was the greatest object we could have in view in making a Commercial Treaty; this not being obtained, we have gained nothing for all the advantages we have transferred, except the posts, clogged with other conditions than our original claim. Mr. F. said, he would not detain the Committee by general remarks with respect to the commercial part of the Treaty. It, however, increases that connexion with Great Britain which was already too great. The British merchants accommodated our citizens with credit, but this advantage drew evils along with it. The influence of debtor and creditor made it the interest of a large class of respectable citizens to be connected with Great Britain; and if anything was done to affect that interest, it agitated almost every merchant and every store-keeper throughout the United States. He did not design, by any violent exertions, to weaken the existing connex ion; but he would by no means strengthen and increase it. This consideration had great weight with him, for most nations who had had any close connexion with that country had suffered by it. We, ourselves, are a striking instance of it, and so was Holland, Portugal, &c. But, with all the objections he had mentioned, if he thought the consequences of the rejection of the Treaty would be what they had been predicted by gentlemen, he would vote for carrying it into effect. But he was far from thinking so. Whilst he was debating upon this subject, he wished to have his mind free from fear, and not have a rod held over his head, the scourge of tyranny. Yet terrors were held over them. If Great Britain was that mad nation, to make new Laws of Nations, and break all the bonds of society, they might apprehend a war, and its consequent evils; but if not, they need to have no fear upon them on this head. For his part, he could not see how a refusal to carry the Treaty with Great Britain into effect, was to produce war. Was it likely that she would desert every interest of trade to go to war with her best customers? Peace with us was as necessary in the present state of things to Great Britain as to us. Was it not seen that the advantages which were proposed to be given to the United States by the Treaty to trade to the East Indies, were given for their own interest, and not for ours? Courts might have some generosity, but monopolizing trading companies have none, and therefore no advantage could be expected to be given by the English East India Company, except they had the hope of a greater in return. The trade was allowed because advantageous to the United States. If it was the interest also of Great Britain to allow us to trade to the West Indies, she would allow it, but not else. The increasing population and wealth of this country were objects of great consequence to the trade of Great Britain. It was strange, therefore, to hear gentlemen talk of our obligation to her, when the obligation lay the other way. It was our interest not to be bound to them. It had been said, because we were weak, we ought to have connexion with Great Britain. But he believed we ought to act as freemen. Let us find our own resources; if we do justice and behave well ourselves, we shall get it. We have another security, it is the interest of Great Britain that we should do so. It would be the interest of all countries to keep themselves from being dependant on them. A new state of things had taken place in Europe. This caused him to recollect what had been mentioned in the course of the debate by the gentleman from New York, viz: that two years ago they were very desirous of treating with Great Britain. This was the first time he had heard of it, though he was then in the House. So far from it, they wished to settle their own commerce, not thinking it good policy to bind themselves to any other nation, because they were not then come to maturity; they knew not what would be best; they wished to be at liberty to regulate their own commerce according [H. OF R. to circumstances. He knew that the people of the United States. and the members of that House, were surprised when a Commercial Treaty was first mentioned. No such thing was intended or expected by that House, or by any body. When the Envoy was sent to Great Britain, obtaining redress for the spoliations, &c., was the only object of his mission. A number of observations might be made upon the subject, but he believed the attention of the Committee was pretty much wearied, and indeed, most of the things which he would have noticed had been touched upon by gentlemen already. The Treaty did not give security for the future; it did not give the advantages we had a right to expect. What it did give was improperly clogged; it deprived us of an important and powerful defence; and, therefore, left us. even when ratified and carried into effect, in a state of hostility; depredations continued to be committed on our trade, and our citizens impressed contrary to the Law of Nations. On these grounds, he conceived, it was inexpedient to carry the Treaty into effect. The Committee now rose, and had leave to sit again. Mr. HARTLEY presented a petition signed by upwards of 600 merchants of the city of Philadelphia, and another from 800 other citizens of Philadelphia, praying that provision might be made with all convenient despatch for carrying into effect the British Treaty. Mr. SWANWICK also presented a petition signed by 1,500 persons, inhabitants of the city and neighborhood of Philadelphia, praying that the British Treaty might not be carried into effect. The above petitions were severally read, and referred to the Committee of the Whole upon the state of the Union. THURSDAY, April 21. Mr. MUHLENBERG presented a petition from 800 inhabitants of the city of Philadelphia, of the same kind with that presented by Mr. SWANWICK yesterday, against the British Treaty. Mr. ISAAC SMITH also presented a petition from 163 inhabitants of Trenton in favor of the British Treaty; and Mr. HARTLEY presented a petition from 109 merchants and others of the city of Philadelphia, and another, signed by 183 persons, inhabitants of the said city, in favor of the British Treaty. The above petitions were referred to the Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union. The amendments of the Senate to the bill for the relief and protection of American seamen, were read, and referred to a select committee. The House resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole on the bill for making appropriations for defraying the expenses which may arise in carrying into effect the Treaty with the Dey and Regency of Algiers; and on the bill for making further provision relative to the revenue cutters; which were agreed to in the Committee, went through the House, and were ordered to be engrossed, and to be read a third time to-morrow. H. OF R.] Execution of British Treaty. DUTIES ON DOMESTIC SPIRITS. The House then resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole on the report of the Committee of Commerce and Manufactures, relative to an election being given to certain persons to pay a duty for the quantity of spirits distilled, instead of according to the capacity of their stills; and come to the following resolution, which was agreed to by the House: "Resolved, That in every case of a distiller who hath entered his still or stills, in such manner as to be liable to pay the duty of fifty-four cents upon the capacity or capacities thereof, for the year, to end in June, one thousand seven hundred and ninety-six. wherein it shall be made to appear to the Supervisor of the District, that the said distiller has been really and truly prevented from employing or working his still or stills, during the term aforesaid, by the destruction or failure of fruit and grain within the district in which he resides, it shall and may be lawful for the said Supervisor, on application made to him any time before the last day of September next, to admit such distiller to the benefit of an election, to pay, in lieu of the duty on the capacity of his still or stills, the sum of seven cents on every gallon of spirits by him therein manufactured: Provided, That the duties to be received in consequence of such election, shall be ascertained, collected, and paid, according to the directions and requisitions of the several laws relating to domestic distilled spirits, in such manner as would have been the case, if such election had been originally made at the time of entry, in June, one thousand seven hundred and ninety-five." Ordered, That a bill or bills be brought in pursuant to the said resolution; and that the Committee of Commerce and Manufactures do prepare and bring in the same. HORSES KILLED IN ACTION. The House resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole on the report of the Committee of Claims, to whom was referred a letter from Arthur St. Clair, respecting a claim for the loss of three horses killed in the action with the Indians, on the fourth of November, one thousand seven hundred and ninety-one; and came to a resolution, which was twice read, and agreed to by the House, as follows: [APRIL, 1796. session of Congress; and, in all cases which may take place hereafter, within one year after such horse shall be killed. And the proof of value shall be, by the affidavit of the Quartermaster of the corps, or two other creditable witnesses." Ordered, That the Committee of Claims bring in a bill pursuant to the said resolution. EXECUTION OF BRITISH TREATY. The House resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union; when the resolution for carrying into effect the British Treaty being under consideration, Mr. RUTHERFORD spoke as follows: Mr. Chairman: In a serious investigation of this matter, I shall to the utmost seek for truth, to do away as much as may be, such prejudices as have consequently been imbibed, guided by reason, justice, and the real state of things. And to avoid, as far as possible, repeating observations of others, it may be necessary to be somewhat retrospective, which I hope will not be considered as altogether improper. This virtuous people have an undoubted right to be heard by their Representatives, who are engaged by all the generous feelings of the human heart, to discharge the important trust reposed in them with fidelity and firmness. All Governments, in the outset, have assumed smiling and placid features, but have been still in a greater or less degree in hostility with the equal rights of the people, and in the end, have uniformly managed them out of those sacred rights. Experience teaches this incontestibly. Shail not this people reason then on a subject of such magnitude, after all that they have achieved? Or, shall they hesitate to scan with minute circumspection the state of their momentous concerns, when they may consider their dear interests involved in a decision? And to tell the people that a WASHINGTON presides, and therefore all must be right, is feeble language, to say no more; for, though we all concur respecting that honest man, we know at the same time, that he, with all who breathe this vital air, must ere long yield to an immutable clause in the universal law. And have this people any security for the upright actings and doings of his successor, perhaps a mere Nero, though he has been an Octaviusan Alfred? Here I beg leave to review the patriot labors of this good man, conjoined with Hancock, Franklin, Sullivan, Randolph, and a list of patriots and worthies too numerous to name, and the task would be painful, as many of them are, alas, no "Resolved, That every officer of the United States, whose duty requires him to be on horseback in time of action, and whose horse shall be killed in battle, be allowed a sum not exceeding dollars, as a compensation for each horse so killed; and this provision shall have retro-more! spective operation as far as the fourth day of This assemblage of great men convened at this March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty-place in 1774, and after an anxious and interestnine: Provided, No person shall receive payment for any horse so killed, until he make satisfactory proof to the Secretary of War, that the horse for which he claims compensation, was actually killed under such circumstances as to entitle him They then addressed the justice, humanity, and to this provision, in all cases which have hereto- affections of their former masters, in strong, manfore taken place, within one year after the presently, and moving terms, and language that will do ing silence, they named the American Cicero to unfold the mighty business that occasioned their meeting; and while great Henry spoke, the generous patriot tear filled every eye. |