H. or R.]

Expense of Foreign Intercourse.

SUNDRY BILLS.
The Senate's amendments to the bill for provid-
ing passports for ships and vessels of the United
States, were taken up and agreed to.

The amendments of the Senate to the bill for suspending the tax on snuff were taken up and disagreed to, there being only eighteen gentlemen in favor of them. They went to a revival of the tax, and, instead of allowing six cents per pound drawback, to allow one half cent per pound.

The amendments of the Senate to the bill regulating the grants of land appropriated for military services, &c., were taken up. They were, on motion, referred to a select committee, who afterwards made a report, recommending it to the House to agree to all the amendments, except the last. The amendments agreed to went to change the plot of land appropriated. The amendment disagreed to, was one which went to the striking out of the clause allowing those officers and soldiers who have already located their warrants in a certain district of country, to remain upon the land so located and improved.

Mr. VENABLE, from the committee appointed to confer with the Senate, on the subject of disagreement between the two Houses on the bill for suspending the tax on snuff, reported that the Se

nate had receded from their amendments.

The amendments of the Senate to the bill for defraying the expenses of trials during the late insurrection, for regulating the allowance to witnesses, jurors, &c., were read and agreed to. The Senate struck out the marshal, and the clause relative to the district attorney of Kentucky, and struck one dollar out for an additional allowance per day to witnesses, and inserted fifty cents.

[MAY, 1796.

wrong in objecting to it; but it appeared to him an unnecessary expense, and therefore an impro per one.

Mr. W. SMITH said, he had no other information than that contained in the Message of the PRESIDENT, which lay on the table. This Message had been referred to the Committee of Ways and Means, and they had brought in a report in conformity to that Message. If gentlemen were satisfied that the PRESIDENT had not the power to advance the grade of our foreign Ministers as appeared to him necessary, they would probably withhold the appropriation. But he believed no gentleman could say what was necessary in this respect, as well as the PRESIDENT himself.

Mr. GALLATIN had no doubt but the PRESIDENT had the power of appointing Ministers, Ambassadors, &c., and they had no control over that power but that of appropriation, which was a good security against the abuse of the power, as without an appropriation, such appointments could not be carried into effect; and it was proper, before they made an additional appropriation of 18,000 dollars, which would become an annual expense for an additional grade of two Ministers, that they should know that there was some reason for the advance. He thought the gentlemen who had hitherto resided at foreign Courts had done their business very well, and he saw no reason for this additional expense.

Mr. HARPER believed the Minister we now had at London was a Minister Plenipotentiary; and whatever we might think of the distinctions between Ministers Plenipotentiary and Ministers Resident, however childish and unimportant it might appear to us, in the Courts of Europe it was a thing of consequence that Ministers of a proper

The amendments of the Senate to the bill limiting the time for allowing a drawback on domes-grade were sent to them. The Courts of Madrid tic spirits, &c., were agreed to.

The disagreement of the Senate to a part of bill for admitting the State of Tennessee into the Union, was read. The House insisted upon their amendment, and a committee of conference was appointed.

FOREIGN INTERCOURSE.

and Lisbon doubtless thought themselves as much entitled to respect from this country as the Court of London. Their Ministers Resident, he believed, were not treated with on any important business; when a Treaty was to be negotiated, men of higher rank must be sent to them. The PRESIDENT was therefore the proper judge of what was necessary on this head.

On taking the question, there was a majority On motion or Mr. W. SMITH, the House went into a Committee of the Whole on the bill mak-against the clause moved by Mr. SMITH; but on ing further appropriations for foreign intercourse for the year 1796, in consequence of a Message received from the PRESIDENT, with an estimate, which, amongst other things, contained the expense of replacing two Ministers Resident at Madrid and Lisbon by two Ministers Plenipotentiary. when he moved an additional section to this effect:

"That there be further appropriated towards defraying the expenses of foreign intercourse, a sum not exceeding 23,000 dollars, in addition to the sums already appropriated."

Mr. NICHOLAS wished to know the use of this

additional expense. He did not know why we should send different ministerial characters abroad from those we have at present. He knew of no necessity for this increased expense, and he did not think it could be justified. Perhaps he was

that gentleman's requiring the Committee to be counted, it was found there was not a quorum; the members without the bar being called in, and the matter being again stated, there appeared 28 for the clause, and 28 against it; the Chairman decided in the affirmative.

The Committee then rose and reported the bill; and two motions being made, the one for taking up the consideration of the amendment, and the other for adjournment, the latter prevailed.

TUESDAY, May 31.

The bill for making appropriations for the sup port of the Military and Naval Establishments for 1796. was read the third time and passed.

The Senate informed the House, by their Se cretary, that they had resolved that the bill au

MAY, 1796.]

Expense of Foreign Intercourse.

[H. OF R

thorizing the Secretary of State to lease certain Christie, Joshua Coit, William Cooper, Jeremiah Crabb, salt springs in the Northwestern Territory do not George Dent, Abiel Foster, Dwight Foster, Ezekiel pass; that the bill authorizing an experiment to Gilbert, Nicholas Gilman, Henry Glen, Chauncey obtain an uniform principle for the regulating of Goodrich, Roger Griswold, William B. Grove, Thomas Weights and Measures be postponed till next ses-Henderson, William Hindman, Samuel Lyman, Nasion; and that they recede from their amendments to the bill for admitting the State of Tennessee

into the Union.

A bill from the Senate providing for a more general promulgation of the laws of the United States, and the repealing a former act, was read and referred to a select committee.

On the motion of Mr. W. SMITH, the House resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole on the bill authorizing the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES to lay, regulate, and revoke embargoes during the recess of Congress; which was agreed to, and ordered to be engrossed for a third reading.

SALE OF PRIZES.

thaniel Macon, Francis Malbone, John Reed, Samuel Sitgreaves, Jeremiah Smith, Nathaniel Smith, Isaac Smith, William Smith, Thomas Sprigg, Zephaniah Swift, George Thatcher, Richard Thomas, Mark Thompson, Uriah Tracy, John E. Van Allen, and John Wil

liams.

LAND FOR MILITARY SERVICES. The Senate, by message, informed the House that they insisted upon their amendment to the bill regulating grants of land for military services. Mr. SITGREAVES moved, that the House do insist upon their disagreement, and appoint a committee of conference; but after a few observations, a motion was made to recede, and carried, 33 to 27.

The Senate's amendments to the bill for the re

lief of distillers in certain cases, were read and agreed to.

FOREIGN INTERCOURSE.

The House took up the bill making further provision for foreign intercourse; when the clause reported from the Committee of the Whole, founded upon the PRESIDENT's Message, being

under consideration

An amendment of the Senate to the bill for preventing the sale of prizes in the ports of the United States, was read. It was to insert words of this effect at the end of the first section, "providing that nothing in this law shall operate against any existing Treaty." The consideration of this amendment was not gone into, but a motion was made by Mr. VENABLE, and supported by Messrs. MADISON, GALLATIN, GILES, SWANWICK, NICHOLAS, and W. LYMAN, to postpone Mr. W. SMITH said, that objections had been the consideration of this bill till the 1st of November made to the advancing their Ministers Resident next, on the ground that the measure was not ne-drid and Lisbon; the sums requisite in conseto the grade of Ministers Plenipotentiary at Macessary; that the cause assignel for it, the probability of a war between Great Britain and Spain was not likely to happen, and that, as it approached very nearly to an encroachment upon existing Treaties, it might give offence to some of the belligerant Powers with whom they desired to be on good terms. The postponement was opposed by Messrs. BOURNE, SITGREAVES, W. SMITH, and GILBERT, insisting that the bill was a necessary and prudent measure, in order to provide against the contingency abovementioned, and having already determined to pass the bill, the amendment from the Senate making no difference in the principle, they trusted the House would not be so versatile as now to postpone it. It was, however, agreed to be postponed; the yeas and nays being taken, on motion of Mr. W. SMITH, stood yeas 40, nays 34, as follow:

YEAS.-Theodorus Bailey, Abraham Baldwin, David Bard, Thomas Blount, Richard Brent, Nathan Bryan, Dempsey Burges, Thomas Claiborne, Isaac Coles, Samuel Earle, William Findley, Albert Gallatin, William B. Giles, James Gillespie, Christopher Greenup, Wade Hampton, George Hancock, Carter B. Harrison, John Hathorn, Jonathan N. Havens, Daniel Heister, James Holland, George Jackson, William Lyman, Samuel Maclay, James Madison, John Milledge, Andrew Moore, Frederick A. Muhlenberg, Anthony New, John Nicholas, John Richards, Robert Rutherford, Israel Smith, Richard Sprigg, jr., John Swanwick, Absalom Tatom, Philip Van Cortlandt, Abraham Venable, and Richard Winn.

NAYS.-Fisher Ames, Benjamin Bourne, Gabriel

quence thereof, and 20,000 dollars proposed to be appropriated for the expenses likely to be incurred in obtaining redress for the spoliations committed upon the property of our merchants, formed the tions urged yesterday, were chiefly, however, objectionable items in the estimate. The objecagainst the advanced grade of the Ministers. To Minister Plenipotentiary sent to that country; obtain the Treaty with Spain, there had been a having made a Treaty with Spain, it would appear extraordinary to send there in future only a ble to preserve perfect harmony with that nation, Minister Resident. He believed it was impossiafter sending Ministers Plenipotentiary to London and Paris, unless a Minister of similar grade which would apply to the former, that would not were sent there also. Indeed, he saw no reason equally apply to the latter. With respect to Portugal, some of the gentlemen in opposition had been very loud in that House, two years ago, in praise of that country, on account of the friendship shown us at that period; he believed it was of importance to cultivate a good understanding with Portugal and if only a Minister Resident were sent there, whilst Ministers Plenipotentiary were sent to the other European Powers, she would probably consider herself as slighted. He was of opinion that a Commercial Treaty with Portugal would be an advantageous thing to this country; but, were it only on account of her congenial interests with us in respect to the Algerines, it was desirable to keep on the best terms

Expense of Foreign Intercourse.

Mr. GALLATIN was very far from agreeing with the gentleman from Rhode Island [Mr. BOURNE] that to discuss the propriety of sending a certain description of Ministers to any country, was unconstitutional. He believed, before they consented to the expenditure of money, they should know that it was necessary; but that gentleman seemed to be of opinion, that, because the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES asked it, it must be right. He knew there was a clause in the Constitution which gave the PRESIDENT power to apMr. GILES said, he should vote against the ap- point Ambassadors, Ministers, &c., by and with propriation. He was willing to allow that the the advice of the Senate; nor did he care much right was with the Executive to appoint Ambas-about the construction given to this clause, prosadors, Ministers, &c. That right had been exercised, and that House must exercise its rights also, by judging of the propriety of all appropriations which they were called upon to make. He was against all intimate connexion between this country and foreign Powers. He had always

MAY, 1796.]

Expense of Foreign Intercourse.

for money for certain purposes, and they conceived they had a right to inquire into the necessity of this additional expense. They had appropriated the usual sum of 40,000 dollars for foreign intercourse; they had done more; on account of the present situation of Europe, they had appropriated an additional 20,000 dollars. And now they were called upon for 23,000 dollars more. He knew if they did not give it, it could not be expended. The gentleman from Rhode Island was mistaken when he said an estimate had before been given in; they had received no estimate before the present; the estimate having been sent to them, they had a right to discuss it. It naturally brought the question before them, whether it was necessary to replace our Resident Ministers with Ministers Plenipotentiary, and in voting on this question, he should vote according to the information which he had on the subject, and not as his colleague [Mr. FINDLEY] proposed, according to the information he had not.

[H. OF R.

that we could not, appropriate more than $60,000 for our diplomatic department. A deficiency of $900,000 being officially communicated to them by the Secretary of the Treasury, they must know that every sum they voted was an addition to our debt. However useful the appointment of Ministers Plenipotentiary, he did not feel its necessity, so far as to justify his giving his vote in favor of an increase of the Public Debt.

Mr. HOLLAND said, he could see no necessity for appropriating this money; and, not seeing the necessity, he should not vote for it.

Mr. W. SMITH agreed with the gentleman from Pennsylvania, [Mr. GALLATIN,] that they had power to refuse this money; yet, undoubtedly, when the PRESIDENT informed the Legislature that such a sum was wanted for similar purposes, it was the duty of the House to grant it, unless there were very strong reasons indeed to induce a contrary conduct. The gentleman from Pennsylvania had confessed he had no information on the subject, yet he would vote against granting the money. Mr. S. thought the conclusion of the colleague of that gentleman [Mr. FINDLEY] more just, who said he should vote for it because he had not information sufficient to convince him it was not necessary.

The only argument brought forward to support this change was that of the gentleman from South Carolina, [Mr. W. SMITH.] He told them that we could not have a Treaty with Spain without a Minister Plenipotentiary. But, he would | ask, whether negotiations were not entered into by Ministers resident, who were clothed only The gentleman last up had not positively said with the character of Commissioners; and whe- that these Ministers Plenipotentiary were unnether the Treaty was not concluded by a Minister cessary, but that the Executive had sent no inPlenipotentiary to another Court, who went to formation to prove that they were necessary. It Spain for that specific purpose, not with a perma- was true the Executive had not sent to them the nent character, but as an Envoy Extraordinary? correspondence which had passed upon the subBut it seemed we were to have a Minister Pie-ject, which had induced him to form the opinion nipotentiary in Spain, because we have treated with them, and one in Portugal, because we want to treat with them. He would ask, what Minister we were to have in Holland, with whom we had a Treaty and extensive connexions? It would appear by the papers on the table that our present resident Minister at Lisbon [Mr. Humphreys] was to be Minister Plenipotentiary at Madrid, with an addition of $4,500 salary and $4,500 for outfits; that our present resident Minister at the The gentleman from Virginia [Mr. GILES] had Hague [Mr. Adams] was to be Minister Plenipo- said it was our wisest policy to live retired from tentiary at Lisbon, with also an addition of $4,500 | foreign nations. This might have been properly salary and $4,500 for outfits; and that there was said at the time they were appropriating money no provision whatever in the estimate for any for foreign intercourse generally; but that quesMinister either resident or plenipotentiary in Hol- tion had been determined. We had already deland. Of all those things, however, the PRESI-termined to maintain our foreign connexions, and DENT was the best judge, and he would not even have mentioned them had not the estimate sent to them brought the discussion of the details. But of one thing, however, that House had a right to judge, to wit: the expense. It may be useful to send Ministers Plenipotentiary to those two Courts; but, unless he had information which he had not, and felt what he did not feel, that it was necessary to send them, he must be governed in his vote by the knowledge the House had of the situation of our finances. Taking that into consideration, the numerous objects of useful expenditure, the many necessary calls for money, and, above all, the acknowledged deficiency of $900,000 for the current expenses of the present year, he was clearly of opinion that we ought_not—nay, |

of their necessity. Was it expected he should have done so? He supposed this kind of inform-⚫ ation was not to be expected; they must, therefore, take it for granted that the PRESIDENT, who had all the requisite information, was the best judge of the propriety of the measure; and without very strong evidence of the contrary, he did not see how they could be justified in withholding the grant.

now the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. GALLATIN] and the PRESIDENT were at issue as to the proper grade of Ministers to be employed-the only question was on the best mode of carrying on our foreign relations.

With respect to the estimate, he must again observe, that there had been a sum of $45,000 at the disposal of the Executive, which was applicable to the purposes of foreign intercourse, and, therefore, might have been appropriated towards this advanced grade of Ministers. Instead of this sum of $45,000, which was diverted to another purpose, the House had only given the Executive, by the act passed, $20,000; so that it was necessary for him to require the additional sum of $23,500. A gentleman had observed that it was

H. OF R.]

Expense of Foreign Intercourse.

[MAY, 1796.

could determine whether a Minister Resident or a Minister Plenipotentiary should be employed to any Court of Europe? Such a thing could not and ought not to be done.

Mr. SWANWICK thought the only difficulty was where they should get the money. When the bill appropriating money for foreign intercourse was passed, money was directed to be borrowed at six per cent.; but now he supposed money could not be got at that rate, since they had agreed that six per cent. stock might be sold under par.

Mr. THATCHER believed the question was not how to get money, but the appropriation of money for a particular object, which was quite a different subject. If a sum of money were due, and they ought to appropriate for it, it was not then the time to inquire where it was to come from. Another time was proper for discussing that question. Mr. T. saw no more right that that House had to withhold the present appropriations than they had to withhold the salaries of the Judges. At least it struck him in this point of view. If he was wrong he should stand corrected.

not owing to our not having Ministers Plenipotentiary at the Court of Spain, but because they had not the title of Commissioners that that Court refused to treat with them. But this was a mistake. It appeared from the correspondence of the Commissioners themselves that Spain had taken umbrage because a Minister Plenipotentiary was not sent there, and in consequence of that Mr. Pinckney was sent with that rank and as Envoy Extraordinary. The gentleman had said that the Minister resident at the Hague was to be removed as Minister Plenipotentiary to Lisbon. But what was there objectionable in that? Might not the PRESIDENT, if he thought the residence of a Minister at the Hague not immediately necessary, and, if he wanted to send one to Lisbon, to inquire whether the Court of Portugal was disposed to make a Commercial Treaty with us. take him from thence and send him to Lisbon? Motives of economy might lead to this arrangement, which, perhaps, was only a temporary one. He believed it was not necessary that the PRESIDENT should lay the facts which had induced him to do this before that House. If gentlemen wished to prevent the PRESIDENT from sending such Min- Mr. VENABLE inquired if there was not $20,000 isters to foreign countries as he deemed most ad- in the present estimate on account of Mr. Bayvisable, they would act accordingly, and refuse ard's agency to London? [He was informed there the present appropriation; but, for himself. he was.] It did not appear to him that they were was satisfied that in order to administer this Gov-appropriating for Ministers, but for an object ernment on its true principles, and to enable the which did not come under the head of foreign inExecutive to conduct our foreign relations in the tercourse, viz: for the expense of paying British manner most beneficial to the country, it was law-suits on account of spoliations on the properright and proper for the House to entertain a li- ty of our merchants. He, therefore, felt himself beral confidence in him, and not to withhold the at perfect liberty to refuse his assent to the appromoneys required for those objects, unless the re- priation; nor did he think it arrogance to do so. fusal was warranted by much stronger reasons He thought there was too great a disposition in than had been advanced. this Government to increase expense, and he felt himself justified in using his endeavors to restrain it.

Mr. TRACY said, that this question presented itself to him in a peculiar point of view. When they granted $20,000 some days ago for foreign correspondence, great complaints were then made that there was no estimate before them, and a larger sum was refused on that ground; but now, when the PRESIDENT had sent them an estimate, it was objected to. Was it the business of that House, he inquired, to take up such things by pounds, shillings, and pence? He thought it was not. The gentleman from Virginia [Mr. GILES] wished to restrict our foreign correspondence, though he knew that was a power placed in the Executive. He believed if the Executive thought it was necessary to send a hundred Ministers to Europe, and called upon that House for appropriations, it was necessary and proper they should make them,

Mr. HEATH spoke in favor of the appropriation. The question was taken by yeas and nays, and carried-39 to 25, as follows:

YEAS.-Fisher Ames, Benjamin Bourne, Richard Brent, Dempsey Burges, William Cooper, George Dent, William Findley, Abiel Foster, Dwight Foster, Ezekiel Gilbert, Nicholas Gilman, Henry Glen, Chauncey Goodrich, Roger Griswold, William B. Grove, John Heath, Thomas Henderson, William Hindman, Samuel Lyman, Francis Malbone, Frederick A. Muhlenberg, Wm. Vans Murray, Francis Preston, John Reed, John Richards, Samuel Sitgreaves, Jeremiah Smith, Nathaniel Smith, Isaac Smith, William Smith, Zephaniah Swift, George Thatcher, Richard Thomas, Mark Thompson, Uriah Tracy, John E. Van Allen, Philip Van Cortlandt, Peleg Wadsworth, and John Williams.

NAYS.-Lemuel Benton, Nathan Bryan, Joshua Coit, Samuel Earle, Albert Gallatin, James Gillespie, Wade N. Havens, Daniel Heister, James Holland, George Hampton, Carter B. Harrison, John Hathorn, Jonathan Jackson, Matthew Locke, Samuel Maclay, Nathaniel Macon, John Milledge, Anthony New, John Nicholas, Israel Smith, Richard Sprigg, jun., Thomas Sprigg, Absalom Tatom, Abraham Venable, and Richard Winn

The gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. FINDLEY] had very well observed that he had not sufficient information on the subject to say such Ministers were not necessary, and, therefore, he should vote for them; and he thought any man, who thought he was a competent judge of this business, must have a great degree of arrogance. If the Executive, indeed, were to show an unwarrantable extravagance in the exercise of his power, they might certainly put a check upon The House again resumed the consideration of him; but did any one ever suppose that they the report of the Committee of Elections, to

CONTESTED ELECTION.