JANUARY, 1796.]

Stenographer to the House.

[H. of R.

Mr. NICHOLAS said, that the reports at present published were full of notorious falsehoods, and the characters of members with their constituents would have been sunk, if it had not been known that this kind of things deserved no credit. He was in favor of the report. He complained that even when pieces were sent to the printers, they were embodied in the sketch, by which means the reporter got the full credit of them, which had pernicious consequences. One of his objections to the present mode of reporting was, that the speeches of members were often much improved. He mentioned an instance from his own experience. A speech was once made for him by a person who reports in this House, and who has a very good style of writing. The style, said Mr. N., was above mine. There was not a sentiment in it which I would have disavowed. It was a better speech than mine; but, in an entire column, there was nothing that I said. As for sending corrections to the printers, Mr. N. was above it.

constant misrepresentation supported by the au- sion would cost twenty thousand dollars, and he thority of the House of Representatives. conjectured that to print the speeches would reMr. HARPER rose in reply to Mr. SEDGWICK,quire an hundred thousand dollars; and even after who, immediately after he began speaking, ob- they were printed, it would be necessary to pay served that the gentleman had mistaken his mean-people for being at the trouble to read them, for ing. Mr. H. said that he perfectly understood the otherwise nobody would go through a perusal of member, and proceeded to recommend the object every word spoken in the House. of the report. He gave credit to the present reporters for diligence and good intention, but thought them far inferior to what might be done. Great attainments had been made, he admitted, but more might be done. He thought it of the highest consequence that the speeches of members should be correctly published and disseminated among the people. As to the sum now proposed, a London newspaper would give, he had no doubt, five thousand dollars a year for such a reporter. He questioned not that Woodfall would receive ten thousand pounds a year from the printer for his reports. It had been objected that daily papers alone could hold such debates; but weekly and semi-weekly papers could select the most interesting passages of them from the daily papers. Mr. H. recommended either that this report or a similar one should be adopted, or that the business of reporting should at once be put to an end. He spoke of atrocious mistakes. The debates, as now published, held up the House to the scorn of the world. He would rather have the doors shut up altogether. He would, if the present resolution was rejected, make a motion to that effect. He was sorry to learn that the debates had been collected into a book, entitled "The Political Register," of which he doubted not that immense numbers would be sent to Europe, and this book he reprobated in the strongest terms.

Mr. SEDGWICK observed, if gentlemen were misrepresented, in one of the newspapers, where debates were reported, the editor of that paper had advertised that he was ready to publish any corrections which might be offered. This notice had been long and frequently given, and gentlemen had it in their power to do themselves justice.

The first resolution in the report was then read, and the question going to be put, when

Mr. BALDWIN said, that the more the House advanced into this affair, the greater was the number of difficulties which occurred. The resolutions had the less weight with him because they were hurried through at the close of last session. The institution was unprecedented in any other Government. He knew that members might be misrepresented, but this scheme would not cure the evil. He repeatedly declared, that on all great questions, where talents found an object worth exertion, the debates in that House were very well represented. He had seen many speeches, sketched by printers in this city, that he would not wish to see better done. He did not know of any recent or particular complaints about inaccuracy. We have now been in session for seven or eight weeks, and there has not occurred much interesting matter, to make any remarkable debate out of. He said that the debates, if taken at full length, would far exceed the limits of any newspaper. As to the expense of printing, that of the laws of this ses

Mr. HILLHOUSE was against the report. The loss of four thousand dollars would be a much greater harm to the public than any injury arising from inaccurate reports. He did not see that the characters of members with their constituents depended on these publications.

Mr. SWANWICK.-The gentleman from Virginia last up has suggested that the House have somehow committed themselves to appoint a stenographer, by their previous resolution on this subject; but that resolution goes only to the committee receiving proposals. It therefore remains with this House whether to accept them or not when made. As to the gentleman who is the subject of the resolution, if I have more strenuously than usual opposed the motion, it is from a desire to keep him from quitting the lucrative situation he is said to find himself in, to embark on the stormy sea he is contemplating. To be the organ of the members of this House to their constituents is indeed a very delicate task; one for which, considering the danger he might be in of an Orpheus's fate-that of being torn to pieces-the salary is but a poor compensation. He is to do justice to the eloquence of some members; he is to clothe in an elegant dress the uncouth, yet well-meaning expressions of others; but what will he do with the silent members, who never speak at all? What will their constituents think of them? Indeed, sir, if he has the idea I have formed of his danger, he will not undertake it at all. Faction and party have been mentioned: happy stenographer, if he can keep clear of these! If he fall into their power, insensibly he will represent one side in clouds and darkness, the other as ornamented with the brightest beams of light. How will he please both? Misrepresentation is complained of: alas, sir, how quick is error-how slow is the pro

H. OF R.]

Stenographer to the House.

[JANUARY, 1796.

last sessions, been altogether exceptionable. He was sorry to learn, that these debates had been collected by a person who comes here, so that they would now, perhaps, descend to posterity. If they were as incorrect in the volume (The Political Register) as they were in the newspaper, they were a libel on that House, and would disgrace it with the world. If this resolution was rejected, it would be advisable to send all the printers to the gallery.

Mr. KITCHELL was entirely against the object of the report.

Mr. GILES said, that he might have taken up wrong impressions, but he thought the matter worth trying. It was a thing of experiment, by which he believed that the printer would make money. He acknowledged that, for some time past, several of the reports had been pretty cor

than to stop them altogether. He would not wish to press the motion. if it was to meet with opposition from several gentlemen who had this day spoken against it. He moved that the Committee should rise, and the further consideration of the report be deferred till Monday.

gress of truth in almost all things. Our stenographer must indeed be a wonder-working man, if he can revert this tide, and make every where light and correct reasoning prevail. The best mode of informing our constituents is, by the yeas and nays on our acts; this truly shows, as a gentleman from New Hampshire has observed, our doings, which are much more interesting to them than our abstract reasonings; these our constituents will easily form to themselves ideas of, when they know our votes; as the celebrated Dr. Johnson is said to have written speeches for members of Parliament whose general political sentiments he knew, by knowing these he applied arguments pretty accurately, as he supposed them to bear on every question offered. But, it has been observed, if we do not agree to have an official stenographer, a motion will be made to clear the House of those who now take down debates. These persons are tol-rect. It is better to let them go out as they are, erated only on the principle that our galleries are open. Woodfall, a celebrated printer, took down debates from memory: could we prevent this being done here? Or should we drive all printers from us who take notes, for the inaccuracies of some? I hope not. The liberty of the press has great title to respect. How can we agree by a Mr. W. SMITH said, it was admitted on all sides, miscellaneous union, the most strange, to commute that it was highly important for the people to re- with Mr. Brown, the printer, the salary of four ceive the most accurate information of the prothousand dollars, so as to possess him first of the ceedings of the House, and that the debates were, proof-sheets, without supposing other printers in general, extremely misrepresented. Was it not, will become rivals of this business, and complain then, the duty of the House to remedy this evil, if they are thwarted in an equal pursuit of their and to adopt such measures as would transmit to own livelihood? The best way is, to leave this the people in every part of the United States the business, like others, to regulate itself. Mr. Brown, most accurate information of the conduct of their by his labor in this way, has already widely ex- Representatives? The House had now an opportended the circulation of his paper-evident in his tunity of obtaining the services of a gentleman present overture-and, by the by, this is no mean peculiarly distinguished for the rare talent of reproof of correctness on the whole in his success; porting with accuracy public debates; the comhe or others will still go on to improve the busi-pensation which would be adequate to such useness, if left to themselves. If he or they fall into ful and laborious service, was beyond the ability errors, they are their own. Members may correct of any printer; the House ought therefore to conthem, or write their own speeches out, if they tribute towards it; the sum required was a trifle, please. But what has the House to do with this; when compared with the advantages; it was no or why should it become the censor and promul- object. The only question, then, was, whether gator of the speeches of its own members? Our the stenographer ought to be an officer of the time is wasted often, already, by too many long House; in that capacity he certainly would be discussions on unimportant objects; but what more easily restrained from the commission of any would it be if we were to be every morning sa- wilful misrepresentation. Mr. S. did not feel the luted with motions to correct the performances of force of the objections against the report. It had the stenographer of the preceding day? All the been said that, although the members were now advantage of the motion is to obtain more accu- misrepresented, yet, they had it in their power to racy; but, it is said, the House means not to pledge publish corrections; but these corrections were itself for this accuracy: if so, why employ an offi- often overlooked, while the misrepresentation was cer under its authority for this purpose? On the operating very injuriously to the character of the whole, sir, we shall in vain seek to escape abuse member; this was generally the case in places reand misrepresentation; these are by far too much mote from the Seat of Government; the mangled in vogue. All the consolation left is, what I usu- account of a debate was republished in a distant ally apply in such cases—that is, the conscious- paper, and the correction, if it reached the distant ness of not deserving them. printer, was generally disregarded. Among the opponents to this report, Mr. S. said he was surprised to find the gentleman who represented this city, [Mr. SWANWICK,] who, more than any other member, should have withdrawn his opposition to Mr. WM. LYMAN said that the debates in one the measure proposed; that gentleman's constituof the newspapers (he either named or plainly al-ents had it in their power, at any time, to hear the luded to the Philadelphia Gazette) had, for the two debates of Congress; they were on the spot; ought

Mr. GILBERT was against the report. He thought the publication of the laws and the yeas and nays. a sufficient means to communicate the proceedings of the House.

FEBRUARY, 1796.]

Indian Trading Houses.

[H. of R.

he not, then, in candor, to assist in facilitating to criminal misstatement: the officer's character and the remote citizens the means of obtaining the talents, his responsibility to the House, and his best knowledge of the proceedings, and the most oath to report with impartiality, would be a sufficorrect statement of the discussions of the House? cient pledge of his accuracy. Mr. S. seriously beOught they, from their remoteness, to be kept in lieved that the character of the House had suffered the dark, or to be furnished with such light as from the erroneous statements which had gone would only mislead? Had they not a claim on abroad. He wished to guard against this evil in the House to adopt such means as would enable future; he was willing, for himself, that every the citizens in every State to judge of the propri- syllable he uttered within those walls should be ety of public measures? The member from this carried to every part of the Union, but he deprecity had another exclusive advantage; if misre-cated misrepresentation. He was anxious that the presented, he could correct the error, and the cor- truth should be known in relation to every act of rection would be read; that was not the case with the Government; for he was as satisfied that the the members from the remoter States, whose re-affection and confidence of the people in this Goputation might be injured by misrepresentation, vernment would increase with the promulgation without a similar advantage: the member from of truth, as that whatever it had lost of that affecthis city was in the midst of his constituents; he tion and confidence was owing altogether to the had daily opportunities of setting right any mis- propagation of detraction and calumny. It was statement by personal explanation. under these impressions that he had originally brought forward the proposition and that he now recommended the report, and having heard no reasons to change his sentiments of the expediency of the measure, he should persist in supporting it.

Mr. SMITH said, he did not agree with some gentlemen, that it was sufficient for the people to know what laws were passed, without knowing the previous discussions; he thought, on the contrary, the favorable or unfavorable impression of a law on the public mind would depend in a great degree on the reasons assigned for and against it in debate, and the people ought to know those reasons. When a law passes, imposing a tax, would not the people be reconciled if they saw, from the discussions of the House, that such tax was unavoidable, and that the particular mode of taxation was the best which could be devised? And ought this information to depend entirely on the caprice or convenience of the reporters, who attended when it pleased them, and who published just as much of the debate as they found leisure or patience to accomplish? Mr. S. said he was convinced that the errors which had excited so much complaint were not the effect of design, but merely of inadequacy to the task. Very few were competent to such a business, which required peculiar skill in stenography, very laborious application, and a clear comprehension of the subject-matter of debate. It could not be expected that persons thus qualified would devote their whole time to this business without an ample reward. The report was objected to because there was novelty in the plan: it was true the House of Commons of England had no such officer, but their practice was not a fit precedent for us on this occasion, for they admitted no person to write down, in the House, their proceedings; their debates were taken from memory. This House, on the contrary, had, from its first institution, facilitated, by every accommodation, the reporting their proceedings. The thing was not altogether, however, without precedent. During the existence of the National Assembly of France, there were officers of the House who composed a daily work called the Logography, which was an exact account of the debates of that body. It had been asked, what control the House were to have over this officer? He answered that the stenographer would be liable to be censure or displaced, if he should be guilty of wilful misrepresentation. It would be always easy to discriminate between a casual inadvertence and a

The motion by Mr. GILES was agreed to. The Committee rose, and, a few minutes after, the House adjourned to Monday.

MONDAY, February 1.

The appropriation bill was received from the Senate with amendments. None of importance: the most material one is a proposed appropriation of thirteen thousand dollars, instead of ten thousand, for the purchase of copper for the Mint.— Ordered to lie on the table.

Mr. HARPER laid on the table a resolution, in substance as follows:

"Resolved, That such reports, as well from Heads of Departments as select committees, as are important to explain the acts of Government, be published at the expense of the United States."

INDIAN TRADING HOUSES.

The engrossed bill for establishing trading houses for the Indian tribes was taken into consideration. The first blank was for the gross sum to be appropriated for the general objects of the bill. It was moved to fill this blank with $150,000.

Mr. WILLIAMS spoke in favor of the bill.

Mr. SWIFT stated some general objections to an appropriation at the present time. The bill had been postponed for the purpose of obtaining further information from the Committee of Ways and Means relative to the actual state of the finances; this information is not yet received, and considering the great sums that must be raised and appropriated for other objects, he conceived that a further postponement was necessary. He moved that it should be postponed to the third Tuesday in February.

Mr. S. SMITH urged the necessity of an immediate decision, in order to answering the object of th Il in any degree whatever. He recited a passage from the Report of the Secretary of the Treasury, to show that the funds were not so de

ficient as the gentleman had stated; but all objection on this account was done away by the plan which he was well assured was before the Committee of Ways and Means, and that was, a reduction of the Military Establishment, by which means a sufficient sum would be found without having recourse to new taxes. The goods ought to have been written for last September. There is, perhaps, just time enough left to procure them, but any further delay will totally defeat the salutary purposes of the bill.

Mr. GILES asked, if voting the money would raise it? He did not suppose that a delay of a few days would make any difference in regard to the final object. He confessed he had his objections to the principle of the bill; he did not consider the plan calculated to produce the effects anticipated from it.

Mr. HILLHOUSE urged a speedy decision. The gentleman from Virginia says, that voting the money will not procure it, but will the money be realized unless it is voted? Mr. H., alluding to the retrenchment of public expenses by the proposed reduction of the Military Establishment, said there would be no difficulty about raising the money; but the money will not be immediately wanted. The Government will not be the importer of the goods. Some merchant will probably be employed for this purpose, and the payment called for at a future day. He urged the necessity of despatch. Mr. PARKER Supported the general provision of the bill, and urged the necessity of an immediate attention to the subject. He calculated on a surplus in the appropriation for the War Department to provide for this object.

Mr. HARPER moved that the bill should be recommitted. He then entered into a general consideration of the principles of the bill, which he reprobated altogether. Alluding to the general objects of commerce, he said that public bodies never manage these matters without loss. He adverted to the repairs of roads, construction of canals, &c.; all these objects prosper under private individual direction, but when entered into by public bodies nothing is ever brought to perfection, and the public money is lost. He applied these ideas to the plan of the bill. Persons at fifteen hundred or two thousand miles distance, are to be intrusted with public property to a large amount. It is not in human wisdom to guard against frauds and impositions; no check or control can be devised which will be found adequate to repressing private rapacity. Mr. H., therefore, wished the bill recommitted, for the purpose of an entire new modification. If the motion should obtain, he should then move a resolution providing for a loan to individuals for the purpose.

[FEBRUARY, 1796.

plan of the bill as applying with greater force against the proposed substitute.

Mr. S. SMITH said, when the gentleman from South Carolina made his motion for a recommitment, he had supposed he would have accompanied the motion with some reasons; but since he had heard what he offered as reasons, he found himself confirmed in his opinion of the inexpediency of his motion. Mr. S. said, the only reason for the commitment was, that the principle of the bill might be changed, by individuals being substituted for the Government, that is, by loaning the money to private persons for the purposes of the trade. He was entirely opposed to this principle. Public debtors are the worst kind of citizens. These persons, after having expended or lost the money, will be coming forward with their petitions to be released from their bonds. He did not wish to increase the business of the Committee of Claims.

Mr. SWIFT enlarged on the idea suggested by Mr. HARPER. He thought it infinitely preferable to leave the business to the enterprise and resources of individuals.

Mr. HARPER rose in reply to Mr. SMITH. He entered into a further consideration and defence of the plan he had proposed as a substitute.

Mr. DEARBORN objected to Mr. HARPER'S idea; he saw no sufficient reasons to support the preference that gentleman gave to a loan to individuals. He was in favor of the general principle of the bill; he thought it economical to appropriate money for the object of cultivating good understanding and harmony with the Indians, but should vote for the bill only on the condition of a reduction of the Military Establishment.

Mr. GILES entered more largely into a consideration of the principle of the bill. He had no opinion of Governmental bargains-he believed they always turned out losing bargains. The clause which provides that the original stock shall not be diminished, he conceived, would operate against the general object of the bill, if adhered to; but this he did not contemplate; he supposed that it would terminate in an annual provision. Mr. G. alluded to the PRESIDENT'S Speech, a clause of which had been recited; he did not consider that, or a former recommendation of this matter, as binding on the House. If the PRESIDENT'S Speech is considered as the political Bible of the Government, the case is different; but he presumed no person was disposed to assert this. He considered the House as perfectly free to adopt or reject the proposition. With respect to the effects of the measure, gentlemen had differed in their predictions. Predictions which were the nearest to the effects produced, may be considered as the result of the greater political sagacity. He would venMr. SWANWICK supported the general principle ture to predict that the whole sum proposed to be of the bill, and reprobated the idea of loans to in-appropriated would be sunk in three years. With dividuals; he considered such a plan as one of the worst kind of sinking funds. The plan is an experiment; it is not, perhaps, possible to predict what will be the result; but the object is worth the trial and worthy the attention of the Legislature. He considered the objections against the

respect to the fund contemplated from the surplus of the War Department appropriation, he considered it as altogether illusory; there is no such surplus, none had heretofore been found, and he presumed none ever would. For though the number of troops voted had never been raised, yet the

Intercourse with the Indians.

The House then resolved itself into a Commit-pointed. tee of the Whole on the second section, Mr. MUнLENBERG in the Chair.

Mr. VENABLE moved that the section should be altered to read, that the agent should give bonds to the amount in value of the goods committed to his charge.

Mr. J. SMITH Supposed that the sum should be sufficient to cover the amount of the goods which may at any time be found in the hands of the agents; from ten to fifteen or twenty thousand dollars, he supposed, might be sufficient for this

the enrolled bills. A message was afterwards re-sideration. This refers particularly to the line ceived from the Senate, informing the House of laid down in treaties already concluded.