JUNE, 1797.] Answer to the President's Speech. [H. OF R. UNITED STATES, June 3, 1797. The members having returned to the House, the SPEAKER again took the Chair, and having read the answer of the President, tion of advances for preserving peace. We, therefore, to each other, although strongly impressed with the receive with the utmost satisfaction your information necessity of collecting ourselves into a manly posture that a fresh attempt at negotiation will be instituted; of defence, I nevertheless entertain an encouraging and we cherish the hope that a mutual spirit of conci- confidence that a mutual spirit of conciliation, a dispoliation, and a disposition on the part of France to com- sition to compensate injuries, and accommodate each pensate for any injuries which may have been commit- other in all our relations and connections, will produce ted upon our neutral rights; and, on the part of the an agreement to a treaty consistent with the engageUnited States, to place France on grounds similar to ments, rights, duties, and honor, of both nations. those of other countries in their relation and connection JOHN ADAMS. with us, if any inequalities shall be found to exist, will produce an accommodation compatible with the engagements, rights, duties, and honor of the United States. Fully, however, impressed with the uncertainty of the result, we shall prepare to meet with fortitude any unfavorable events which may occur, and to extricate our selves from their consequences with all the skill we possess, and all the efforts in our power. Believing with you that the conduct of the Government has been just and impartial to foreign nations, that the laws for the preservation of peace have been proper, and that they have been fairly executed, the Representatives of the people do not hesitate to declare that they will give their most cordial support to the execution of principles so deliberately and uprightly established. The many interesting subjects which you have recommended to our consideration, and which are so strongly enforced by this momentous occasion, will receive every attention which their importance demands; and we trust that by the decided and explicit conduct which will govern our deliberations, every insinuation will be repelled which is derogatory to the honor and independence of our country. Permit us, in offering this Address, to express our satisfaction at your promotion to the first office in the Government, and our entire confidence that the preeminent talents and patriotism which have placed you in this distinguished situation, will enable you to discharge its various duties with satisfaction to yourself and advantage to our common country. To which the PRESIDENT returned the following answer: Mr. Speaker, and Gentlemen of the House of Representatives: I receive with great satisfaction your candid approbation of the convention of Congress; and thank you for your assurances that the interesting subjects recommended to your consideration shall receive the attention which their importance demands; and that your co-operation may be expected in those measures which may appear necessary for our security or peace. The declaration of the Representatives of this nation of their satisfaction at my promotion to the first office in the Government, and of their confidence in my sincere endeavors to discharge the various duties of it, with advantage to our common country, have excited my most grateful sensibility. I pray you, gentlemen, to believe, and to communicate such assurance to our constituents, that no event which I can foresee to be attainable by any exertions in the discharge of my duties, can afford me so much cordial satisfaction as to conduct a negotiation with the French Republic, to a removal of prejudices, a correction of errors, a dissipation of umbrages, an accommodation of all differences, and a restoration of harmony and affection, to the mutual satisfaction of both nations. And whenever the legitimate organs of intercourse shall be restored, and the real sentiments of the two Governments can be candidly communicated Mr. W. SMITH said the Speech of the President of the United States had been referred to the Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union. Before the House resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole on that subject, he wished the rule to be read, which respected the closing of the galleries. [It was read accordingly.] This rule says, that when any Message shall be received from the President which shall require secrecy, or when any member has any communication to make which, in his opinion, requires secrecy, the galleries shall be cleared. Mr. W. S. gave notice that he had a communication to make which required secrecy, and begged the galleries might be cleared. Mr. NICHOLAS hoped they should understand from the gentleman, whether it was any new information, or matter which grew out of the business before the House. tleman to declare his communication was of a MONDAY, June 5. The Journals of the proceedings of Saturday having been read, Mr. NICHOLAS Supposed there was an omission, as no mention was made of the resolutions which had been brought forward by the gentleman from South Carolina, after the doors had been closed, and which it had been determined were not of a nature to require secrecy. Mr. W. SMITH said the vote which had been taken only related to a part of what he had brought forward. Mr. NICHOLAS said, he understood that the letter which he had produced was a private letter, and therefore it was not necessary to notice it. Mr. GALLATIN observed, that no distinction had been made. If the letter could be considered as part of the communication, it was also included in the vote, as it was simply that the communication did not require secrecy. Mr. MACON thought the resolutions stood upon the same ground as that upon which a motion offered to the House, upon which no decision was made, which was never recorded until it was taken up. Mr. THATCHER Concurred in the opinion. Mr. NICHOLAS was still of opinion an entry ought to have been made on the Journals, and moved to amend them. The question was put, and there appearing 41 votes in favor of it, and 41 against it, the Speaker decided it in the negative. DEFENSIVE MEASURES. The House then resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union, and the Speech of the President, at the opening of the session, having been read, Mr. W. SMITH said, he wished to lay upon the table a number of resolutions, which it appeared, if it should not be found advisable to carry the whole of them into effect, were at least worthy of discussion. He did not, however, at present, pledge himself to support the whole: they were as follow: "1. Resolved, That further provision ought to be made by law, for fortifying the ports and harbors of the United States. 66 "5. Resolved, That provision be made by law, for regulating the arming of the merchant vessels of the United States. "6. Resolved, That the existing Military Establishment ought to be augmented by an addition of one regiment or corps of artillerists and engineers, and companies of dragoons. "7. Resolved, That provision be made by law, for empowering the President to raise a provisional army, to consist of - regiments of infantry, one regiment of artillery, and one regiment of dragoons, by commissioning the officers, and by volunteers or enlistments, whenever the circumstances of the country shall, in his opinion, render the said army necessary for the protection and defence of the United States: Provided, That neither the officers nor soldiers shall receive any pay or emoluments until called into actual service. "8. Resolved, That provision be made by law, to authorize the President to borrow, on the credit of the United States, a sum not exceeding - dollars, to defray the expense which may arise in providing for the defence and security of the United States. said. "9. Resolved, That provision be made by law, to raise a revenue adequate to the reimbursement, within years, of such sum as may be borrowed, as afore"10. Resolved, That provision be made by law, to prohibit, for a limited time, the exportation of arms, ammunition, and military and naval stores." The resolutions having been read from the Chair, Mr. W. SMITH moved the first of them. Mr. MACON wished the gentleman from South Carolina to inform the committee, whether he [JUNE, 1797. meant to repair all the fortifications which had heretofore been contemplated. Perhaps some might be necessary, but he thought, considering the present state of our finances, few of them ought to be attended to. Much of the money already expended on this subject had been thrown away. He particularly mentioned New York. Mr. W. SMITH thought the gentleman had been long enough a member of that House to know that, when they were about to settle the principle of a thing, it was not usual to go into details. If the resolution was agreed to, a committee would be appointed, who would report such fortifications as it appeared to them necessary to be attended to, with an estimate of expense, upon which the House would determine; or a sum of money might it as appeared to him best; but this was not the be voted, and leave it to the President to employ question, but merely whether a further sum of money should be voted for this object. Mr. THATCHER thought they were not ripe for this subject, as they did not know what was the state of the different fortifications. He thought, as there were a number of propositions, in some degree connected, that it was desirable they should tee might rise, to give time for this to be done. be printed; he therefore moved that the commit Mr. GILES wished the gentleman would reverse his propositions, and let the one for raising money come first. He did not know whether they were prepared to meet this expense. He did not mean to oppose the present motion; he supposed it would pass. But he thought they were about to be too precipitate in their measures. At a time when all Europe seemed to be tired of war, and about to make peace, we seemed to be disposed to rush into it. He did not believe that much good would be done by this system of fortification. He did not think the United States were more secure now, than before they had a single work of the kind. We have, said he, an extensive seacoast, and it was not to be expected that an enemy would choose to come to precisely the place where a fortification stands. It was his opinion that the interests of the country would be served, by letting this matter lie over till next session. Mr. WILLIAMS observed, that the sense of the committee would be first taken upon the propriety of going into the measure; if there was a majority in favor it, (and he could not doubt it,) the matter would be referred to a select committee, who would make their report upon it. Mr. S. SMITH was in favor of going into this measure; for if the war continued in Europe, he thought it probable we might be drawn into it. Mr. SWANWICK should not be opposed to the present motion, because he agreed with the gentinued in Europe there was a probability of this tleman from Maryland, that whilst the war concountry being drawn into the vortex. But he thought there was some weight, also, in the observation of the gentleman from Virginia, with respect to the ways and means; because, if, after they should agree to carry into effect certain measures, they should disagree about the means, their time would have been spent to no purpose. The question was put and carried, there being 62 votes in favor of it. Mr. W. SMITH moved the second resolution. Mr. NICHOLAS wished to know whether the provision already made for completing the three frigates was not sufficient? Mr. W. SMITH said, he had no information on the subject; he had inserted the word completing as well as manning, lest there should be any deficiency. Mr. OTIS was not prepared, in so rapid a way, to press resolutions of this importance, without having them printed, or time to deliberate upon them. If he voted for these resolutions, he should consider himself as pledged to carry them into effect. He therefore hoped the committee would rise. Mr. MACON was opposed to this resolution. He did not believe that seamen could be got to man the vessels, as nearly four times the price was paid for seamen's wages that was paid when the law for building these vessels passed. Mr. RUTLEDGE was in favor of the committee's rising. Mr. NICHOLAS had no objection to the committee's rising, if gentlemen wished it; if so, he hoped the resolution agreed to would be reported. He wished the principle of the different resolutions, however, to be settled in a Committee of the Whole. Messrs. CRAIK, CLAIBORNE, VARNUM, and Corr, were in favor of the committee's rising. Mr. SWANWICK thought it would be best that a committee should be appointed to report on the business. Mr. S. SMITH saw no reason for the committee's rising, because, if gentlemen were not prepared to vote upon this resolution, they might go on to others. Though he should vote in favor of this proposition, he should not hold himself bound to vote ultimately for the bill, if he disliked it. The motion for the committee to rise was withdrawn, and afterwards renewed by Mr. McDowELL, who also withdrew it, on a suggestion from Mr. LIVINGSTON that the resolution would be less objectionable to run, "that a committee be appointed to inquire into the propriety of," &c., and, when a committee had the business referred to them, they could possess themselves of the necessary facts, and report them to the House. Mr. GALLATIN said, if the question was to determine the principle of manning the frigates, the resolution stood right as it was. But if it were not intended, by adopting this resolution, to commit any man, but only to say that they would take the business into consideration, and if found useful and necessary, and funds were attainable, they would carry it into effect, then the amendment of the gentleman from New York (Mr. LIVINGSTON) Would be proper. As to the committee's rising, he could see no ground for it, as these propositions were not new-they had had them before them for three weeks in the Speech of the President. Of course, so far as related to the frigates, gentlemen must have formed an opinion; yet he agreed that it was desirable to see [H. OF R. some documents on the subject, before a decided affirmative or negative was given. He was, therefore, in favor of the amendment for a committee to be appointed. He wished all those subjects which were of a doubtful nature to be then determined. On the other hand, those upon which members were ready to decide at once, either by an acceptance or rejection, might be voted upon in the form in which they were introduced. Mr. PARKER read the motion which was entered into last year, and thought it would be a good model for the present. Mr. W. SMITH was of a different opinion. He thought the committee should first decide the abstract principle. He thought it would be wrong to refer to a select committee a business in which every member was so intimately interested, and he doubted not gentlemen were ready to decide upon this abstract question. With regard to expense, he was of opinion that if the situation of the country required it, that should be no object. If gentlemen thought differently, they would of course negative the proposition. Any information on the subject could be got before the business was finished. He thought they should first say what were the necessary objects of expense, and then provide the money, which might be done by borrowing or by taxes. If there was a necessity for the expense, there was no doubt the money would be raised. If gentlemen were not prepared to discuss the subject, he had no objection to the committee's rising, and, in the House, the Secretary of War might be called upon for information. Mr. NICHOLAS thought the question was not fairly presented. It was whether they should man the frigates. But when they were called upon to determine this, they should know when they would be ready to receive the men. The probability was that the frigates would not be ready to receive the men before the next session of Con gress. Mr. DAYTON (the Speaker) was in favor of the original proposition. He wished to provide for manning all the frigates which could be got ready before the next session of Congress. He believed if they adopted this plan, unnecessary delay would be prevented. Mr. PARKER was ready to vote for the proposition of the gentleman from South Carolina. He believed the frigate in Philadelphia might be equipped, rigged, and manned, in three months. The only reason why he varied his motion was, that he might include the next proposition; but he believed it would be better for them to stand separate, as, before he voted for the additional vessels, he should wish to know how the means were to be got, and for what purpose they were to be used. The vessel at Boston, he said, would not be ready so soon, but it would be in readiness before the next meeting of Congress; that at Baltimore would be in readiness to receive her men in four months. Mr. S. SMITH said, the frigate building at Baltimore would be launched on the 4th of July, and the equipments were in greater forwardness than those for the frigate at Philadelphia. H. OF R.] Defensive Measures. [JUNE, 1797. Mr. BALDWIN was against referring this propo- Mr. GILES thought this a very extraordinary sition to a select committee. It would be desira-measure. ble, indeed, to know what the cost of doing the business would be, but every one knew how little to be relied upon were estimates of this kind. He was ready to vote for manning the frigates; indeed, there was no question upon which he was so ready to say aye, as upon this. The question was about to be put on Mr. LivINGSTON'S motion, when Mr. VARNUM said he thought the wording of the resolution improper, as the word "completing" would clash with the act of last session. The question was put and negatived, 50 to 34. Mr. MACON wished the frigates to be completed, but not manned, he therefore moved to strike out the words "and manning." The question was put and negatived; there being only 24 votes in favor of it. Mr. GILES moved to strike out the word "completing;" but, after some conversation, the motion was withdrawn, and the original resolution was carried. The third proposition next came under consideration. Mr. NICHOLAS hoped the gentleman who introduced this motion, would tell them for what purpose these additional vessels were wanted. He supposed this resolution to be connected with the next, and if so, he thought they should be considered together. What, he asked, were to be the instructions given to the commanders of these vessels? He thought it a very embarrassing business, and one that would certainly lead to war; nay, indeed, the thing seemed to be a war operation in itself. Mr. W. SMITH wished the gentleman had made his inquiries before. They would have come more properly when the frigates were under consideration, as the same objection would be against both; and the next resolution had no more connection with this than with that already agreed to. The gentleman seemed to have let go the opportunity of calling upon him; as, however, he did not wish to evade his call, (though he was not willing to say he would himself vote for the measure,) he would say that it appeared to him, from the present state of the commerce of this country, to be necessary to provide convoys for our vessels. These vessels might not, indeed, be employed as a regular convoy, but partly confined to the coasts and harbors. This was a separate question; or it might be left to the Executive to employ them as he might see proper. He was not, however, ready to give an opinion on the subject. He rose principally to remark upon what had fallen from the gentlaman last up, as to employing a convoy being an act of war. He owned he had not looked deep into the subject at present, but he recollected in our treaty with Sweden, there was a stipulation that when both Powers were neutral, they should protect each other's commerce.* The following is the article of our Treaty with Sweden, produced and read by Mr. W. SMITH: He called the attention of the committee to the critical situation of Europe, and thought, before they went into any expensive operations, they should wait the issue of the negotiation, especially as he supposed it was probable a full session might be necessary. It had been said that several of the ports in the West Indies were in a blockaded and rebellious state. He did not suppose it was the intention of the committee, by means of a convoy, to press a trade to those ports; this would be a certain means of provoking war. He thought they ought to make a pause; as it was probable that, in less than four months from this time they might again be in session; and, in the meanwhile, the affairs of Europe might have taken such a turn as to do away the necessity of going into hostile measures. Mr. NICHOLAS expected the gentleman from South Carolina would have acknowledged that the two resolutions were connected. Indeed he must have intended those vessels to be employed in this way, or such a resolution would not have been introduced. With respect to Sweden's treaty for a reciprocal convoy, there was some ground for it, as there was a difference between the Northern Powers of Europe, as to the principle of free ships making free goods; but where there was no difference as to the principle, no such thing could take place. Mr. GALLATIN said the present resolution was certainly in some degree connected with the next. It was understood that the purchasing of frigates and sloops of war, was for the purpose of convoying our trade. Under the present circumstances of this country, he should be opposed to this proposition; not that he denied the right of neutral Powers to afford convoys to their merchant vessels; but, because under present circumstances it was impolitic to adopt the measure, not only for the reasons urged by the gentleman from Virginia, but on account of our situation with respect to France at the present moment. By our treaty with France, enemy's property was to be respected on board of American vessels, and certain articles used in the building of ships were not considered as contraband; the President would, of course, be obliged to give orders to have our vessels protected in this situation, and who could not see that this would be the source of war; and if the convoy were not to be employed to enforce "If in any future war at sea, the contracting Powers resolve to remain neuter, and, as such, to observe the strictest neutrality, then it is agreed that if the merchant ships of either party should happen to be in a tion are not stationed, or if they are met on the high part of the sea where the ships of war of the same nasea without being able to have recourse to their own convoys, in that case the commander of the ships of war of the other party, if required, shall, in good faith and sincerity, give them all necessary assistance, and, in such case, the ships of war and frigates of either of the Powers, shall protect and support the merchant ships of the other Provided, nevertheless, that the ships claiming assistance are not engaged in any illicit commerce contrary to the principles of neutrality." : these two privileges, he did not see what use it could be of. He knew that depredations without number had been committed in the West Indies; but he was led to believe that this was done by pirates more than by any other vessels. But suppose it were practicable to distinguish between those vessels which were regularly, and those which were piratically taken; yet, he must confess, he would not be for running the risk of a rupture, by sending out armed vessels to contest the point, especially when we have reason to believe that these attacks are unauthorized by the French Government. Mr. G. thought it would only be necessary to extend our navy in case of war, and were this unhappily to be our situation, vessels might easily be purchased without delay; but whilst we were at peace, he did not think the advantages which could be derived from a convoy, would be a sufficient inducement to go into the measure. Besides he was induced by another motive to give this proposition his negative. He knew the depredations upon our commerce had been great; but he did not look upon this loss as falling only upon merchants. There was not an individual who did not bear a part of it. For instance, if a merchant paid ten or fifteen per cent. additional upon his cargo, he will put a proportionably high price upon his commodities, which must eventually be paid by the consumer. Therefore, so far as an argument might be drawn from this circumstance, it became a question of expediency, and he thought it would be granted, that the loss to individuals would be less in this way than if they had to support a navy to protect our trade. [H. or R. Mr. S. said he had made a rough calculation of what would be the expense of three frigates of 32 guns, and six sloops of war of 16 guns, and found it to be $926,000, including the equipment and manning for one year. But, said Mr. S., does not the farmer suffer by these spoliations? He certainly does; for, if the merchant was obliged to pay an extravagant insurance, he would give the less for the farmer's produce; but, added he, the expense of the frigates will be no loss to the country, as, if they cost a million of dollars, the whole will be paid to our citizens; every article used in the building of these vessels being the produce of the United States. But gentlemen complain of our impatience in the business; he thought the wrongs we had suffered sufficient to rouse our resentment. It was also said, that there was a probability of peace, and why go on with this expense? But he might as well say there was no probability of peace. One supposition would stand against the other. Indeed, who knew that the Czar of Russia would not join the coalition against France? A hope of peace, therefore, was not a sufficiently stable ground upon which to calculate. We must either interdict all trade, suffer merchant vessels to arm, or go into the measure proposed. But it was said that France had declared certain British ports in the West Indies blockaded, and in a state of rebellion, and therefore we must not trade with them, but he did not know why our vessels should be subject to be taken, and our seamen to be hung, because they chose to make these declarations; declarations which he trusted this country never would acknowledge. What, said Mr. S., will be the consequence of negotiating, without taking any measure of defence? It will put it in the power of France to make requisitions on us to any amount she pleases, she may spin out the negotiation by throwing difficulties in the way of it. She may take all our vessels, and when she has drained us of all our wealth, it will be said, we must submit. Where will then be your privateers? Your vessels are taken, and your seamen gone! Mr. W. SMITH acknowledged that there was considerable weight in the arguments of the gentleman from Pennsylvania, though he did not find sufficient weight in them to change his opinion of the propriety of the measure. The gentleman from Virginia had endeavored to show that, as there was no difference of opinion as to principle between France and this country, the regulations entered into with Sweden did not apply; whilst the gentleman from Pennsylvania had produced arguments to show that we were in that situation. With respect to the treaty articles in The gentleman from Pennsylvania admitted dispute, it would be an easy matter for the Presi- the right of neutral Powers to convoy their vesdent to give the commanders of our vessels pro- sels; that gentleman put the matter upon the exper instructions on that head. And would any pediency of the thing, which was the true ground gentleman say it was not right to defend our ves-upon which he wished to have it discussed. sels against pirates? Would not the French say, if they were applied to for redress, "You knew these were pirates; why did you not defend yourselves against them ?" The expense, which seems so much to alarm gentlemen, should be put out of the question. The only question, said he, is, if your property is unjustly attacked, will you defend it? But it was said the loss did not fall upon the merchant, but upon the consumer. Mr. S. asserted it fell upon the country; and so far from the expense of the proposed armament being equal to the loss sustained by captures, it would not, in his opinion, be a tenth part of the amount, for whatever the plunderers got this country lost. Mr. GILES said, the gentleman from South Carolina talked of defensive measures, but his plans were offensive. That gentleman had undertaken to doubt the right of France to declare her ports rebel ports. Was this defensive? Every nation had this right. It was not long since Great Britain exercised it against us. Yet, aided by a convoy, he wished to push our trade to these ports. This would not only be hazarding the peace of the country, but taking the direct road to war. Besides, said Mr. G., could it be expected that six or ten frigates could convoy all our vessels? No; not a twentieth part of them. They could, therefore, be of little use, but might be the means of producing the greatest evil to the country. |