there was such a law, what could the House do? Could they declare a law of North Carolina null and void? There would be no utility in this; but if there was a law in North Carolina that violated the Constitution, there was a clear remedy in the law which organizes the Judicial department of the United States, in which it is said, if any law of an individual State interferes with a law of the United States, a person has a right to take advantage of the law of the United States. There was no necessity, therefore, to call upon Congress for a remedy against this law. Indeed, he saw nothing in this memorial which called for their interference, and he was therefore against a reference, as a further discussion of it would only produce uneasiness in certain parts of the United States, without producing any good.

[NOVEMBER, 1797.

justice they should be attended to; and not only attended to, but, if possible, relief granted. It was stated that there were a number of persons held in bondage who were justly entitled to liberty. This fact called for examination; and a question arose, if it were established, whether that House could afford redress. A gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. BLOUNT) had stated that the fact was not true; it was certainly, therefore, worth while to be inquired into. Another gentleman had said, if the fact were as stated, they had no power to act; and a third was of opinion that, by the Constitution, redress might be afforded. This diversity of opinion showed the necessity of an investigation of the subject, in order to determine the jurisdiction of the House. He wished it for another reason. It had been stated, that if this Mr. RUTLEDGE observed, that notwithstanding petition were attended to, it would open a door to all that had been said, considering the present ex-faction and mischief. Can it have this effect? traordinary state of the West India Islands and of These people bring forward a petition stating a Europe, he should insist that "sufficient for the number of facts; they certainly do not come forday is the evil thereof," and that they ought to ward for the mere design of exciting disorder in shut their door against any thing which had a any quarter. If the House say they will throw tendency to produce the like confusion in this their petition under the table, would not such treatcountry. If this were not done, the confidence of ment give the factious some ground of clamor by a great part of the Union in the General Gov- which to sow dissension? But if, on the contrary, ernment would be weakened. In the Southern they coolly looked into the petition, and reported States, where most of their property consisted of thereon, would it not stop the mouths of these slaves, and where the rest was of no value with- people? It certainly would; since they could not out them, there was already a prejudice existing then say common justice was refused to the petithat the Northern and Eastern States were inimi- tioners. Again: having once investigated the cal to this kind of property, though they were subject fully, if petitions of a similar kind should bound by the Constitution from an interference hereafter come forward, it would be reasonably with it; but when they heard of the House giv-said, this matter has already been taken up and ing countenance to a petition like the present, it would increase their uneasiness. He referred to what had fallen from the gentleman from Delaware respecting ex post facto law, and thought a court of justice the proper tribunal to settle that business. Mr. R. said he was indisposed, notwithstanding the high panegyrics which had been passed upon the body of Quakers, to withdraw the censures he had cast upon them. The gentleman from New York had doubted the charges which he had produced, and said such things could never be attempted by the body. It was true, they did not come in a body into his lodging to seduce his servant, but individuals did it. But why, he asked, do these men come here in a body? Because they believe that their presence will give more weight to their petition; so that they appeared in bodies, or as individuals, to answer their purposes. Gentlemen had charged the opposers of the petition with heat; he thought there was as much heat on one side as the other. Mr. EDMOND did not believe there was any real ground of irritation in the question; as no gentleman could suppose they were about to do any thing which was either unconstitutional, or which would affect their property. Whether the persons who presented the memorial are virtuous or vicious, was of no consequence, since justice was due to both classes of men. They had brought a petition before them, and they ought to consider it. It was addressed to their honesty or justice; if the facts were claims upon their honesty or

fully decided upon; and, therefore, we will not again go into it. Until this was done, the factious would doubtless have cause of complaint.

Mr. BLOUNT said, several gentlemen who had spoken on this subject seemed to express themselves as if they believed there was no punishment for individuals reducing to slavery persons who had been manumitted. He read an extract from a law, passed in 1779, in North Carolina, by which the punishment of death is awarded against such an offence.

Mr. MACON read the proceedings of the House on the petition respecting the kidnapping of negroes, in order to show that the gentleman from New York (Mr. LIVINGSTON) had misstated the issue of that business. The last report on the subject was that it would be best to leave the regulation of the subject to the Legislatures of the several States. Mr. M. allowed that his reflections upon the whole body of Quakers were too general, and he had no hesitation in retracting them; but he believed a number of them were guilty of the charges brought against them by the gentleman from South Carolina.

Mr. THATCHER said, if, when the motion was first made, he had been against it, from what had fallen from gentlemen on the subject, he should now be in favor of it; for, notwithstanding they opposed the second reading of the petition, they were filing off in squads to read it, and ready to fight for a sight of it. He believed, therefore, they had some reasons for opposing the second reading,

which did not appear. He referred to what had been said by the gentleman from North Carolina, as to the fact stated in the petition, and said that, notwithstanding the laws which he had read, the fact might be true; but that this very doubt about the fact was an additional reason for going into the inquiry.

[H. OF R.

received and read, and no matter found in it upon which the House could act, the proper mode of disposing of it was to order it to lie on the table, where every member could have recourse to it, and could call it up whenever he pleased. This was not disrespectful, and it would give members a better opportunity of becoming acquainted with Gentlemen had said, however good and virtuous it than a second reading, which the gentleman the petitioners might be, it ought to have no effect from Massachusetts (notwithstanding his attempt upon the petition; if this were true, he hoped when at wit on the subject) knew was merely a matter they were represented as the worst of men, that of form, the first words only being repeated. With representation was not meant to influence their respect to the society from whence the petition decision on the question. Mr. T. could not con- came, he respected them as much as any other soceive for what purpose they were carried to Eu-ciety in the United States; but, if they presented rope, to witness the scenes which had taken place there for the last ten years. Was this, he asked, the state of society? If he thought so, if it had the faintest resemblance of what was taking place there, he would fly from it to the uttermost parts of the earth, and there make his habitation. Mr. T. wished an inquiry to take place; there was a part of the United States in which slavery was tolerated-some of the members from those parts thought it not right; there were other parts of the Union which disclaimed it. These two opposing principles were like two opposite powers in mechanism, which produced rest; but, the more frequently the subject was looked into, the more mitigated would be its effects.

Mr. BAYARD went into a justification of what he had before advanced with respect to its being within the jurisdiction of the House to afford a remedy with respect to the ex post facto law complained of, and insisted that, without some such interference, persons might be in a situation in which they could get no redress. Mr. B. concluded by saying, that gentlemen knew little of human nature, who thought to silence these petitioners by contemptuous treatment, and alluded to the indulgence which had been shown them with respect to taking of oaths.

Mr. S. SMITH wished for an explanation on the subject of ex post facto law. He thought the Constitution of the United States could have no power over laws passed before it existed. He was of opinion this petition ought to be referred, as it was presented in a respectful form, and by a respectable body of men-a body of men so respectable that their word was equal to the oath of other men. He thought, also, that a fair and candid decision would prevent future similar applications. Because some few men had attempted to delude the servants of gentlemen, it ought not to be the ground of a reflection upon the whole body.

The gentleman from Pennsylvania had said that the manumission law of that State had done no harm to property of this kind; that he denied; he believed it had made many of the slaves in the neighboring States unhappy in their situations, and had given their masters considerable uneasi

ness.

Mr. VENABLE Would not have risen, had it not been that he wished to correct a mistaken notion of disrespect that was attached to ordering a petition to lie upon the table. When a petition was

a petition upon which the House could not act, he should be for its lying upon the table.

Mr. GORDON defended what he had before assert

ed with respect to the law organizing the Judiciary system being equal to the redress of any grievance arising from a State law, in opposition to the gentleman from Delaware. He read the law at length.

The question was taken for the second reading of the petition, and carried-53 votes being in the affirmative.

Mr. GALLATIN moved that it be referred to a select committee.

Mr. Corr wished it to be referred to the Com

mittee of the Whole, to whom was referred the petition on the subject of kidnapping negroes, &c.

Mr. RUTLEDGE thought a select committee would be best, as stage-plays, cock-fighting, horseracing, and other evils, would, of course, be considered.

The question for reference to a select committee was put and carried-59 members being in the affirmative.

Five members being agreed upon to form the committee, the SPEAKER named Messrs. SITGREAVES, NICHOLAS, DANA, SCHUREMAN, and S. SMITH, for the purpose.

The House adjourned.

FRIDAY, December 1.

A new member, to wit: JOSEPH HEISTER, returned to serve in this House as a member for the State of Pennsylvania, in the room of George Ege, who has resigned his seat, appeared, produced his credentials, and took his seat in the House.

Several other members, to wit: from Pennsylvania, ANDREW GREGG; from Kentucky, THOMAS T. DAVIS; and from North Carolina, NATHAN BRYAN, and DEMSEY BURGES, appeared and took their seats in the House.

The Clerk then informed the House that he had heard from a member of the Senate that the SPEAKER was indisposed; so much so, that he was not able to communicate his indisposition to the House in writing.

Mr. DENT said, this being the case, he should move that the orders for this day be further postponed till Monday; which motion being agreed

H. OF R.]

Impeachment of William Blount.

to, the Clerk, on motion, adjourned the House till Monday morning, at 11 o'clock.

MONDAY, December 4.

THOMAS SUMTER, from South Carolina, appeared and took his seat.

Mr. Corr, from the Committee of Elections, reported on the memorial of Robert Rutherford, complaining of the undue election of General MORGAN, that they had examined the proofs adduced, and that they were wholly insufficient to support the allegations contained in his memorial. Mr. C. moved that the House concur with the report; but, upon the request of Messrs. J. PARKER and T. CLAIBORNE, it was committed to a Committee of the Whole for Thursday.

REMISSION OF DUTIES.

[DECEMBER, 1797.

of the committal; and the motion was put and carried, and a committee of three members appointed to report thereon.

DUTY ON STILLS.

Mr. T. CLAIBORNE presented a petition from sundry citizens of the State of Virginia, complaining of being aggrieved by the act laying a duty upon stills, and praying relief.

Mr. C. was doubtful as to what committee this petition ought to go. He thought it best to go to the Committee of Ways and Means; but, on being informed no such committee was at present in existence, and Mr. HARRISON wishing the subject to go to a select committee, he consented. Mr. NEw thought it would be best to appoint a committee to inquire what amendments were necessary to the act. Mr. J. PARKER was in favor Mr. LIVINGSTON, from the Committee of Com-of a Committee of Ways and Means; and Mr. merce and Manufactures, made reports on the pe-Means be appointed. NICHOLAS moved that a Committee of Ways and titions of John C. Normand and Henry Sherriot, who prayed for the remission of duties on wine destroyed by fire. The report stated that there was no doubt of the fact being as set forth; but that the House had of late years rejected all such applications, not only as inequitable, but on the ground of its being impossible to guard against imposition, and therefore, referring to former decisions, determine the prayer of the petitioners could not be granted.

A Committee of Ways and Means was accordingly appointed, and consisted of the following members, viz: Messrs. HARPER, GALLATIN, GRISWOLD, BLOUNT, HOSMER, CRAIK, BRENT, A. FosTER, SEWALL, MORRIS, DAVIS, SINNICKSON, W. C. CLAIBORNE, BAYARD, CHAMPLIN, and BALDWIN. The petition was referred to this committee.

TENNESSEE BOUNDARY.

Mr. L. also made a report on the petition of Mr. W. C. CLAIBORNE presented the remonFrederick Cyrus, praying to have the manage-of Tennessee, complaining of the extension of the strance and petition of the Legislature of the State ment of a mining scheme; stating that as the committee knew of no such plan, and the House had no power to make the appointment, the prayer of the petition could not be granted.

The House concurred in these reports.

PUBLICATION OF DEBATES.

Mr. DWIGHT FOSTER presented the petition of Thomas Carpenter, stating that he was the editor of the American Senator, published during the session of Congress ending in March last; that, at the commencement of that session, he presented a memorial to the House, praying its support of his work; that the House had declined supporting it as a body, but receiving individual assurances of support from many of the members, he had been induced to engage in the work; but the event had proved unfavorable to him. He hoped now, therefore, that he should be recompensed, by the House engaging to take three copies for each member of the work he proposed to publish this session, (provided he met with the support he prayed for,) which, computing the session at eighteen weeks, he supposed would not amount to more than $2,250.

boundary of the United States into the Cherokee country; of the proclamation of Colonel Butler, requiring all persons settled upon the land included in the boundary, within a very short space, and at an inclement season, to remove therefrom, by which nearly 3,000 persons had been greatly distressed; of the conduct of Mr. Hawkins, &c., and praying relief. Referred to a select committee.

IMPEACHMENT OF WILLIAM BLOUNT.

Mr. SITGREAVES said, he was prepared to make a report from the committee appointed at the last session, to sit during the recess, for the purpose of collecting evidence, and substantiating charges against William Blount, a Senator of the United States, impeached of high crimes and misdemeanors; but as that committee was appointed and received its instructions with closed galleries, he supposed, except the injunction of secrecy were taken off, it would be necessary that the galleries should be closed whilst the report was made; though the committee were of opinion there was not any thing in the report which ought not to be

Mr. D. FOSTER moved that this petition be re-made public. He therefore moved that the referred to a select committee.

Mr. CoIT objected to a reference. The House, he said, had so often determined to have nothing to do with the publication of the debates, that he thought it time to have done with the subject. He hoped, therefore, the petition might lie upon the table.

Mr. FOSTER and Mr. THATCHER spoke in favor

port should be received in the usual way.

The SPEAKER read the rule of the House on the subject, and said he did not think any motion necessary, if the committee were of opinion secrecy was not necessary.

Mr. THATCHER thought it was necessary that the injunction of secrecy ought to be taken off before the report was made.

Impeachment of William Blount.

H. OF. R.]

Impeachment of William Blount.

aliens to hold land; the deponent spoke of the different letters which had passed between W. Blount and himself on the subject of Louisiana, which the former regretted the English did not possess, and spoke of going to England on the business; he regretted the Floridas did not belong to the United States. It was understood between them that it was most favorable for Louisiana to belong to the Spaniards, but that the English had much better have it than the French; they agreed that it was necessary to sound certain persons in Philadelphia on the subject, as well as in Virginia and the Southern States; spoke of his conversation to Blount about going to England, but that Mr. Blount neglecting to answer his letters, he gave up the project.

After this evidence, follows the cross-examination of the committee. The letters which passed between W. Blount and N. Romayne bear date from February to May, and are chiefly on the project of going to England, on the business of Louisiana. Mr. R. frequently speaks with great confidence of success, and often introduces in his letters the critical situation of the European Powers, and the improbability of peace.

[DECEMBER, 1797.

36. Lord Grenville's note to Mr. Liston, in which the British Government declines to accede to the proposals made to them respecting the Floridas, &c.

37. Evidence of Elisha B. Hopkins with respect to conversation held with Chisholm.

38. Dr. Charles Buxton's examination relates to conversation between him and Dr. Romayne. 39. John Franklin was examined with respect to Chisholm being at Lester's at the same time with him; spoke of his conversation respecting Louisiana and the Floridas, W. Blount, and the British Minister.

40. James Carey and John Rogers's evidence went to the same effect.

The reading of the papers having continued for more than two hours, and it being three o'clock, Mr. DENT said, as he observed there were yet several more papers to read, he should move the House to adjourn. The motion was carried-39 to 31.

TUESDAY, December 5.

Mr. HARPER, from the committee appointed to prepare and report a bill for the relief of Antonia Carmichael, reported a bill, which was twice read, and ordered to be committed to-morrow.

31. Next follows the examination of Mr. William Davy, of this city, which relates to the sailing of Chisholm in the brig John Henderson, which Mr. Oris presented a petition from Isaac Stehe chartered, and which cleared out for Ham-vens, late a prisoner at Algiers, which states the burgh, but was bound for London, on the 20th of hardships the petitioner had experienced; that, March; that his passage was taken and paid for during his long absence from family and home, by R. Liston, by means of Mr. Thornton; Mr. D. his property had been made away with, his wife repeats conversation which took place between had been obliged to go out to service, his children them as to his business; that Chisholm was to had been dispersed, his own health had been imcommand a squadron against Pensacola, and a paired, and that he was now obliged to subsist variety of other circumstances. Mr. D. also menupon charity. He prays for some aid which may tions several interviews with Mr. Liston on the soothe the decline of his life. Referred to the business. He also produced a letter from his Committee of Commerce and Manufactures. brother in London, mentioning Chisholm having endeavored to get money from him; but before he gave him any, he applied to Lord Grenville's office, to know if he had got money from thence, and finding they had supplied him largely, he declined letting him have any.

32. Evidence of George Lesher relates to Chisholm's being at his house with a party of Indians; of his conversation about going to Europe, and of his business there; that, whilst he was at his house, he was arrested for $400, and that he told him he was obliged to sacrifice a note of Mr. Bond's for $500, at a loss of five or six dollars in the 100, to satisfy the demand.

33. The examination of William Bell refutes what is said about sacrificing the note of $500, as he states that he gave Chisholm credit, from time to time, and that the note of $400 was not paid at all.

34. A letter from the Secretary of State to the committee, stating what had passed between him and the British Minister, in which, amongst other things, it is asserted that Mr. Liston gave Mr. Chisholm no money at all; that he only paid his passage to the owner, and gave him an order for £20 on his banker in London.

35. A note from Mr. Liston to the Secretary of State.

Mr. W. CLAIBORNE presented the petition of James Grant, of Knoxville, stating, that in pursuance of a process issued by a committee of that House, he and his papers were seized on the 28th of last July; that he was in custody 65 days, at the expiration of which he was discharged, at the distance of 700 miles from his own home, from whence he had been dragged by military force, to the great neglect of his business. He prays to be placed, at least, in as good a situation as he was found. He reckons 20 days for his return home, which, added to 65, makes 85, and hopes he shall be allowed five dollars a day; for, as he has been guilty of no offence, he trusts he shall go unpunished. Referred to the Committee of Claims.

STAMP DUTIES.

Mr. D. FOSTER observed, that in looking into the laws of last session, he found that the act laying a stamp duty throughout the United States was to take place on the first of next month. As he understood that it would be impossible for the act to take place at that time, as the necessary preparations could not be effected in the interim, he should move that a committee be appointed to inquire whether any and what alterations are necessary to be made in that act.

The SPEAKER Submitted to the gentleman whe