MARCH, 1792.] State Duties of Tonnage-Indemnity to General Greene. certain acts of the States of Maryland, Georgia, and Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, which impose a small duty on tonnage for the purpose of clearing obstructions in the navigation of the Sound-Mr. W. SMITH in the Chair. Mr. GILES moved to strike out the first clause, and made sundry remarks on the unequal operation of a law of Maryland which should subject the vessels of other States to a tax solely for the benefit of the port of Baltimore. It is designed by this bill to raise a fund to be applied for the removal of a natural obstruction in the navigation of that port, and hence he considered it as a perpetual tax on the citizens of other States; in this view, he objected to it as a partial imposition; it was much complained of by the neighboring ports; he hoped therefore the clause would be struck out. Mr. SENEY supported the clause. He observed, that though the port of Baltimore would be benefited in the first instance, yet it was by no means a partial business; the accommodation and safety to shipping resulting from it had an important reference to the commerce of the Union; it contributes to the security of navigation, both foreign and domestic-and the importance of the trade of that place was sufficiently obvious from the amount of the revenue collected there. The salutary effects of the regulations which have been adopted and sanctioned by Congress, he conceived were sufficient reason for continuing those regulations. Mr. GOODHUE and Mr. GERRY offered a few remarks in opposition to the regulation, and said the provision might be extended with equal propriety to various other parts of the Union; it ought not therefore to be taken up except on general principles. Mr. MURRAY defended the regulation of the bill on general principles. He considered it in the light of a turnpike road, which, though it may subject the citizens to a tax, they are abundantly compensated by the benefits resulting from the accommodation thereby provided; the tonnage paid is a small duty, applied expressly to this object, and cannot reasonably be considered as an oppressive or partial tax; and it is paid by those who are immediately benefited, and is in every sense reciprocal. [H. of R. the continuance of a regulation which had been sanctioned by the General Government, and was clearly within the spirit and letter of the clause which has reference to the commerce and navigation of the States; it is a regulation of a general nature, that tends to the advancement of the trade of the Union as well as of that particular port. Mr. AMES and Mr. WHITE both spoke in favor of the clause-the latter observed that it appeared to him perfectly constitutional. Mr. GILES denied that the benefits resulting from the regulation were reciprocal; they are confined to the town of Baltimore; and, if the clause is agreed to, he said he should move for a bill to confer similar benefits on all other seaports laboring under natural impediments in their harbors. Mr. HARTLEY supported the clause on general principles, and said he should advocate a law which has for its object similar regulations in respect to any other place laboring under the like difficulties. Mr. WADSWORTH said, as an owner of shipping, he should give his consent to any law which provides for removing the obstructions in navigation. No impositions are paid with more cheerfulness than those which are designed to procure safety and accommodation to the shipping. He enlarged on the advantages which result to the general interest, both of the merchant and farmer, from the shipping being able to penetrate far into the country by the navigable rivers; similar applications, said he, may be made from other quarters, and if they should he would give his assent to them. Mr. FITZSIMONS added some observations in favor of the clause, and then the question being put, the motion for striking out was negatived. The Committee proceeded through the other sections, and then reported the bill without amendment. The blank for the continuance of the act was filled with three years, and then it was ordered that the bill be engrossed for a third reading. INDEMNITY TO GENERAL GREENE. The House proceeded to consider the resolution reported from the Committee of the Whole House on the 24th of February last, to indemnify the estate of the late Major General Nathaniel Greene, for a certain suretyship entered into by the said Nathaniel, in his life-time, on public account. Mr. NILES said he had seconded the motion for striking out on a mistaken apprehension. He had supposed the money to be collected was to go into the public Treasury, but the remarks of the gentleman from Maryland [Mr. MURRAY] had unde- The report being read, a memorial of Henry Hill ceived him, and he thought his comparison to a was presented by Mr. FITZSIMONS, praying that turnpike road was in point; he then enlarged on no law may be passed in the case which may opethis idea, and said he could not conceive what in-rate to the injury of the petitioner in respect to an jury would result from extending the principle to any part of the Union where similar obstructions assignment made to him of a certain demand against the United States, by one of the partners of Banks and Company. Mr. F. recapitulated the general objections which had been before urged against the indemnification, and concluded by a motion in which it was proposed that the business should be put into a train of legal investigation. Mr. BALDWIN, after some remarks highly favorable to General Greene's character, observed, that H. OF R.] Indemnity to General Greene-Courtesies to France. [MARCH, 1792. Mr. HILLHOUSE stated sundry reasons why he should vote against the Report; and then the House adjourned without deciding the question. SATURDAY, March 10. a legal process in this case did not appear to offer those accommodations which this case seemed to call for. He then entered into a general consideration of the subject, in the course of which he observed, that certain bold and striking traits distinguished the conduct of General Greene during An engrossed bill declaring the consent of Conthe late war. He acted as a Soldier, a Politician, a Legislator, a Commissary, a Quarter-master, and gress to a certain act of the State of Maryland; and to continue for a longer time an act declara General; in short, like a man who was conducting the assent of Congress to certain acts of the ing a Revolution on the success of which his own States of Maryland, Georgia, and Rhode Island life depended and the liberties of his country, and Providence Plantations, so far as the same reperhaps of mankind. He then adverted to the evidence which had been adduced to show that spects the States of Georgia and Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, was read the third no partnership existed between General Greene time and passed. and Banks, and that the engagements he entered into were on a public account. He said the characters of those who had solemnly testified on this occasion were such as to banish every trace of suspicion from his mind. He concluded by observing, that if ever a claim on the justice and humanity of a country existed, the present was such a claim. A petition of Isaac Ledyard was presented to the House and read, praying compensation for services in the Military Hospital of the United States; referred to the Secretary of War, with instructions to examine the same, and report his opinion thereupon to the House. COURTESIES TO FRANCE. On a motion made and seconded, that the House do come to the following resolution: It was moved and seconded that the said motion be committed. And on the question for commitment, it passed in the negative—yeas 17, nays 35-as follows: Mr. STEELE said, he hoped the report would not be agreed to. He said the subject appeared now to be involved in more complexity than it at first "Resolved, That this House hath received, with senappeared to be attended with. In all appropria- timents of high satisfaction, the notification of the King tions of money, the subject ought to be well consi- of the French, of his acceptance of the Constitution predered; but what have the gentlemen who reported sented to him in the name of the Nation; and that the the resolutions done? Instead of producing that President of the United States be requested, in his anevidence which would pass in any Court of Jus-swer to the said notification, to express the sincere partice, they have adduced General Greene's charac- ticipation of the House in the interests of the French ter, virtues, services, &c.; of these he had as just Nation, on this great and important event; and their an opinion as any one, but he thought they were wish that the wisdom and magnanimity displayed in not altogether pertinent to the occasion. He hoped the formation and acceptance of the Constitution, may a further investigation would be made, and that if be rewarded by the most perfect attainment of its object, the Report was not rejected, the business would the permanent happiness of so great a people." be put in a different train. Various and contradictory statements have taken place in the course of the discussion in six weeks. Some things are now admitted which were before denied. As the advocates of the Report have founded their arguYEAS.-Fisher Ames, Benjamin Bourne, Benjamin ments on the character of General Greene, he Goodhue, James Gordon, James Hillhouse, John Lauthought it his duty to bring forward some circum-rance, Amasa Learned, Samuel Livermore, Nathaniel stances, which, though they do not impeach his character as a soldier and a brave man, yet they show his want of sincerity and consistency. He then adverted to the letters which he wrote, abusing the people South of the Potomac, at the very time he was experiencing their munificence and liberality. These things he mentioned not to injure his reputation, but to show that full credit ought not to be given to his subsequent assertions and declarations. He observed that the subject had not been so fully investigated, nor had such evidence been adduced as would justify an appropriation of the sum of sixty thousand dollars. He then took notice of those documents which appeared to favor the idea that General Greene was connected with Banks and Co. This matter, he thought, had not been placed in the most satisfactory point of light; a more thorough investigation ought to take place, and in order to do this, he said the subject had better be postponed to the next session. Niles, Theodore Sedgwick, Jeremiah Smith, Israel NAYS.-John Baptist Ashe, Abraham Baldwin, Robert Barnwell, Egbert Benson, Abraham Clark, William Findley, Thomas Fitzsimons, William B. Giles, Nicho- And then debate arising on the said motion, a division thereof was called for. Whereupon, The question being put, that the House do agree to the first part of the said motion, in the words following: "Resolved, That this House has received, with senRe-timents of high satisfaction, the notification of the King of the French, of his acceptance of the Constitution presented to him in the name of the Nation: And that Mr. CLARK was opposed to agreeing to the port; he offered several objections arising from the obscurity which envelope the transactions. MARCH, 1792.] Courtesies to France-Georgia Contested Election. the President of the United States be requested, in his answer to the said notification, to express the sincere participation of the House in the interests of the French Nation, on this great and important event:" It was resolved in the affirmative-yeas 50, nays 2, as follows: MONDAY, March 12. [H. OF R. GEORGIA CONTESTED ELECTION. This being the day to which the trial of the contested election in the case of JAMES JACKSON, complaining of an undue election and return of ANTHONY WAYNE, one of the members returned to serve in this House for the State of Georgia, stood postponed; the House proceeded to take up the same for consideration. Whereupon, The sitting member, with his Counsel, and the petitioner, being present at the bar of the House, application was made by the Counsel for the sitting member further to postpone the hearing on the said trial until Wednesday se'nnight. which application, the parties respectively being fully heard, and the question put thereupon, it passed in the negative. YEAS.-Fisher Ames, John Baptist Ashe, Abraham Baldwin, Benjamin Bourne, Abraham Clark, William Findley, Thomas Fitizsimons, William B. Giles, Nicholas Gilman, Benjamin Goodhue, James Gordon, Andrew Gregg, Thomas Hartley, Daniel Heister, James Hillhouse, Israel Jacobs, Philip Key, Aaron Kitchell, John W. Kittera, John Laurance, Amasa Learned, Richard Bland Lee, Samuel Livermore, Nathaniel Macon, James Madison, John Francis Mercer, William Vans Murray, Nathaniel Niles, John Page, Cornelius C. Schoonmaker, Theodore Sedgwick, Joshua Seney, Jeremiah Smith, Israel Smith, William Smith, John Steele, Samuel Sterrett, Jonathan Sturges, Thos. Sumpter, George ThatchThe petitioner then proceeded to exhibit and er, Thomas Tredwell, Thomas Tudor Tucker, Abra-read his proofs in support of the allegations of his ham Venable, John Vining, Jeremiah Wadsworth, Artemas Ward, Anthony Wayne, Alexander White, Hugh Williamson, and Francis Willis. NAYS.-Robert Barnwell and Egbert Benson. On the question, that the House do agree to the second part of the said motion, in the words following: "And their wish that the wisdom and magnanimity displayed in the formation and acceptance of the Constitution, may be rewarded by the most perfect attainment of its object, the permanent happiness of so great a People:" On petition, so far as respects the first article of charge therein contained; when an adjournment being called for, said hearing be postponed until to-morrow. Ordered, That all farther proceeding on the TUESDAY, March 13. Mr. TUCKER, from the committee appointed on Saturday last to wait on the President of the United States, with the resolution, of the same day, expressive of the sense of this House of the It was resolved in the affirmative—yeas 35, nays ceptance of the Constitution, presented to him in notification by the King of the French of his ac16, as follows: YEAS.-John Baptist Ashe, Abraham Baldwin, Ben-mittee had discharged the duty assigned to them. the name of the nation, reported that the comjamin Bourne, Abraham Clark, William Findley, Thomas Fitzsimons, William B. Giles, Nicholas Gilman, that the Senate have passed the bill, entitled A message from the Senate informed the House Andrew Gregg, Thomas Hartley, Daniel Heister, Philip Key, Aaron Kitchell, John W. Kittera, Richard Bland "An act for an apportionment of Representatives Lee, Nathaniel Macon, James Madison, John Francis among the several States, according to the first Mercer, William Vans Murray, Nathaniel Niles, John Enumeration, and making provision for another Page, Cornelius C. Schoonmaker, Joshua Seney, John Enumeration and an Apportionment of RepresentSteele, Samuel Sterrett, Jonathan Sturges, Thos. Sump-atives thereon, to compose the House of Repreter, George Thatcher, Thomas Tredwell, Thomas Tu-sentatives, after the third day of March, one thoudor Tucker, Abraham Venable, John Vining, Anthony sand seven hundred and ninety-seven," with seveWayne, Alexander White, and Francis Willis. ral amendments; to which they desire the conNAYS.-Fisher Ames, Robert Barnwell, Egbert Ben-currence of this House. son, Benjamin Goodhue, James Gordon, James Hillhouse, Israel Jacobs, John Laurance, Amasa Learned, Sam'l Livermore, Theodore Sedgwick, Jeremiah Smith, Israel Smith, William Smith, Jeremiah Wadsworth, and Artemas Ward. Ordered, That Mr. TUCKER, Mr. MADISON, Mr. MERCER, Mr. VINING, and Mr. PAGE, be appointed a committee to wait on the President of the United States, with the said resolution. GEORGIA CONTESTED ELECTION. On a motion made and seconded, "That, in the case of the contested election on the petition of JAMES JACKSON, complaining of an undue election and return of ANTHONY WAYNE, one of the members returned to serve in this House for the State of Georgia, the sitting member have leave to be heard by his Counsel at the bar of this House, on Monday next:" It was resolved in the affirmative. 2d CON.-16 GEORGIA CONTESTED ELECTION. The House resumed the hearing on the trial of the contested election, in the case of JAMES JACKSON, Complaining of an undue election and return of ANTHONY WAYNE, one of the members returned to serve in this House for the State of Georgia. Mr. LEWIS (Counsel for Mr. WAYNE) appealed from the charges contained in the petition, in support of the sitting member, and stated reasons why it would be proper in the House to grant a further postponement, which he moved for. The chief arguments were, that there was certain evidence expected by Mr. WAYNE which had not arrived from Savannah. A debate of two hours took place upon the motion for postponement, which was negatived, 19 members only rising in the affirmative; consequently the trial commenced. It was opened by a short exordium from Mr. JACKSON, who was allowed to read and comment upon his evidence until past the usual hour of adjournment. Mr. JACKSON observed that, whilst he acknowledged the unpleasing task of appearing as a prosecutor, and sincerely wished the occasion had never presented itself; and whilst he lamented that so much of the public time which was required to other important objects had been expended, he could not help expressing the satisfaction he felt at the prospect of a decision on the Georgia election; nor could he forbear to observe that the doors of investigation could never be too widely extended on a subject of such capital import, and where the liberties of the people were so materially interested. One of the greatest advantages, he observed, of a free Government was the right, which every individual of the community possessed, of making the grievances he lay under known; but that what in a private man, where there had been a private injury, was a private right, became, in a public man, where a public grievance or injury to the community had taken place, a public and indispensable duty. Possessing, therefore, the testimony he did, and being in the situation he was, a candidate at that election, and the person who he believed, had justice been done, ought to have held the seat on that floor, he felt himself called on, in a double capa- | city, first, as a private individual, to assert his own rights, and, secondly, as a public man, to prevent an injury to the community-silence would have been inexcusable, and he should justly have been charged by his fellow-citizens as the betrayer of the rights of those whom he might most improperly term his constituents. He observed, that it was but a short time since that a period had been put to a Revolution, which, although glorious in its issue, was severe and bloody in its contests. It was needless for him to remind the honorable House of the groundwork, the cause of that Revolution, where so many of its members had participated in its dangers, and had been distinguished in its conflicts; that it must be well remembered that the avowed principle, the declared right of Britain to bind America in all cases whatsoever, without representation, was the cause. Sir, added he, the right of representation was what America fought for seven long years, for which so many States were desolated, and for which so many heroes fell. Yet, strange as it might appear, scarce half a score of years had passed away ere this right had been violated and trampled on; trampled on ere the blood of our fellow-citizens, spilt in its defence, was as yet scarcely cold, and whilst the vestiges of the Revolutionary War were still exposed to every eye. To prove this and, for the honor of human nature, he wished he could not-was the object of his petition, and his appearance at the bar of the House; that, in the prosecution, he wished the House to observe that it was not their favor, but their justice, which he demanded; that the names or merits of the sitting member, or himself, should [MARCH, 1792. not be known on the occasion; and that, for his own part, whatever might be the opinion of the honorable gentleman, of his merits or ability, he had not the vanity to suppose that his being in or out of Congress would affect the interest of America in the smallest degree; but that the question, abstractedly considered, was a question of the greatest magnitude, in which the lives, the liberties, the fortunes, the happiness of the American people, were materially involved; for it could not be denied that they all depended, in a greater or lesser degree, on the representation in that House; that the question was rendered more important by its being the first of its kind, and therefore would become the rule of decision in all future cases. He then proceeded to state the facts and charges in his petition, and to make a few observations on them; that those observations should be as concise as possible, for he wished to address the House, not as a common jury, liable to be biassed by prejudice, or to be imposed on by quibbles, but as the great guardians of the nation, sitting in a judicial capacity on a great and an important question, and in the decision of which the whole community was concerned. After stating that he had testimony of another nature, which he had been prevented by the resolution from bringing forward, being tied down to the express articles of charge, which, in the Effingham election, were confined in two points-that of there being more votes than voters, and but one qualified magistrate presiding thereat, he proceeded to the investigation of those charges, and produced the following evidence: First, the law of the State of Georgia for the election, by which he proved that the State was divided into three districts; that three magistrates were required to open a poll; that the poll was to be opened at nine o'clock on the 3d of January, 1791, and to be continued open until sunset; that the voters within the districts were to meet on the day of election in their respective counties, agreeably to the Constitution, to elect, by ballot, one person for each district, agreeably to proclamation. He then produced the return of the election itself, which proved the charge of there being nine more votes than voters; and, by the signatures of the three persons presiding, it appeared that but one of them had signed as a magistrate. He observed here that he should deem this sufficient if he brought no more evidence, but that he would now produce the testimony of Bell and Hudson, two of the persons acting at that election, to prove that they acted as private individuals, and in no other manner whatever. Mr. Bell's testimony went to prove that, when he arrived at the place of election, he was accosted by Lane, the sheriff of the county, who then first apprised him of his appointment, and persuaded him to sit as a magistrate; that he refused at first, saying he had no right, but afterwards agreed to sit, saying he might as well sit there as any where else; that he refused to sign the return as a magistrate, and that he signed as an individual, and in no other manner; that he was not at that time [H. OF R. worked on those persons they had given up their own opinions; and here he appealed to the evidence of Hudson, who swore that he had objected to Gibbons, Putnam, and Moore, signing the return, but had been prevailed on by Gibbons, and had given up his own opinion to him, as Gibbons was an attorney at law, and he, Hudson, supposing him to know more of these matters than himself. Mr. JACKSON likewise here appealed to the House whether, if a law had been passed by Congress on elections, Mr. Gibbons's behaviour would not have come under it, and whether an offender of the kind would not have been severely punished; that there would be no safety for the liberties of the people, if such corruptions could be permitted; you find, says he, the electors generally intoxicated by ten or eleven o'clock in the morning; the electors in that situation could not tell who they voted for. Why, he asked, were those individuals so solicitous to get those persons to sit, but that they supposed they would be more docile to their measures, and permit those to vote who had no right to vote? He next produced the testimony of Mr. Hudson, who proved much the same as Mr. Bell; and added, that he found the people intoxicated be'tween ten and eleven o'clock in the forenoon; that Messrs. Gibbons, Moore, and Putnam, residents of Chatham, voted in Effingham; that he gave up his opinion to Mr. Gibbons that the magistrates were not qualified; that a qualification was necessary, he produced the testimony of John Godlieb Meidlinger, clerk of the Superior Court of Effingham county, who proved that he never saw them act as magistrates before; that he did not consider them as magistrates; and that they were qualified in open court after the day of election. Meidlinger, whose testimony was taken on behalf of the sitting member, likewise proved that the grand jury of the county had presented the election as illegal; indeed, added Mr. JACKSON, a qualification on oath is necessary, and is founded on the justest reasoning. Should not he be quali- Hence, he said, your honorable House find Gibfied on oath, who has the power to qualify on bons, Moore, and Putnam, voted in Effingham oath? Should not he be bound by some tie, who contrary to the law and Constitution, giving their has the personal liberty and property of his fellow-suffrages. [Here Mr. JACKSON produced the testi.. citizens so greatly at his disposal? "Miserable is that servitude where the law is vague and uncertain," says a law author; but much more miserable, he thought, would be that country where the public and private rights of a community would be at the will of a little despot of a Justice, without any tie, human or Divine. He did not mention this to censure the persons who had signed the return; he knew them to be honest and well intentioned, and they had objected to sitting as magistrates themselves. mony of John Moore, which was objected to by Mr. LEWIS, but on argument it was admitted; who proved that one John King, a minor, had voted. Mr. Moore likewise proved that Gibbons, Lyman, and James Moore, were very active in favor of Mr. WAYNE, and that there were nine more votes than voters; and that Hudson had signed the return at the instigation of Gibbons.] Hence, too, he said, the House might perceive other irregularities, such as magistrates and clerks leaving the poll altogether, and hence, no doubt, the nine more votes than voters. [Here he produced the testimony of Thomas Wyllis, who corroborated the testimony before read very fully, and proved that the poll was sometimes left by the justices and clerks; he further declared that he knew Bell and Hudson not to be qualified magistrates.] It was in Georgia as it was in most other new countries; to prevent greater evils the Government was compelled to appoint characters of this kind; honest and upright persons, who were totally unacquainted with the law; men who generally did well when left to themselves, but who, when worked on by artful and designing persons, such as Lane, the sheriff, who you find by Bell's testi- And hence, he observed, the very return itself mony persuaded him to sit, and that he had a was drawn up by this Mr. Gibbons; what right right to do so, although it was the first time he had he to interfere with this return? But, nothad heard of his appointment. Lyman, the at- withstanding all this cunning and corruption of torney, whom you find informing Hudson, to in- Gibbons, the very return was deficient. Were it duce him to sit, that he had spoken to the Go- not in the same bundle and under the same seal, vernor, who had answered, "It did not make the there would be no knowing whether it was an least odds whether he was qualified or not;" and election for a member of Congress or a member this person, Gibbons, whose soul is faction, and for the State Legislature; whether an election for whose life has been a scene of political corruption; the office of a coroner, or that of a constable. [He who never could be easy under Government-here produced the return, which did not mention [Here Mr. JACKSON was called to order.] After apologizing to the House, he observed that he was commenting on facts; that the proofs were strong against Gibbons of abominable corruption; that this corruption was, in a great measure, of his charges; that Gibbons had gone out of his own county, not merely to use an undue influence with the electors, but to corrupt even the magistrates themselves; that it was evident, that when he what the election was held for, but barely declares that at an election held at Elbertson, in the said county, the candidates were, &c.] Mr. JACKSON also observed that there was some testimony brought forward by the sitting member, to prove that a Mr. Lavier was a magistrate and a worthy man. Why, he would ask, did he go away? Why did he not sign the return, but that there were some such transactions going forward |