H. OF R.]

Establishment of a Mint.

[MARCH, 1792.

cents per acre for the same, with interest from the pass- cumstance of having the President's head stamped ing an act for that purpose." on the coin could not be justly considered as doing Ordered, That a bill or bills be brought in pur-him an honor, he said, that persons of no better suant to the said resolutions; and that Mr. SEDGWICK, Mr. FINDLEY, Mr. BENSON, Mr. LEARNED, and Mr. BALDWIN, do prepare and bring in the

same.

ESTABLISHMENT OF A MINT.

A message from the Senate informed the House that the Senate disagree to the amendment proposed by this House to the bill entitled "An act establishing a Mint, and regulating the coins of the United States ;" and agree to the amendment proposed by this House to the bill entitled "An act supplemental to the act for making further and more effectual provision for the protection of the frontiers of the United States."

It was moved that the House should recede from their amendment to the bill entitled "An act establishing a Mint, and regulating the coins of the United States."

character than a Nero, a Caligula, or a Heliogabulus, may enjoy it as well as a Trajan, &c.

Mr. SENEY animadverted with severity on the remarks offered by Mr. LIVERMORE, and on the conduct of the Senate; particularly in returning the bill with a negative to the amendment of the House, within a period that left them no time to deliberate on the reasons which might have influenced the House.

Mr. GILES opposed the motion for receding. He adverted to the ideas which are connected with the subject in European countries. The President's head will not designate the Government. There is to be but one head; but does not our Government consist of three parts? Is there any other head proposed to be on the coin but the President's? He said this circumstance was of a piece with the first act of the Senate. It had a near affinity to titles, that darling child of the Senate, which has been put to nurse, with an intention that it shall be announced at some future period in due form.

Mr. BENSON said, he supposed he should be extremely disorderly were he to mention the motives which influenced the Senate in their discussions. He knew not what they were, nor was it of importance that he should. He then observed, that plain pieces of metal will not answer for money; some impression is necessary to guard against counterfeits. The Senate have determined what the device shall be; but the House, by their amendment, have left the matter entirely to the judgment of the artist, who may form such an emblem as suits his fancy. Mr. B. ridiculed the idea of the people's being enslaved by their Presidents, and much less by his image on their coin.

Mr. LIVERMORE supported the motion. He said he did not conceive it possible that any friend to the President of the United States, the Chief Magistrate, that great and good man, would have refused to pay every tribute of respect which was justly due to him. We have now a favorable opportunity of complimenting him, without any shadow of flattery, and without any expense. But, instead of this, what is proposed? An emblematical figure of Liberty. But what is this Liberty which some appear to be so fond of? He had no idea of such Liberty as appears to possess the minds of some gentlemen. It is little better than the liberty of savages-a relinquishment of all law that contradicts or thwarts their passions or desires. His idea of Liberty was that which arose from law and justice, which secured every man in his proper and social rights. Some gentlemen Mr. PAGE replied that he was sorry to find that may think a bear broke loose from his chain fit some gentlemen endeavored to ridicule Republicemblem of Liberty; others may devise a different an cautions. He thought it both indelicate and emblem; but he could not conceive that any of inconsistent with their situations, as well as highly them would be applicable to the situation of the impolitic. He confessed that, as long as the peoUnited States, which justly boasted of being ple were sensible of the blessings of liberty, and always free. If any idea of an emblem is necessary, had their eyes open to watch encroachments, they he thought it might be applied to the head of the would not be enslaved; but if they should ever President of the United States. The present oc- shut them, or become inattentive to their interests casion affords the best opportunity of doing honor and the true principles of a free Government, they, to the man we love; instead of which, we offer like other nations, might lose their liberties; that him an affront. He could not reconcile this con- it was the duty of the members of that House to duct to propriety or consistency; for, while it is keep the eyes of their constituents open, and to proposed to raise a monument to the memory of watch over their liberties. It was therefore unthe President, which will cost fifty thousand gui- becoming a member to treat with levity and to neas, a proposition to honor him in a more effect-ridicule any sentiment which had that tendency. ual manner, and in a way which will be satisfactory to the people, without any expense, and with perfect security to their liberties, is objected to. He hoped the House would recede.

Mr. MERCER replied to Mr. LIVERMORE with some degree of asperity. He observed that there was a rule in the British House of Commons that the name of the King should never be mentioned in any debate. He thought some such rule might be introduced with advantage into this House. In the course of his remarks, to show that the cir

For his part, he thought it the peculiar duty of the Representative of a free people to put them upon their guard against anything which could possibly endanger their liberties. That with this view he warned his constituents of the danger, not merely of imitating the flattery and almost idolatrous practice of Monarchies with respect to the honor paid to their Kings, by impressing their images and names on their coins, but he wished to add as few incentives as possible to competitors for the President's place. He warned his

MARCH, 1792.]

Defeat of the Army under General St. Clair.

[H. OF R.

to the amendment adhered to by this House to the bill entitled "An act establishing a Mint, and regulating the coins of the United States." DEFEAT OF THE ARMY UNDER GENERAL

ST. CLAIR.

On a motion made and seconded that the House

do come to the following resolution:

"Resolved, That the President of the United States be requested to institute an inquiry into the causes of the late defeat of the army under the command of Major General St. Clair; and also into the causes of the detentions or delays which are suggested to have attended the money, clothing, provisions, and military stores, for the use of the said army, and into such other causes as may, in any manner, have been productive of the said defeat :"

country against the cabals, the corruption, and animosities, which might be excited by the intrigues of ambitious men, animated with the hope of handing their names down to the latest ages on the medals of their country. But this indiscriminate honor is unworthy of the President's acceptance. A Nero, a Caligula, a Heliogabulus, it has been observed, [by Mr. MERCER,] may enjoy it as well as a Trajan. To apply it to the present Chief Magistrate, alone, would be less exceptionable. But this would be highly improper; for, if he should pass an act for this purpose, it might blast his reputation. I am of opinion that the Senate knew his delicacy would not permit him to pass such an one. They have therefore extended the compliment to all his successors. We are under obligations to the great man now our President; but a lover of Liberty and friend to the Mr. VINING inquired what was the object of Rights of Man, would be cautious how he showed the resolution? In what way was it to be carried his sense of that obligation. As a friend to the into execution? For, if the House is not furnishPresident, I am unwilling to offer him a complied with some answer to these inquiries, he did ment which, if accepted, might damn his reputation. Were I in his place, I would cut off my hand rather than it should sign the act as it now stands. Were I his greatest enemy, I should wish him to pass it as it was passed by the Senate. Sir, I am as much his friend as the member from New Hampshire, and have shown, at proper times and places, that I was so. I am too sensible of the honor our President has acquired to suppose that an unbecoming compliment can in any degree contribute to its increase. I hope, therefore, the amendment which the House has made will not be receded from.

The question being now put, that this House doth recede from the said amendment, it passed in the negative-yeas 24, nays 32, as follows:

YEAS.-Fisher Ames, Robert Barnwell, Egbert Benson, Elias Boudinot, Shearjashub Bourne, Benjamin Bourne, Thomas Fitzsimons, Elbridge Gerry, Nicholas Gilman, Benjamin Goodhue, Thomas Hartley, James Hillhouse, Daniel Huger, Israel Jacobs, John W. Kittera, Amasa Learned, Samuel Livermore, Theodore Sedgwick, William Smith, Jonathan Sturges, Peter Sylvester, George Thatcher, Jeremiah Wadsworth, and

Artemas Ward.

NAYS.-John Baptist Ashe, Abraham Baldwin, John Brown, Abraham Clark, William B. Giles, James Gordon, Andrew Gregg, Samuel Griffin, William Barry Grove, Daniel Heister, Philip Key, Aaron Kitchell, Richard Bland Lee, Nathaniel Macon, James Madison, John Francis Mercer, Andrew Moore, William Vans Murray, Nathaniel Niles, John Page, Josiah Parker, Joshua Seney, Jeremiah Smith, Israel Smith, John Steele, Thomas Sumpter, Thomas Tredwell, Thomas Tudor Tucker, Abraham Venable, John Vining, Alexander White, and Hugh Williamson.

Resolved, That this House doth adhere to the said amendment.

Ordered, That the Clerk of this House do acquaint the Senate therewith.

TUESDAY, March 27.

A message from the Senate informed the House that the Senate recede from their disagreement 2d CON.-17

not see how gentlemen could vote for it. He conceived that this indefinite mode of procedure would only embarrass the President, without producing the desired effect. He was in favor of a full and complete investigation of the subject; and, if there has been any deficiency, let those who are to blame be impeached. He was not disposed to screen any officer from justice, let him be of what rank he may ; but he was not satisfied with the mode now proposed. He did not consider it as constitutional or practicable.

Mr. BOUDINOT said, he was surprised to hear the gentleman from Delaware express a doubt of the practicability of instituting an inquiry into the late unfortunate business in the mode proposed. For his part, he saw no such difficulties in the way, as appeared to the gentleman. Mr. B. then stated certain complaints which existed, and were currently reported-such as a failure of the contracts, and, for aught that appeared to the contrary, the misfortunes of the army may be Other complaints are cirtraced to that cause. culated, respecting which the public have a right to be satisfied. The present proposition goes no further than a simple request. Having signified the wish of the House, the President may adopt such measures in relation to the subject as he may see proper.

Mr. GILES Supported his motion. He conceived that the inquiry was indispensable, and the mode proposed strictly proper. The business must begin somewhere. This House is the proper source, as the immediate guardians of the public interest.

Mr. VINING rose to explain. He stated various difficulties which would impede the progress of the matter in the informal mode proposed. These, he observed, were so great as to involve an impossibility of prosecuting the investigation to any purpose. He supposed that a more proper and constitutional way would be to call on the Heads of Departments to give an account of their conduct.

Mr. CLARK observed, that it was evident the public mind was greatly agitated. An inquiry was necessary. If the mode proposed should not

H. OF R.]

Defeat of the Army under General St. Clair.

prove agreeable or convenient to the President, he will let us know it.

Mr. W. SMITH observed, that this was the first instance of a proposition on the part of this House to inquire into the conduct of officers who are immediately under the control of the Executive. In this view of the subject, the resolution proposed could not but be considered as an impeachment of the conduct of the First Magistrate. Mr. S. then adverted to the division of the powers of the Government expressly provided for in the Constitution. Gentlemen have discovered great solicitude to keep the branches separate and distinct; but, on this occasion, from the consideration that this House is the grand inquest of the nation, they seem to discover a disposition to go into a similar mode of conduct with the National Assembly of France, who spent a whole night in examining a drum major. He would not say that they had not a right so to do, but he believed no gentleman would justify such a line of conduct on the part of this House. He then particularized the several objects of inquiry in relation to the present subject. He showed that the Constitution had made provision in all the several cases. And as it was the duty of the President of the United States to carry the laws into execution, it ought to be shown that he has been remiss in his duty, before he is called on in this way. He noted the account published by the Secretary of War, by direction of the President, and considered as his act. After several other remarks, Mr. S. concluded by saying that, in any case where it shall appear that the Supreme Executive has not done his duty, he should be fully in favor of an inquiry; but, till that was done, he trusted the measure would not be adopted, without at least a previous and full discussion.

Mr. WILLIAMSON said, he doubted the propriety of the resolution, in its present form ; but was fully of opinion that an inquiry into the expenditure of all public money was the indispensable duty of this House. He proposed the appointment of a select committee to inquire and report.

Mr. KITTERA moved to amend the resolution by substituting a select committee.

Mr. VENABLE was in favor of the original motion. He conceived that it was the only proper mode of proceeding. Nor had he any apprehension that the President would consider it as encroaching in the smallest degree.

Mr. GILES contended that his motion was so far from tending to blend the several branches of Government, that its effect would be the reverse.

[MARCH, 1792.

particularly concerned, loudly demands an inquiry.

Mr. VINING here moved that the resolution should be committed to a select committee.

Mr. BOUDINOT objected to the idea of a committee. He said the time would not admit of it. Witnesses are perhaps eight hundred miles off. What progress can a committee make in such a business? He denied that it was the duty of the President to institute the inquiry, unless he was requested to do it. The magnitude of the objects of inquiry would involve such an expense that the President would not be justified in incurring it, unless he was authorized by the House. He then stated some particulars to show the practicability of the measure-among others, that there were a sufficient number of officers present to form what is denominated a Court of Inquiry.

Mr. BARNWELL was opposed to the original motion. He considered it as informal, and suggested what he considered as the proper mode of procedure, which was, to call on the several officers of Government for such information as may be necessary. He was against the commitment.

The motion for a select committee was negatived.

The question then was on agreeing to the resolution.

Mr. HILLHOUSE said, he believed this was the first time that it was ever contemplated to appoint a Court Martial to inquire into the expenditure of public money.

Mr. FITZSIMONS said, he conceived that several parts of the resolution were improper. He thought that it was entirely out of order to request the President of the United States to institute a Court Martial or a Court of Inquiry. The reasons and propriety of such Courts are better and more fully known to the President than to the members of the House. He was in favor of a committee to inquire relative to such objects as come properly under the cognizance of this House, particularly respecting the expenditures of public money; and if the resolution should be disagreed to, as he hoped it would, he should then move for such a committee.

Mr. BALDWIN said he had made up his mind on the subject. He was convinced the House could not proceed but by a committee of their own. Such a committee would be able to throw more light on the subject, and then the House would be able to determine how to proceed; and, if any failure had taken place on the part of the Executive officers, he should then be prepared to address the President, and to request him to take the proper steps in the case.

Mr. STEELE said, he was indifferent as to the mode, provided the matter was fully gone into. The gentleman from South Carolina has mentioned the Report of the Secretary of War, and has said that it is considered as the act of the President of the United States. Mr. S. denied that it was the President's act. It was not satisfactory. Will any gentleman on this floor say it is satisfactory to him? He enumerated several articles of complaint, and observed that he had no great doubt that an inquiry would lead to an impeach-being improper and informal. ment. Justice to the public, and the officers

Mr. SENEY advocated the resolution, and urged several objections against a committee.

Mr. HARTLEY said, as it was probable some degree of odium would fall on those who might vote against this resolution, he thought proper to give some reasons why he should vote against it. These were similar to what had been offered by several other gentlemen against the resolution, as

Mr. MADISON started some difficulties in the