
Полная версия
Abridgement of the Debates of Congress, from 1789 to 1856 (4 of 16 vol.)
The witness refused to answer the interrogatory.
Question 2 – At what place was the conversation held?
Witness refused to answer.
Question 3 – Have you seen the members alluded to, or any of them, since you first appeared before this committee on Saturday last?
Witness likewise refused to answer this interrogatory.
Whereupon it is ordered by the committee that the Sergeant-at-Arms detain said Rounsavell in his custody until the pleasure of the House of Representatives relative to the conduct of said witness can be ascertained.
After the report was read, Mr. Grundy offered the following resolution for consideration:
"Resolved, That the Sergeant-at-Arms be directed to bring the said Nathaniel Rounsavell to the bar of the House, there to answer such questions as may be propounded to him by the Speaker, under the direction of the House."
Much desultory discussion took place as to the mode of proceeding in this case, the form of the proposed order, its conformity to precedent, &c., in which Messrs. Pitkin, Lacock, Sheffey, Troup, Tallmadge, Grundy, Fisk, and Widgery, took part. This discussion resulted in the proposition of a preamble to the motion, by Mr. Grundy, reciting the grounds of the order.
The motion was then agreed to.
On motion of Mr. Grundy, the select committee were then discharged from the further consideration of the subject.
On motion of Mr. Grundy, it was resolved that several interrogatories contained in a paper which he offered to the House, should be proposed to the witness.
Mr. Burwell suggested the propriety of allowing this person counsel; but withdrew the suggestion, on its being remarked, that this person appeared before the House in the character of a witness, not a criminal, and that it was not usual for a witness to appear by counsel.
Mr. Rounsavell was then brought to the bar of the House by the Sergeant-at-Arms.
After some hesitation on the part of the witness to take the oath required, he was sworn, in the usual form of oath administered to witnesses.
The first interrogatory agreed to by the House was put to him by the Speaker, in the following words: "From the conversation of what members did you collect the information of which you have spoken in your deposition before the committee?"
To this question the witness answered in these words: "I refused to answer that question when before the committee, and I continue steadfast in that refusal."
The witness was ordered to withdraw, and the Speaker reported his answer to the House; having deemed it unnecessary, on his refusal to answer the first, to propound any other of the questions.
Mr. Seybert, after stating his indisposition to encroach on the rights of the citizen, which, however, must yield to the superior rights of the nation, which required them to act in this case, suggested the propriety of recommitting this person to the custody of the Sergeant-at-Arms until further order should be taken by the House, and preventing him in the mean time from communicating with those from whose conversation he might have derived his information. With this view he offered the following resolution:
Resolved, That Nathaniel Rounsavell be committed to the custody of the Sergeant-at-Arms until further order, and that in the mean time he be precluded from all intercourse or conversation with any person or persons other than the Sergeant-at-Arms.
The question on striking out so much of the motion as precludes the witness from conversation with any one unless in the presence and hearing of the Sergeant-at-Arms, was decided as follows – yeas 62; nays 22.
The question was then stated on the motion as just amended, viz:
"That Nathaniel Rounsavell be committed to the custody of the Sergeant-at-Arms until the further orders of the House."
The question was taken on the resolution, and it passed by a very large majority.
Tuesday, April 7
Publication of Secret ProceedingsA letter was laid before the House from Nathaniel Rounsavell, the witness now in the custody of the Sergeant-at-Arms. The letter disclaims any intention to have violated the respect due to the House by the publication which he had made; it declares that the conversation which the writer had was inadvertent, as he believes, on the part of the members who partook in it, and entirely without any intention on their part, as he believes, to violate the order of the House; that he had been refused by the committee an opportunity to explain his testimony; and that his only motive for refusing to answer was, that if he were to answer the question as propounded to him, it might have the effect of criminating those who had committed no crime, and from whose conversation, but for previous and subsequent knowledge, he could not have ascertained that an embargo had been the subject of discussion, &c.
Mr. Smilie said it was in his power, he believed, to make a statement to the House which would procure a discharge of this man. Had the original motion succeeded yesterday, he should then have risen and stated what he was now about to say, because he had been determined that the man should not suffer. I do believe, said Mr. S., that the substance of the information which Mr. Rounsavell published in his paper, he did derive from conversation of myself with others; whether he got other particulars from other members, I know not. The circumstance was this: The night the embargo law passed this House, I met with a member who was absent, and ignorant of what had passed. Upon meeting with this gentleman he inquired of me what had been done? I briefly told him, and I have reason to believe Mr. Rounsavell was in such a situation as to hear what I said. Having made this statement, I will make a few other remarks. I had a seat in Congress when each of the former embargoes under this constitution were laid. The mode in which they came before the House was in those cases such as to enable us to keep them secret. In every instance except the present, the first intimation relative to the embargo came from the President to the House in a confidential shape, and the doors were immediately closed. What was the fact in this case? The measure originated in the Committee of Foreign Relations. It was proposed there that it should be kept secret; when a member of the committee rose and declared he would not be bound – he would not keep it a secret. This destroyed at once the efficacy of any such determination on the part of the committee; we might as well have discussed the subject with open doors as with closed doors, had it not been from respect to the Message of the President recommending a different course. What was published in the Herald, therefore, was of no importance; when the subject of discussion was known to all, it was of very little consequence to know who was chairman, and who spoke, and how many voted. If the House must have a victim, and it appears to me some gentlemen would be very willing to have one, I offer myself in the room of this man; he has suffered too much already. The quo animo constitutes the essence of every crime; it cannot then be supposed, after the warm support I have given to this measure, that I could have any unfriendly intention towards it. I well know the powers of this House; and I know the limits of those powers. The House will take such steps as they think proper. I have taken my ground; I am prepared for the event. He would further observe that in relation to the suspicion of members having influenced Rounsavell to refuse to answer, that he had not seen him from the time of the conversation he had stated until after his appearing before the committee and refusing to answer.
Mr. Smilie was asked to name the member of the Committee of Foreign Relations, to whom he had just alluded, and replied that his name was no secret – it was Mr. Randolph.
Mr. Calhoun said that the member of the Committee of Foreign Relations, (Mr. Randolph,) to whom allusion had been made, not being in his seat, he would state how the fact just stated had occurred in the committee. That gentleman stated (said Mr. C.) that he had doubts of the power of the committee to compel him to secrecy; but the gentleman also stated that he had just returned from Baltimore, where he found the British Consul possessed the knowledge of an intended embargo, and that a great commercial house was acting on it, and therefore he did not feel it his duty to keep it secret. I, sir, was the one who made the motion that our proceeding should be confidential. After the statement made by the gentleman from Virginia, that he should feel it his duty to proclaim the fact, combined with other circumstances, I did not feel so strongly the obligation, and the motion for secrecy was waived. Under the impression that it was no longer a duty to confine the knowledge of this transaction to the bosom of the committee, I mentioned it to the gentleman from Boston and other commercial cities, that they might be aware of the transaction; I did it from a sense of duty, that they might be as well informed on this head as other members of the House.
Mr. Quincy rose to state the circumstances as they had occurred on the day alluded to, and he had it in his power to do so, because, anticipating that some difficulty might arise, and wishing to relieve himself from blame, he had on the morning after the occurrence, committed it to paper, as follows:
"March 31, 1812.
"Memorandum. – Mr. Calhoun, of South Carolina, a member of the committee of Foreign Relations, this day informed me that 'the Committee of Foreign Relations had come to a determination that an embargo should be proposed to Congress for its adoption to-morrow.' I asked him if I was at liberty to mention this as a fact from him. He replied that 'I was at liberty.' He said 'that the gentlemen of the committee were generally of opinion that the subject should be kept secret. But Mr. Randolph,26 one of the committee, had declared that he would not consider himself bound to any such obligation. The committee, therefore, had thought that it was but fair to give an equal chance to all the gentlemen in Congress. And that he informed me of the fact, as a member from a commercial town, in order that I might communicate it to my mercantile friends.'
"I soon after went to him and asked him, 'whether the embargo would come as an Executive recommendation.' He replied, 'I do not deem myself authorized to answer that question.'
"I find the same information has been communicated by other members of the committee to various members of Congress.
"JOSIAH QUINCY."Mr. Seybert said, after what had been stated by his colleague, it was very evident that the information which had found its way to the public had been inadvertently communicated by a member; and he hoped the House was satisfied with the result. When he made the original motion, yesterday, for detaining this person, Mr. S. said he was desirous of a modification of it; he had not contemplated so rigorous a confinement as it would perhaps have comprehended. He was now perfectly satisfied, and considered it his duty to move that the witness be discharged from the custody of the Sergeant-at-Arms.
Mr. Roberts was opposed to discharging the witness until he had explained a sentence of his letter to the Speaker, in which he had asserted that he was not permitted to explain his testimony. The fact was, that the committee had acted with the greatest patience and liberality towards the witness, and extended to him every indulgence in their power, and his assertion was therefore unwarranted.
Mr. Macon, in the absence of Mr. Randolph, thought proper to remark that he had heard of the embargo in Baltimore, and the report had brought him here. It appeared, then, it was no secret at all. This was the first instance, indeed, Mr. M. said, in this Government in which a committee had undertaken to make a secret for itself. No such power of a committee was recognized by the House. Being confidentially referred by the House to a committee, they must in that case act on it in the same manner; otherwise there was, perhaps, no obligation. He did not believe there was a man in the nation who would be farther from doing a dishonorable act than the gentleman from Virginia, whose name had been called in question.
Mr. Seybert said, after what had passed, he presumed every one was satisfied there was no occasion to pursue the inquiry, and as the witness had submitted to the authority of the House, he moved the following resolution:
"Resolved, That Nathaniel Rounsavell, now in the custody of the Sergeant-at-Arms of this House, for a contempt of its authority in not answering the questions propounded to him by order of the House, having submitted to answer, and purged himself from the contempt, be discharged from said confinement."
The question was then taken on Mr. Seybert's motion, and carried without opposition; and the Sergeant-at-Arms was ordered to discharge the witnesses from confinement; and then, on motion, the House adjourned until to-morrow.
Thursday, April 9
Importation of British GoodsThe House resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole on the bill to authorize the importation of goods, wares, and merchandise, under certain circumstances, from Great Britain, her colonies or dependencies.
Removal of Federal Judges on Address of CongressAMENDMENT OF THE CONSTITUTIONMr. McKim offered to the House the following resolution, premising that he had been particularly induced to offer it, by considerations resulting from the present state of things in the State of New York, arising from the disability of the District Judge, by which upwards of seven hundred suits were kept in suspense, to the great injury of individuals and prejudice of the Government. In order to remedy that difficulty, a bill had passed both Houses, which had been returned by the President as objectionable on constitutional grounds. It had been pronounced on this floor, by a respectable law authority, that if that bill was rejected there was no other remedy. He, therefore, had been induced to offer the following resolution:
Resolved, by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled: (two-thirds of both Houses concurring,) That the following section be submitted to the Legislatures of the several States, which, when ratified by the Legislatures of three-fourths of the States, shall be valid and binding as a part of the Constitution of the United States:
"Resolved, That the Judges of the Supreme and Inferior Courts may be removed from office, on the joint address of the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States."
The resolution was ordered to lie on the table, and to be printed – 44 to 33.
Louisiana Lead CompanyThe House resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole, on the bill to incorporate Moses Austin, Henry Austin, John R. Jones and others, in the Territory of Louisiana, by the name of the Lead Company of Louisiana. After considerable debate, the first section of the bill was stricken out, on motion of Mr. Troup. The question on concurrence with the committee was decided by yeas and nays. For concurrence 46, against concurrence 43.
And so the said bill was rejected.
Tuesday, April 14
Cumberland RoadMr. Morrow, from the committee to whom was referred the Message of the President of the United States, of the 1st ultimo, transmitting a report and letter concerning the proceedings under the act, entitled "An act to regulate the laying out and making a road from Cumberland, in the State of Maryland, to the State of Ohio," and also a petition from a number of the inhabitants of the western counties of the State of Pennsylvania, praying that an appropriation may be made for the purpose of erecting a bridge over the Youghiogany at the place where the new road crosses the said river, made the following report:
That two subjects are suggested by the said Message, which require Legislative provision, viz: the appropriation of $30,000 for completing the said road to Tomlinson's, where the old and new roads meet, and the granting authority to levy toll sufficient to keep the said road in repair.
The reasons assigned in favor of such provisions, by the report and letter communicated by the Message, are, in the opinion of the committee, sufficient to show the expediency of the measure; they therefore refer the House to these documents.
It is proper, however, to state that the appropriations already made for the objects have exceeded the moneys produced by the fund pledged to defray the expense of the said road, which will appear by a letter from the Treasury Department, accompanying this report. That circumstance, as also the present state of the public finances, the necessity arising out of the existing crisis in the national concerns, for applying the public resources to objects of security and defence, have been duly considered; and whatever ground of objection to the proposed measure these considerations may afford, the committee are of opinion, nevertheless, that the advantages the public would derive from an immediate extension of the new road to where it will intersect with the old, are sufficient to justify the appropriation.
They are of opinion, that an appropriation for erecting a bridge over the Youghiogany River would be improper at this time, because, by law, the superintendent, in making the road, has power to deviate from the original survey, only that the road shall pass through the principal points established. If, then, a bridge should be erected over the said river, that place must necessarily become fixed as a point to which the road must lead, and being many miles in advance of the parts of the road contracted for, might prove inconvenient in the further prosecution of the work.
The committee respectfully submit the following resolutions:
Resolved, That $30,000, in addition to the sums heretofore appropriated, and reimbursable by the same fund, shall be appropriated for making the road leading from Cumberland to Brownsville.
Resolved, That provision be made for the levying of toll sufficient to keep the same in repair.
Resolved, That it is inexpedient to appropriate money for erecting a bridge over Youghiogany River on the said road.
The report was referred to a Committee of the Whole on Thursday next.
Monday, April 20
Death of the Vice PresidentA message was received from the Senate, announcing the death of the Vice President of the United States, and the resolution they had adopted.
The House agreed to consider the joint resolution as above stated.
Mr. Tallmadge said, it was assuredly not from any want of respect to the memory of the patriot deceased, that some member from the State of New York did not on this occasion address the Chair. At their request, and being himself a native citizen of the State of New York, and having served particularly and on honorable occasions in the Revolutionary war with the gentleman whose death was now announced; having long known his services and merits as a soldier and statesman, he took the liberty, in behalf of the delegation from New York, to move a concurrence in the resolution of the Senate.
The House unanimously concurred; and Messrs. Tallmadge, Mitchill, Gold, Stow, and Macon, were appointed a committee on their part to act with the committee of the Senate.
And the House adjourned, to meet at nine o'clock to-morrow, to receive the report of the joint committee on the subject.
Tuesday, April 21
On motion of Mr. Tallmadge,
Resolved, unanimously, That from an unfeigned respect to the late George Clinton, Vice President of the United States, and President of the Senate, the Speaker's chair be shrouded with black during the present session: And, as a further testimony of respect for the memory of the deceased, the members will go into mourning, and wear black crape on the left arm for thirty days.
On motion of Mr. Tallmadge,
Resolved, unanimously, That the members of this House will attend the funeral of George Clinton, deceased, the Vice President of the United States, to-day at four o'clock.
And the House adjourned.27
Friday, April 24
Corps of EngineersThe House resumed the consideration of the bill making further provision for the corps of Engineers, which had been amended in Committee of the Whole, so as to authorize the appropriation therein made to be disbursed "at such place as may be designated by the President of the United States for that purpose."
Mr. Gold spoke against a concurrence in this amendment at some length, and was followed on the same side by Mr. Smilie and Mr. Widgery; to whom Mr. Key, Mr. Williams, and Mr. Wright replied.
The discussion principally involved the respective merits of West Point and Washington City (to which place it was supposed, probably, that the Executive might deem it expedient to remove the Academy) as proper sites for a Military Academy. The question on the amendment was decided by yeas and nays. For the amendment 63, against the amendment 56.
Mr. W. Alston moved an amendment contemplating the establishment of the Academy at Carlisle, in Pennsylvania, a place which he stated to be more eligible, in point of economy, convenience, and comfort, than West Point.
Mr. Gold opposed the motion.
A motion was made by Mr. Little to recommit the bill, and negatived.
Mr. Findlay spoke in favor of the motion.
Mr. Baker suggested the propriety of locating the Academy at Harper's Ferry; and because, if the Academy must be removed, he thought Harper's Ferry preferable to Carlisle, he should vote against the motion.
Mr. Rhea made a motion which he said would put an end to all these propositions to amend the bill, viz: to postpone the bill indefinitely. The motion was negatived – yeas 32.
The question was then taken – "Shall the amendments be engrossed, and, together with the bill, be read a third time?" and decided in the affirmative.
Wednesday, April 29
Relief of Caraccas, &cMr. Macon submitted for consideration the following resolution:
"Resolved, That the Committee of Commerce and Manufactures be instructed to report a bill authorizing the President of the United States to cause to be purchased – barrels of flour, and to have the same exported to some port in Caraccas, for the use of the inhabitants who have suffered by the earthquake; and also authorizing him to cause to be purchased – barrels of flour, and to have the same exported to some port in Teneriffe for the use of the inhabitants who are likely to starve by the ravages of locusts."
To the adoption of the first clause of this resolution, there was no objection made by any one; but a desultory debate took place on incidental points and on the merits of the last clause.
Mr. Randolph made a speech of some length in favor of the object of the proposed resolution, but going to show that the aid the Government could afford would be ineffectual to relieve famine, if it existed; and that unquestionably the most effectual relief that could be afforded on our part to the wretched and unfortunate people of Caraccas would be a suspension, as to them, of our restrictive system. He, therefore, moved to amend the resolution by adding to the end of it the words "and to authorize vessels laden with provisions to clear out for any port of the aforesaid country."
Mr. Calhoun expressed his regret that this proposition to aid the cause of humanity could not be permitted to pass without the intermixture of party feelings, which the motion and speech of the gentleman from Virginia, he thought, were calculated to excite. He was opposed to the amendment, which he conceived would virtually repeal the embargo, and he hoped, as there could be no probability of adopting it, he would withdraw it. Mr. C. said he had doubts about the latter clause of the resolution; because, as to the distress at Teneriffe, the House had no other information than a newspaper report, whilst of the scarcity of provisions at Caraccas they had accurate information.
Mr. Randolph defended himself against the imputation of a desire to excite party feelings, &c., and declined withdrawing his amendment, because he believed its adoption to be essential to the accomplishment of the object of the original motion. He also made a number of observations on the impatience which gentlemen of the minority were listened to in the House, and the frequent interruptions they were in the habit of meeting with, &c.