am opposed to it because I am a friend to the court. I am opposed to it because I believe it to be the commencement of a system by which the moral influence and power of that court will ultimately be overthrown; and it will remain either an incubus upon our institutions, pressing them with a weight injurious to the community, or perhaps producing such a state of things in the public mind as ultimately to destroy the institution itself, or overthrow that independent tenure of office which to me is its highest recommendation.

I think that, in view of the past legislation of Congress, and of the consideration suggested by the Senator from Missouri, there is every reason to believe that at the next session of Congress the necessity for further relaxation will not only not be removed or diminished, but will be increased, and more strongly urged as a reason for a continuance of relief. If appeals be so numerous now, when the circuits below do have occasionally two judges for the purpose of hearing and deciding important causes, what may we expect when, for a whole year, the determination of every cause, important or unimportant, involving, whatever amount of property, or whatever perplexing questions, will be thrown, by the necessity of the case, on a single judge? I think that in every important cause there will be a writ of error or appeal to the Supreme Court; and that twelve months hereafter you will have just as much reason, nay, greater reason, for the passage of a special law.

[APRIL, 1848.

During a session of upwards of ninety days the court decided, as the Senator from Arkansas informs us, about forty cases.

Mr. CRITTENDEN. Upwards of fifty cases. My friend from Kentucky says, from the statement of the clerk, upwards of fifty cases have been decided. I imagine that the two statements are quite reconcilable. The clerk puts down all the cases that have gone off the docket; several cases being involved in one opinion, and some merely docketed and dismissed. Why were not there more cases disposed of? We are all somewhat familiar with the manner in which cases are argued in that court. Now, Lord Bacon has informed us in one of his essays-and no man understood better, theoretically, than he the duties of a judge, whatever might have been his practical discharge of those duties that one of the offices of a judge was, "to moderate length, repetition, and impertinence of speech," using the latter term of course in its original and appropriate signification, not as meaning insolence, but irrelevancy. Now, has that remedy been applied by the court? Has the court taken upon itself the responsibility which it ought to have exercised, in order to prevent a waste of the public time by those who happen to gain the ear of the court a little earlier, in debate, indulging in idle and frivolous discussion, felt by the court themselves to be totally immaterial to the decision of the cause? Has the court been careful to prevent discussion of questions which might be regarded as axiomatic in this country Then, as I apprehend, if Congress act con-dissertations or scholastic essays, like those sistently, applying this remedy from year to delivered to young men prosecuting their year, toties quoties, it must come to this, that studies in a lawyer's office, in the expectation of we shall have these gentlemen as judges of the obtaining a license? It is quite familiar to us Supreme Court of appeals, not mingling with all, that in a case which attracted some attenthe ordinary transactions of business-not ac- tion, one of the learned counsel occupied an customed to the "forensic strepitus" in the entire day for the purpose of demonstrating courts below-not seeing the rules of evidence this very difficult proposition in America, that practically applied to the cases before them- the people are sovereign; and then pursued not enlightened upon the laws of the several his argument on the second day by endeavorStates, which they have finally to administering to make out the extremely difficult concluhere, by the discussions of able and learned sion from the first proposition, that being counsel in the courts below-not seen by the sovereign, they had a right to frame their own people of the United States-not known and constitution! Well, now, if the court sit recognized by them-not touching them as it quietly while gentlemen, from whatever mowere in the administration of their high office tive, either to gain distinction from an exhibi-not felt, and understood, and realized as part tion of their polemical powers, capacity for and parcel of this great popular Government; didactic discussion, or any other reason, occubut sitting here alone-becoming philosophical py the attention of the court with such discusand speculative in their inquiries as to law-sions, what hope, what expectation can be becoming necessarily more and more dim as to the nature of the law of the various States, from want of familiar and daily connection with them-unseen, final arbiters of justice, issuing their decrees as it were from a secret chamber-moving invisibly amongst us, as far as the whole community is concerned; and, in my judgment, losing in fact the ability to discharge their duties as well as that responsive confidence of the people, which adds so essentially to the sanction of all the acts of the officers of Government.

entertained, that this bill will supply any remedy for the evil of a surcharged docket?

I have no doubt, if the court had met on the 1st of December, with the resolute purpose of confining the argument of counsel to the questions on record, and refusing to listen to any discussion of any points which the court considered to be clear and settled, that instead of deciding forty cases, the court might have decided one hundred and forty. Gentlemen around me know, that we belong to a profession exceedingly discursive, and that when we

APRIL, 1848.]

Supreme Court Bill.

have looked into a subject, and imagine that we can make a display, we are very apt to occupy time without consideration of the just claims of those who are to come after us.

Mr. PHELPS. I regard this judicial system which has been in operation some fifty years, and with a very slight interruption ever since the organization of the Government, as the best that can be devised for the General Government and for the people. I deprecate as much as the Senator from North Carolina, or any other gentleman on this floor, the separation of the judges of the Supreme Court from their circuit duties. The consideration that the separation of the judges of the Supreme Court from their circuit duties would operate very much to the prejudice of the country, is not to be overlooked. I have had my fears, however, that this system, admirable as it is, would have to be abandoned; and that apprehension has been founded upon the fact, that in the first place, the judges have not time to attend to their circuit duties; and that, in the second place, the docket of the Supreme Court had become so loaded, that the business of the court cannot be despatched-the very evil which I apprehended as likely to grow out of the extension of our territory, and the utter impracticability of having the duties of the circuit court discharged by such a number of judges as would be proper to be congregated here. If you increase the number of the judges of the Supreme Court with a view to enable them to discharge all the duties of the circuit courts, you have a court too numerous. On the other hand, they cannot, if they be limited to their present number, discharge the duties of the circuit courts. What is to be done? Some remedy must be applied. In my humble judgment, we have this alternative before us: we must either afford temporary relief, or abandon the system altogether. This is the issue presented. Well, not being disposed to abandon the system-preferring to retain it, and for the very considerations suggested by other Senators-I desire to apply some remedy to relieve the court from the accumulation of business here. In my judgment, if an extra session of this court can dispose of this accumulation of business, the court can attend in future to the ordinary discharge of its duties. If this be not done, what is the result? Why, if the docket of this court is allowed to accumulate and increase from year to year, and the community becomes satisfied that the business of the court cannot be despatched, we are driven irresistibly to the very measure which gentlemen deprecate-the separation of the court | from the States. In these circumstances there is but one alternative-we must either change the system, or we must adopt some temporary measure of relief. I am decidedly of opinion that we should resort to some measure of temporary relief, and preserve the system. It is really a choice of evils, and I prefer that course which looks to temporary relief, rather than

[30TH CONG. that which must result in an entire change of the system. As to the recommendation of the Senator from North Carolina, I have only to say, that it is easy to talk on this floor about the manner in which the judges should discharge their duties. I confine myself to the subject before us, and allow the judges to go on in their own way.

Mr. FOOTE. Until the debate occurred to which we have just listened, I confess that I was decidedly favorable to the passage of this bill. But some objections to its becoming a law have been preferred which are too cogent to be resisted; and I shall, contrary to my first inclinations, vote against it. The merits of the bill have been so fully debated, that nothing which I could now say would aid the Senate in coming to a wise decision concerning it. I shall, therefore, content myself with responding to a single suggestion which has just fallen from the Senator from Vermont. That gentleman seems to be particularly horrified at certain animadversions in which honorable Senators have indulged touching the conduct of those who preside in the Supreme Court of the Union. He appears to be of opinion that we ought not, under any circumstances, to find fault with the action of a co-ordinate department of the Government, and especially with the judicial department. The Senator may or may not be right in the general doctrine which he asserts; and yet it is most evident to me, that if any one of the three departments of Government decreed by the constitution to be separate and independent of each other, should be allowed to interfere with the action of another in any case, the exception to the general rule should be admitted in favor, either of the Legislative or Executive, in preference to the Judiciary. Nor do I imagine that there will be much difference of opinion as to the correctness of this proposition among Senators who attach sufficient importance to the fact, that the judges of the Supreme Court are appointed (not elected, either by the people or otherwise) for life, and are only responsible to the country through the medium of impeachment-a proceeding long since ascertained to be wholly inefficient for the purpose of punishing an unworthy judicial functionary. The occasion is not such as to allow of my objecting in form to the mode in which the members of the Supreme Court of the Union are appointed to their high stations, or to their peculiar tenure of office, which induced Mr. Jefferson to declare this tribunal to be a solecism in our system.

Mr. Downs. I confess I agree with the Senator from North Carolina, that much of the evil that we complain of might be remedied by the court itself, still I think it is necessary that the bill should pass. It is not an act for the relief of the court, but for the relief of those who are engaged in litigation before that court-for the relief of the people of the United States. It is said that if this measure be not adopted, another measure will be brought forward that

1ST SESS.]

French Revolution.

[APRIL, 1848.

measure that may be necessary. Being strongly desirous that the system should not be changed, and fearing that this bill if adopted will change it, I feel myself compelled to vote against it. The question was then taken on the engrossment of the bill, and decided as follows:

will remedy the evil. I shall be happy to see | eral remedy, and then adopt any additional a remedy applied, and I see an opportunity now for the adoption of a remedy. There is in my State a large amount of property in litigation. A case was carried to the Supreme Court before the act of 1844 was passed, involving some hundred thousand acres of land, and it still remains undecided; how many years more it will take, I do not know. The delay has become positively intolerable. But if the court could be allowed to sit through the year, the docket might be cleared off, and we should then have time to adopt such measures as may be necessary to prevent a recurrence of the evil.

YEAS.-Messrs. Bell, Breese, Butler, Crittenden, Dayton, Downs, Greene, Hannegan, Johnson of Maryland, Mangum, Mason, Miller, Pearce, Phelps. Rusk, Underwood, and Upham-17.

NAYS.-Messrs. Allen, Ashley, Badger, Bagby, Benton, Calhoun, Davis of Mississippi, Dickinson, Dix, Douglas, Felch, Foote, Hale, Houston, Lewis, Niles, Spruance, Turney, and Westcott-19.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

MONDAY, April 10.
French Revolution.

Mr. STEWART, of Pennsylvania, said he hoped

of them.

The resolutions were taken up, and read the first time by their title.

Mr. CALHOUN. I rise simply to state, in a very few words, the reasons that will govern me, in giving my vote on this occasion. It must be admitted, on all sides, that this is intended to be only a temporary measure, and that the present system ought to be continued. I believe this is the general impression; such is mine, very strongly. This bill is presented the House would this morning, by common on the ground, that the cases upon the docket consent, take up and dispose of the joint resohave so accumulated, that it requires an extra-lutions from the Senate tendering the congratuordinary law-to relieve the judges from their lations of the American to the French people. circuit duties for one year-in order to clear It would take but little time, he said, to dispose them off. Well, what possible assurance have we, that at the end of the year the same reason will not exist for enacting such a law for the next year? It appears to me that we are inverting the order of things. The first object should be to adopt some measure that would prevent the accumulation of cases in future, and then some measure for disposing of those which now exist. But proceeding as we are, The SPEAKER said, the resolutions having it appears to me it will be tantamount-with-been read the first time, the previous question, out intending it to be so-to a permanent being moved, would apply to the second readchange in the circuit system. Now, I believe ing there are very few Senators prepared for this; I believe the judges themselves are not. We have ample time during the remaining part of the session-it will probably last three months, yet I should be very glad to think it would terminate in three-surely this will furnish ample opportunity to the Judiciary Committee,

or if that committee be overloaded with business, to a Select Committee to take the subject into consideration, and propose some measure that will prove an effectual remedy for the evil that is complained of.

Mr. DAYTON. The Judiciary Committees in both Houses have had the subject under consideration. A bill has been reported, and is now before the House of Representatives; but any bill that is passed should be a bill calculated to sweep away the accumulations of the cases with which the docket of the Supreme Court is now lengthened. They must be disposed of irrespective of any bill for the regulation of the Judiciary hereafter.

Mr. CALHOUN. I was not aware that there was a bill before the House relating to this subject; but that being the case, it is a reason why this bill should lie upon the table until that bill passes. Let us apply first the gen

Mr. THOMPSON, of Pennsylvania, moved the previous question.

Mr. ASHMUN said the resolutions had not

been read. He called for their reading before any action was taken upon them.

The previous question was seconded, and, under its operation, the resolutions were read a second time by their title.

The question being on the third readingMr. HOLMES, of South Carolina, called for the reading of the entire resolutions; which were read for information, as follows:

Resolved, &c., That in the name and behalf of the American people, the congratulations of Congress are hereby tendered to the people of France upon the success of their recent efforts to consolidate the principles of liberty in a republican form of Government.

And be it further resolved, That the Pesident of the United States be, and he is hereby, requested to transmit this resolution to the American Minister French Government. at Paris, with instructions to present it to the

Mr. ASHмUN Confessed that he objected to the resolutions of the gentleman from Ohio the other day; and he hesitated to concur in the proceedings contemplated this day, because France has not yet achieved republican liberty. They had been told that a republican government had been formed in France; that it had been already achieved, and was now existing. The President of the United States, in his

California Claims.

Mr. STEWART, of Pennsylvania, called for the yeas and nays; which were ordered, and re-importance; for no extras, much less twenty sulted as follows:

1ST SESS.]

California Claims.

[APRIL, 1848.

and this fact standing out incontestably among | calde, and Colonel Alvarado, informing them that he the events of the times, and presenting a pre- was surveying the nearest route from the United sumptive case of aggression against the United States to the Pacific Ocean. This information, and States, very naturally attracted the attention that his men were not United States soldiers, was, of the committee, and commanded their most also, by myself, officially given to the prefecto. searching and thorough examination. The Having obtained funds and supplies from myself, result is before the Senate, in the depositions Monterey that he was to return when he collected he returned to his camp; it being well known in referred to, and may be examined in detail by his men. Some fifteen or twenty days after this, every Senator. For myself, I propose only to Captain Frémont, with his party, encamped at a make a brief, connected story from their ample vacant rancho belonging to Captain Fisher, (about contents, to rebut in the first place an injurious ninety miles from here,) to recruit his men and presumption, and to exhibit afterwards in lucid animals. From there he proceeded towards Santa order the summary of events which gave rise Cruz, making short journeys. On the 3d of March to these California claims, and show that they he encamped on the rancho of Mr. E. P. Hartwell, ought to be paid. where he received letters from the general and prefecto, ordering him out of the country, and to obey the order without any pretext whatever, or immediate measures would be taken to compel him to do so. This not corresponding with assurances received at Monterey, it was not answered, and he gave orders to hoist the United States flag the next morning, as the only protection his men were to look to. From the 7th to the 10th of March, they fortified their camp with a breast work of logs. Encamped on a high hill, which commanded a view of the surrounding country, they could see, with the use of spy-glasses, the general and his troops, numbering about two hundred men, at their camp, in the mission of St. John's, preparing their cannon. On the 9th instant I sent duplicate lettersone by an American, who lost his papers, and the other by a Californian-to Captain Frémont, informing him of the movements of the Californians. The Californian courier returned to the consulate in about nine or ten hours, bringing a letter from Captain Frémont, having travelled in that time sixty miles. He reported being well treated by Captain Frémont and his men; and that two thousand of his countrymen would not be sufficient to compel him to leave the country, although his party was so small."-Letter, 27th March, 1846.

In the month of May, 1845, Mr. Fremont, then a brevet captain of engineers, set out on his third expedition of geographical and scientific exploration in the Great West. War had not then broken out between the United States and Mexico; but affairs were critical between them, and Mr. Fremont was determined, by no act of his, to increase the difficulties, or to give any cause of complaint to the Mexican Government. His line of observation would lead him to the Pacific Ocean through a Mexican province through the desert parts first, and the settled parts afterwards, of the Alta California. Approaching the settled parts of the province at the commencement of winter, he left his equipment of sixty men and two hundred horses on the frontier, and proceeded alone to Monterey, to make known to the Governor the object of his coming, and his desire to pass the winter, for the refreshment of his men and horses, in the uninhabited parts of the valley of San Joaquin. The permission was granted, but soon revoked, under the pretext that Mr. Fremont had come into California, not to pursue science, but to excite the American settlers to revolt against the Mexican Government. Upon this pretext troops were raised, and marched to attack him. Having notice of their approach, he took a position on the mountain, hoisted the flag of the United States, and determined, with his sixty brave men, to defend themselves to the last extremity. Waiting there four days, and not being attacked, he quit his position, descended from the mountain, and set out for Oregon, that he might give no further pretext for complaint by remaining in California.

The United States consul at Monterey, Mr. O. Larkin, gave official information of these events to the Secretary of State, (Mr. Buchanan,) and from these I will read what is necessary to verify the statements which I have made:

"Captain J. C. Frémont, of the United States army, arrived at this United States consular-house in Monterey, on the 27th of January, 1846. Being very anxious to join his party of fifty men at the second place of rendezvous, without the settlement, they having missed the first place by mistake, he remained but two days, in which time, with myself, he visited the commandant-general, prefecto, al

Captain, Frémont was well received in this place, and to the last day we heard of him, by the natives individually, who sold him provisions, and liked his presence. During his encampment thirty or forty miles from here, despatches were received by the commandant, General José Castro, a native of Monterey, from Mexico, ordering him to drive Captain Frémont out of this department; which order, with one hundred and seventy or two hundred men present, and over one hundred more daily expected, he pretended to execute. Captain Frémont left his camp a few hours after he received the undersigned's letter of the 9th of March, (not from fright of General Castro,) as he had been preparing the week before to travel. It is supposed he has gone to Santa Barbara, where an American was sent by the undersigned in February, with funds and provisions for his use.

"The undersigned has not supposed, during the whole affair, that General Castro wished to go after Captain Frémont, and was very confident that, with all California, he would not have attacked him, even had he been sure of destroying the whole party, as five times their number could have taken their place before the expected battle. Captain Frémont received verbal applications from English and Americans to join his party, and could have mustered as many men as the natives. He was careful not to do so. Although he discharged five