in the District of Columbia, to drain the low grounds on and near the public reservations, and to improve and ornament certain parts of such reservations," reported the same without amendment, and it was ordered to lie on the table. Mr. FLOYD submitted the following resolution, viz: Resolved, That the President of the United States be requested to cause to be communicated to this House, if not injurious to the public good, any letter or communication which may have been received from Jonathan Russell, Esquire, one of the Ministers of the United States, who concluded the Treaty of Ghent, after the signature of that treaty, and which was written in conformity to the indications contained in said Minister's letter, dated at Ghent, 25th December, 1814. The resolution was ordered to lie on the table one day. On motion of Mr. MCLANE, the Committee of the whole House on the state of the Union, to which is committed the bill to render permanent the Naval Peace Establishment of the United States, were discharged from the consideration thereof, and it was recommitted to the Committee on Naval Affairs. The House took up, and proceeded to consider, the bill from the Senate, entitled "An act to abolish the United States trading establishments with the Indian tribes:" Whereupon, it was ordered that the bill be committed to the Committee of the whole House to which is committed the bill of this House to regulate the intercourse with the In Idian tribes within the United States and the territories thereof. A motion was made by Mr. HEMPHILL, that the Committee of the whole House to which is committed the bill for the preservation and repair of the Cumberland road, be discharged from the consideration thereof, and that it be committed to the Committee of the whole House on the state of the Union; which motion was disagreed to by the House. A message from the Senate informed the House that the Senate have passed a bill, entitled "An act for ascertaining claims and titles to land within the Territory of Florida;" in which bill they ask the concurrence of this House. Mr. GORHAM's resolution, laid on the table yesterday, calling for information respecting the French ship La Pensee, was taken up, and adopted. The resolution submitted yesterday by Mr. MOORE, of Alabama, calling for information respecting certain transactions in the Huntsville Land Office, was also taken up, and after a few remarks by MOORE, the same was adopted. Mr. RICH submitted the following resolution: Resolved, That the 69th section of the rules and orders of the House be expunged, and the following substituted in lieu thereof, to wit: Exclusive of the "Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union," there shall be three committees of the whole House, to wit: One on bills and other subjects of a public or general nature; one on private or local bills; and one on subjects of a local or private nature, upon which unfavorable reports shall have been made by a committee; and when a subject shall H. OF R. have been referred to a Committee of the Whole, it shall be assigned to the appropriate committee by the Speaker; and unless otherwise specially ordered, shall be entered on the calandar for the next succeeding day. The House having resolved into either of the said committees, the several subjects referred to it shall be announced by the Chairman, in the order in which in the discretion of the committee, be considered at the they stand upon the calendar; and any number may, same sitting. But no subject shall be considered, except on the motion of a member, seconded by a majority of the committee: Provided, That the House may specially resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole, upon any subject, which a committee shall previously have refused to consider. The resolution was ordered to lie on the table one day. to print five thousand extra copies of the report of Mr. VAN WYCK moved to take up the motion the Committee of Retrenchment, but the motion was negatived, ayes 59, noes 64. Pursuant to notice, Mr. Cook moved for the consideration of the report of the special committee appointed on the subject of inspecting the Western Land Offices; but the House refused to consider the same. the consideration of the bill in relation to the esMr. WRIGHT moved that the House proceed to cape of fugitives, slaves, &c.; but, the question being put, Mr. W.'s motion was negatived. titles to land in the Territory of Florida, was twice A bill from the Senate to ascertain claims and read and referred. of the bill in addition to an act to reduce and fix The House then proceeded to the consideration the Military Peace Establishment. The question recurred upon concurring with the Committee of the Whole in their amendments Mr. TATNALL moved that the bill, with the amendto the bill; but, after a few prefatory remarks, ments, be laid on the table-which was agreed to. MILITARY APPROPRIATIONS. The House then resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole, on the bill making further appropriations for the military service of the United States for the year 1822, and for other purposes. Mr. CocкE moved to strike out the appropriation for Fort Delaware, but, after a few explanatory remarks by Mr. SMITH, of Maryland, the motion was withdrawn; and the appropriation for that fort, and for Forts Washington and Monroe, were respectively agreed to. Mr. CHAMBERS moved to strike out the appropriation of $50,000 for Fort Calhoun. This motion gave rise to a discussion which spread into a wide debate, and, after thirty-one speeches had been made thereon by Messrs. CHAMBERS, WALWORTH, FLOYD, F. JOHNSON, TRIMBLE, WARFIELD, COCKE, and COLDEN, in favor of the motion, and by Messrs. BASSETT, MERCER, SMITH, of Maryland, LITTLE, MCCOY, TOD, BRECKENRIDGE, POINSETT, NELSON, of Maryland, WRIGHT, BAYLIES, and SERGEANT, against it, the Committee, before any question was taken thereon, rose and reported progress, and the House adjourned. H. OF R. FRIDAY, April 19. made. To encourage the cultivation of the vine and olive was the primary object of the grant, and, without the provision of this bill, he believed that object could not be attained. Mr. GILMER moved that the bill be recommitted "to the Committee on the Public Lands. On this motion the merits of the bill were incidentally discussed by Messrs. GILMER and ALEXANDER SMYTH, in favor of the recommitment, and by Messrs. RANKIN, WALWORTH, MOORE, of Alabama, MERCER, and RHEA, in opposition to it. Mr. RANKIN, from the Committee on the Public Lands, to which was referred the bill from the Senate, entitled "An act to amend the act granting the right of pre-emption to certain settlers in the State of Louisiana, and for other purposes," reported the same with amendments. The bill and amendments were ordered to lie on the table. Mr. SMITH, of Maryland, from the Committee of Ways and Means, to which was referred the bill from the Senate, entitled "An act for the relief of the legal representatives of Greenbury H. Murphy," reported the same without amendment, and it was committed to a Committee of the Whole. Mr. FLOYD's resolution, submitted yesterday, calling for information from the Executive in relation to the correspondence of Jonathan Russell, Esq., Minister of the United States, in concluding the Treaty of Ghent, was taken up and adopted. A Message was received from the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, as follows: To the House of Representatives : I communicate to the House of Representatives copies of sundry papers having relation to the transactions in East and West Florida, which have been received at the Department of State since my Message to the two Houses of Congress, of the 28th of January last, together with copies of two letters from the Secretary of State upon the same subject. JAMES MONROE. WASHINGTON, April 18, 1822. The Message was ordered to lie on the table. The SPEAKER laid before the House a letter from the Secretary of the Treasury, informing the House that the information called for by the resolution of this House, of the 10th instant, in relation to the sales of public lands in each of the States and Territories, and the price at which the same was sold, cannot be furnished until the next session of Congress; which letter was ordered to lie on the table. THE VINE AND OLIVE. The bill from the Senate supplementary to the act to set apart and dispose of part of the public lands to encourage the cultivation of the vine and olive, was read a third time. Mr. RANKIN presented a variety of considerations in support of the passage of the bill, and replied to inquiries made by Mr. HILL and Mr. WALWORTH. Mr. GILMER opposed the bill, on the ground that it enabled the purchasers and occupiers of certain parts of the land to hold the same at two dollars per acre, when they were worth forty, and the residue of the lands would be useless to the United States. Mr. Cook was also opposed to it on the same ground, and he added that the individuals who entered into the association well understood the terms of the contract, and there was no good reason why it should be departed from. Mr. TAYLOR was in favor of the bill on the ground that it was necessary to carry into effect the object for which the grant was originally Mr. Cook expressed himself satisfied with the explanation that had been given by the gentleman from Mississippi, (Mr. RANKIN,) and hoped the bill would be adopted in its present shape. The motion for recommitment was negatived; and the bill was finally passed and returned to the Senate. MILITARY APPROPRIATIONS. The House then resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union, on the bill making further appropriations for the support of the Military Establishment of the United States, for the year 1822. The question recurred upon striking out the appropriation for the erection of Fort Calhoun, on the Chesapeake. The debate was opened by Mr. BASSETT in opposition to the motion. He viewed the facts connected with the progress of the work, and replied to the observations made yesterday by the gentleman from Kentucky, (Mr. TRIMBLE.) He thought we were not departing from the economy of Jefferson, but on this subject were following with unequal steps the policy which that statesman had recommended. He dwelt upon the calamities that might ensue to the country in the result of an unsuccessful naval conflict with an enemy, if we had not fortifications to shelter a retreat, or to afford protection to our cities, and expatiated at length upon the peculiar importance and expediency of the fort in question. Mr. COLDEN made a few remarks on the subject, which could not be heard by the reporter. Mr. BALDWIN did not rise to make any remarks on the subject of the specific appropriation now proposed, but only to reply to observations of the gentleman from Kentucky, (Mr. HARDIN,) yesterday, and he explained fully and at length the circumstances in relation to the alleged excess of expenditures over the appropriations of the last year. After a few queries by Mr. MALLARY, and an explanation by Mr. BASSETT— Mr. STERLING, of New York, took the floor, and adverted to the charge made yesterday upon the Secretary of War, of transcending the appropriations of last year; and upon the First Clerk, of participating in the contract for the works at the Rip Raps, and of injuring the public interest thereby. Mr. S. went into a particular examination of the subject, and referred to documents, by which he contended it was fully shown, that, instead of transcending the appropriation, the Secretary of War had kept within it by more than APRIL, 1822. Proceedings. H. OF R. Mr. RHEA expressed his sentiments in favor of the appropriation. fifteen thousand dollars. And in respect to the thousand dollars in the report of the Committee of Chief Clerk, Mr. S. remarked that the gentleman Retrenchment. (Mr. COCKE) who made the statement was ap- Mr. WHIPPLE (a member of the committee) expointed in 1819 chairman of a committee to inves-plained, and contended that the mistake just pointed tigate the subject, and had shrunk from the task out did not exist. of reporting upon it. Mr. S. contended that the contract was fairly made; that the Government tested the expense by experiments; that the owners of the quarries were notified and consulted; that there were five bidders for the contract; that the lowest terms were accepted; and that the contractor afterwards refused to extend the contract on similar terms. Mr. COCKE said, that the statement made by the gentleman from New York, that the committee had shrunk from an investigation of the case of Mix's contract, &c., on a former occasion, was not founded on fact as regarded himself, (Mr. C.) He never had shrunk from any duty that he had to perform, and he never would do so. The committee which had been alluded to, after two sittings, never could be got together again; which fact, Mr. C. said, he did at the time communicate to the House; and had he known that he could have procured an addition to the committee by a motion to that effect, he certainly would have applied to the House for that purpose. Mr. C. repeated what he had before stated, that the contract in question was made without a previous publication of it; that Christopher Vandeventer was, when the committee made the investigation, from his own acknowledgment, owner of one-half of the contract, for which he gave one hundred dollars; and Mix and Jennings each owned half of the remainder; and (as he understood from gentlemen in this House, from the State of New York) Elijah Mix was not, at the time of making the contract, worth one hundred dollars. And Mr. C. appealed to those gentlemen for a confirmation of the fact. From all the circumstances attending the contract, Mr. C. repeated (as he had before said) he did not believe the Government had had justice done to it. Mr. HARDIN disclaimed having made any charge or accusation on any department, but contended that the statements he had made were correct, and that the gentleman from New York (Mr. STERLING) had misconceived the propositions he had advanced. Mr. McDUFFIE replied at length to the remarks made yesterday by the gentleman from Kentucky, (Mr. HARDIN,) and took a wide range of remark, animadverting upon the report of the Retrenchment Committee, (so called,) which he contended was altogether incorrect, and defending the character and policy of the present Administration, in a speech of nearly an hour. Mr. HARDIN replied in extenso to the observations of the gentleman from South Carolina, (Mr. MCDUFFIE,) and defended the report of the Committee of Retrenchment, by reference to a variety of documents and estimates. Mr. SMITH, of Maryland, made a few further observations upon the subject of the proposed appropriation, and also pointed out what he deemed to be an error of five hundred and twenty-one Mr. McDUFFIE rejoined to the remarks of the gentleman from Kentucky, (Mr. HARDIN,) and reviewed the various topics that had been introduced into the discussion. Mr. HARDIN replied to the observations of the gentleman from Maryland, (Mr. SMITH,) and also animadverted upon the remarks of the gentleman from South Carolina, (Mr. McDUFFIE.) Further remarks were made on the subject by Messrs. SMITH of Maryland, F. JONES, Ross, and H. NELSON; when the Committee rose, reported progress, and then the House adjourned. SATURDAY, April 20. Ordered, That the Committee on Private Land Claims, to which was referred the bill from the Senate, entitled "An act for the relief of the representatives of John Donnelson, Thomas Carr, and others," be discharged from the further consideration thereof, and that it be referred to the Committee on the Public Lands. Ordered, That the Message of the President of the United States of the 17th instant, communicating a correspondence between the Secretary of State and the Ministers of Great Britain and Russia, relative to the claims of those Governments, respectively, to certain parts of the northwest coast of America, be referred to the committee appointed on the 10th of December last "to inquire into the expediency of occupying the Columbia river and the territory of the United States adjacent thereto; and of regulating the trade with the Indian tribes." Mr. RICH gave notice that he should, on Monday next, call for the consideration of a resolution by him heretofore submitted for altering the rules of the House, and he presented the following, which he wished to be subjoined thereto, and which lies, of course, one day on the table: "With the exception of the three last weeks of a session, bills of a local or private nature, and reports of committees, other than bills, on the like subjects, shall, to the exclusion of other business, (the period for going into committee having been reached,) be considered on Friday and Saturday in each week, and on no other days: Provided, That this rule shall not prevent the third reading of a bill on any other days, nor the consideration of any subject upon which a Committee of the Whole shall have made a report. " Mr. BASSETT, from the select committee, appointed on that subject, reported a bill concerning the disbursements of public money; which was twice read, and committed to a Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union. A message from the Senate informed the House that the Senate insist on their disagreement to the amendment proposed by this House to the amendments of the Senate to the bill from this House, H. of R. Reduction of Pay of Members-Military Appropriations. entitled "An act to provide for paying to the State of Missouri three per cent. of the net proceeds arising from the sale of the public lands within the same;" and ask a conference thereon, at which they have appointed managers on their part. Mr. VAN WYCK renewed his motion to cause five thousand extra copies of the first report of the Committee on Retrenchment to be printed; but the question of consideration being put, it was again negatived-ayes 50, noes 60. REDUCTION OF PAY OF CONGRESS. Mr. HARDIN, from the select committee heretofore appointed on the subject of retrenchment of the public expenditure, made a further report thereon, accompanied by a bill. The report is as follows: APRIL, 1822. trary; for the best talents in America, since the formation of this Government, have been proud and ambitious of a seat in Congress; besides, money cannot be the object of any man in accepting a seat in Congress. An indemnity is all he can, or ought to expect. It has been alleged by some that the pay of the members should be so high as to make them entirely independent of the influence of Executive patronage. If there be any thing in that argument, this answer may be given that the committee are fearful that eight dollars a day would not answer the desired purpose. Without going further into the discussion of this question, the committee are unanimously of opinion that, in the great and good work of retrenchment, Congress ought to be the first to set an example to the balance of the nation, and begin with themselves. They, therefore, to effectuate the objects pointed out in this report, submit to the House the accompanying bill. MILITARY APPROPRIATIONS. The select committee, to which was referred a resolution directing an inquiry to be made whether any part of the public expenditure can be retrenched with- The House then resolved itself into a Commitout detriment to the public service, and whether there tee of the Whole on the state of the Union, on be any offices or appointments in the Government of the bill making further appropriations for the milthe United States which have become useless and un-itary service of the United States for the year necessary, and can be dispensed with, report, in part, 1822. that, from the best estimate which they can make as to the average expenses of both Houses of Congress, taking one session with another, and allowing each session to be as long as the session of the Sixteenth Congress, the same will stand thus, or nearly so : Pay and mileage of the members Salaries of clerks, &c. Salaries of Doorkeepers and Sergeant-atArms - $336,975 90 9,000 00 $363,075 90 The question recurred upon striking out the appropriation for the erection of Fort Calhoun, on the Chesapeake, and the same was put and negatived by a large majority. Mr. BUTLER, of New Hampshire, moved to amend the section by adding thereto a clause providing that no part of the appropriation should be applied on the contract made with Elijah Mix. on the 25th July, 1818. Mr. SAWYER was opposed to the proviso, but the reasons which he offered could not be heard by the reporter. amendment. He regarded it as going to declare a Mr. SMITH, of Maryland, also opposed the dissolution of a contract which Congress had repeatedly affirmed. Mr. BUTLER contended that the contract was made in contravention of the laws of the United States, and that there was such reason to suspect that there was fraud in the case as would justify us in withholding the appropriation. The committee propose to reduce the pay and mileage of the members to six dollars per day, and six dollars for every twenty miles travel; also the pay of the Clerk of the House of Representatives and Secretary of the Senate to $2,000 each, the principal deputy of each House to $1,500, and the other deputies to $1,200; the Doorkeepers and their Assistants, and the Sergeant-at-Arms of each House, to six dollars a day, during the session of Congress; and to each Doorkeeper, for taking care of that part of the Capitol set apart for the use of Congress, $200 in addition. If the reduction proposed shall be made, it will lessen the expenditure for the Legislative Department about $90,000 annually; and, after the Seventeenth Congress, the reduction will be equal to near $100,000. The committee, in proposing to reduce the expenses of the Legislative Department, are influenced by several considerations. They are decidedly of opinion Mr. ToD also made a few observations on the that nothing can save the nation from a system of subject, when the question was taken, and the internal taxation, but retrenchment in the public ex-motion negatived by a large majority; and the penditures, a return to good old principles, which, for blank was filled as proposed by the Committee of some years past, have been lost sight of. The pay of the members of Congress, from the formation of the Ways and Means. Government until a few years ago, was what is now proposed by the committee, and money is worth as much now as it had been at any period within the last twenty or thirty years. It may be objected, that a reduction of the pay of the members will drive all those who are not wealthy out of Congress. To that it may be answered, that the former experiments of the Government in its operation before the compensation was raised, prove the con Mr. Ross opposed the proviso, not only on the ground assumed by the gentleman from Maryland, (Mr. SMITH,) but also on the principle that, Congress having recognised the contract, it was now too late to annul it, and he should vote against the amendment, although he had been opposed to the appropriation. The appropriation for fortifying Mobile Point being under consideration, Mr. COCKE moved to strike out the section, and to insert in lieu thereof an appropriation for the specific purpose of collecting materials for that fortification. The principle on which he preferred a specific appropriation was, that the money heretofore appropriated for the fortification at Mobile Point had not been applied to that object, but had been transferred to Colonel Gratiot, at Norfolk, and he referred to documents on the subject. Mr. J. S. JOHNSTON contended that the money had been applied to the great object for which it was appropriated, and he examined with minuteness the particular circumstances of the case in question. Mr. J. also adverted to the topics that had been drawn into discussion yesterday, and contended that the question, whether the Secretary had assumed an undue responsibility upon himself or not, ought not to be brought to bear upon the subject. Mr. CockE replied, and expressed his dissent to the justification of the Secretary of War which had been urged by the gentleman from Louisiana, (Mr. JOHNSTON,) and again reviewed the positions he had taken on the question. Mr. SMITH, of Maryland, explained the facts in relation to the origin and changes of the contract for building the fortifications at Mobile Point, and made a general exposition of the subject of fortifications, with an historical sketch of the policy that had been pursued for a series of years, in their erection and extent. He also expressed his acquiesence in the amendment proposed by the gentleman from Tennessee, (Mr. COCKE,) and intimated an opinion that it would be expedient for the United States to abandon the system of erecting their fortifications by contract. H. of R. Virginia, (Mr. SMYTH,) in relation to the agency of the Secretary of the Treasury in the transaction alluded to, and which he said was limited to the transfer of the money from De Russe to Colonel Gratiot. Mr. JOHNSTON, of Louisiana, had no expectation that the contract would be fulfilled by the sureties of Colonel Hawkins, and he thought it most expedient to apply the appropriation to the procurement of materials, which was, in his opinion, the only mode in which the great object was most likely to be accomplished. Mr. J. was unwilling to enter into the expediency of the terms of the contract, because that was a point which should be left to those to whom it was by law confided. The dangers of climate, and the dearness of provision, rendered labor higher at Mobile than in the State of New York. The power of appropriation, he contended, was the great moral power of this House, and he differed entirely from the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. SMYTH) in respect to the expediency of making appropriations specific. He also contended it was expedient to prevent the competition of the various parts of the Union, which would bring odium and charge of partiality upon the Executive officers. Mr. SMYTH, of Virginia, replied, and contended that it was improper for the Government to refuse to fulfil the contract, for if the contractors Mr. ALEXANDER SMYTH thought the gentleman had violated the contract by non-fulfilment on the from Tennessee (Mr. CoCKE,) was mistaken in one hand, the Government had equally violated the facts, and that he had been misled by the simi- it by withholding the stipulated payments on the larity of sums to suppose that a transfer had been other. He also animadverted upon the other topmade of the appropriation for Mobile Point. Mr. ics connected with the discussion. He expressed S. contended that it was incorrect policy to make his willingness even to borrow money for fortifispecific appropriations to fortifications by name. cations, if necessity required it. For institutions Á sum should be designated by Congress for the of a perishable nature, he was not willing to make general object, and the distribution of it should be a charge upon posterity; but for imperishable fortileft to the Executive Department, and on that de-fications, built of granite, and calculated to last partment the responsibility should rest, for its correct and faithful disbursement and application. In reference to the alleged transfer, he remarked that the Secretary of War was absent at the time the fiscal arrangement was entered into-that it was done by the President of the United States, the Secretary of the Treasury, and the Chief of the Engineer department. The Secretary of War, said he, probably approved of it subsequently, but the responsibility, whatever it was, seemed to rest upon the President; but the money he believed was fairly expended in the public service, and in pursuance of the act of Congress. Mr. TRACY was in favor of the amendment, on the ground that it was equivalent to an expression of the intention of the House to discontinue the contract for building the fortification at Mobile Point; from which contract he contended the United States was fairly absolved, for the work was to have been completed in 1821 by the terms of it. He also adverted to the items of the contract, which he thought fully proved that the contract was disadvantageous to the Government, and he was unwilling to continue it further than a legal liability imposed an obligation. Mr. SMITH, of Maryland, rose to correct what he thought was an error of the gentleman from for eternity, he did not feel that it would be unjust to tax posterity, as they, as well as the present generation, were to participate in the benefits and security they may afford. The subject was further discussed by Messrs. TRACY, F. JOHNSON, WILLIAMS, of North Carolina, and HARDIN, and opposed by Messrs. H. NELSON, and Cook, when the question was taken, and the amendment was adopted. Mr. PLUMER, of New Hampshire, moved to fill the blank with the sum of $30,000 instead of $50,000, which motion was supported by the mover and Mr. CoсKE, and opposed by Messrs. MOORE, of Alabama, JOHNSTON, of Louisiana, and SMITH, of Maryland, when the question was taken thereon, and carried without a division. After the appropriation for fortifications at the Rigolets, and Chef Menteur, had been carried, Mr. SERGEANT moved to insert a clause to make an appropriation of $19,000, to complete the Arsenal at Frankfort, Pennsylvania. The motion was supported by the mover, and opposed by Mr. SMITH, of Maryland, but before any question was taken thereon, the Committee rose and reported progress, and obtained leave to sit again. The House adjourned. |