Newspaper Page Text
Volume IV.I \V Fn\r v tm a v
" J ' u r, ODA Y, avu.arv 1-, 1802. fNo. 15/..
__ _____ ' ,iE,>7r ,Snul! -WT-TO sIN > 7UIDR
GEORGIA. LOUISVILLE :_Pdbli(hrd every WcdnHday. by A.VHKObE I»A,Y & JAMES HI.LV, Pr ntm to Uu Eli
3 o iars pei ann.. but bays, Anicksot Intelligence Advcitil'eineiUf, &c. itc. ate lhanklally received,
an tRI.\ 1 IMG in all iis variety, is execut'd tvitli neatnels and ddpaich.
WASHINGTON CITY.
i
CONGRESS
OF THE UNITED STATES.
Bouse of Representatives.
Monday, January 4.
Mr. Gregg pre fen ted two
petitions, drawn with great jpi
lit, from certain aliens in I an
caller county, Pennfylvania,
pricing a repeal of the laws ref
pecting aliens—Referred.
The fpeaker laid before the
houfe a letter from the fecretary
of the navy, accompanying a
report of the commiffioner.s of
the fund for navy penfions and
half pay.
The fpeaker alfo laid before
the houfe a letter from Samuel
Dexter, late fecretary of war,
Haring that in his official cha
racter he had rented a houfe in
the city of Wafhngton for the
war office, which had been con
fumed by fire, and that he had
been lued in his perfonal capa
city by the owner of the houfe
for the lofs he had incurred.
Mr. Randolph moved that
the houfe jfhould go into a com
mittee of the whole on the Hate
ot the union, with the view of
fuhmitting three refolutions to
the committee, viz.
1. Refolved, That it is ex
pedient to^enquire whether any
aad what alterations fhould be
made in the judicial eflabliih
ment of the United States,
2. Refolved, that provifion 1
might to be made for the im
partial feledion of juries,
3. Refolved, That it is ex
pedient to- enquire, whether
any, and what reductions can !
be made in the civil expences i
of the government of the Uni- \
led States.
The houfe accordingly went
mto committee, Mr. Morris in ;
the chair.
Mr. Bayard prefumed an 1
Agreement to thefe reiblutions
in their prefent ffiape ,
meet with no oppofition. It
' Va s impoffible to determine |
V; uat ffiape thev would ultimate
ly aflbme. The judiciary fyf-
was doubtlcfs fufcepnble of
Amendment, and if any proper
Amendments fhould bepropofed,
be would concur in their adop
tion. ‘W ith refped to the fe- i
c °nd rcfolution, though he did I
know that there was any
Aeceffity for altering the mode i
At prefent p radii led of fcled.ng 1
juries, having not heard of any ,
c °mplaints under it, yet as the j
Moiution only led to an enquiry !
in to the fubjed, he would not !
objed.
V ith regard to the lad refo- 1
THE LOUISVILLE GAZETTE;
and
REPUBLICAN TRUMPET.
lurion, it was one in which we
nn 11 all concur. The objtd,
if attainable, would be extreme
ly grateful to all of us.
1 he three refolutions were
agreed to without a divifion.
'The committee role, and re
porte:d the refolutions.
On the report being taken
up? Mr. Randolph moved, that
the confideration of the two
fitffi refolutions be poftponed
.till the third Monday of Janu
ary.
Mr. Bayard hoped the motion
for poftponement would not
prevail. 1 he propofttions were
abftrad ones leading to enquin ,
and the foonCr they were aded
upon the better. The mode
purfued by the gentleman from
Virginia, if his fir.pie ol.jed
was to give notice, v as the lead
happy that he could have devi
led. For it gave to gentlemen
no opportunity to pn pai e them
felves, as they were totally un- ;
acquainted, in the prefent itage \
of the bufmefs, what would be
the alterations propofed. If u
committee were now appointed,
they would have time to delibe
rate on a fubjed of the utmnft
importance, one fo complicated
as to require great attention.—
When their report was made,
he would be one of thofe who
would afk from the candor of
the houfe rime to conficler it.
Mr. Randolph laid he was at
all times willing to accommodate
gentlemen ol every political
clefmption on proper oecafions.
Apprehending that his relolu
tions, if taken up in the houfe,
would cive rife to difeuffion, he
had moved for their poftpone
i ment, from a wiffi not to intcr-
I feie with the defire of the gen
-1 tlcman from Pennlylvania, and
I other gentlemen to ad on the
i apportionment bill. As his
motion for pofrponemcnt ap
j peared likely to be itlelf pro
-1 dudive of difeuffion, by which
the time of the houfe would be
exhaufted, and the means he
' ufed defeat the end he had in
view, he would withdraw his
motion.
The houfe then agreed to the
refolutions without a divifion
Mr. Randolph moved the
reference of the two firft relb
lutions to the fame committee.
He fald, in reply to the gen
tleman from Delaware, that he
made the motion refpeding ju
ries not becaufe any complaint
did at prefent exift of the exer
cife of the powers under which
, jurors were feleded, but becaufe
| they had not long lince exifted,
; and becaufe in fimilar circum
-1 fiances they might again exift.
1 He was glad the gentleman from
Delaware had no reafon to com
plain of their pref'ent abide. —
But this was no lecurity againll
the future.
Mr. Bayard faid that he had
fpoken as he had d r ne, not for
the purpole of oprcfllng any
opinion that any abufe nfpc(fling |
juneshad b; en reef ntly removed I
under the prdent Bate of things, j
but to Bate that he had nber
heard of any complaints on this
fubjeft in rl.t part of thfe union
from which he came; arid he
had particularly alluded to the
mode of designating jurors in
his Bate, which was by ballot.
But if there were complaints in
other parts of the union, he
would co-operate in any means i
that could be deviled, for rc- |
moving tii< m.
Mr. rnd e find that fin.ee the 1
gentleman from Delaware had '
introduced the fubjecl, and had !
; declared that no complaints had
1 cxißed, that juft grounds for
I them exißed, and that thev had
been expiclled in the loudeft
| tone. And he would appeal to
| the gentleman from Delaware,
! whether any man could be fafe,
j who was at the mercy of a mar
flial, who was the mere creature j
of the prefidenc.
Mr. Bayard and Mr. Kan- ;
dolph followed Mr. Smilie.
After fume further debate, it
was determined to refer the.two
firft relolutions to a committee
of 7 : and the Jail to a com
mittee of 5 members.
I he home rtfoived irfelf into j
a cornm;ttee of the whole on
ti e apportionment bill ; Mr. 1
Nichoilon in the chair.
Mi. Bayard opened rhedebare ■
bv a detailed expreftlon of ideas !
and arguments recommendatory
of the ratio of thirty thoufand.
Dr. Mitchell, Mr. Van Nefs,'
general Smith, and Mr. Lowndes
followed Mr. Bayard, and al
igned reafons in favor of the
ratio of thirty three thoufand
Mr. Van Ranfelacr fupported
the motion for Bribing out
33,000, with a view of voting
for a larger divifion.
On the queftion being taken
for Bribing out “ thirty-three,”
it was loft.—Aves, 42 —Noes,
Mr. Dennis moved tnc irfer
tion of f( nine,” in the room of
“ eight,” the number of repre
fentatives allotted to Maryland;
vhich amendment had been ren
dered neceftary by the fupple
mentary return received from
Maryland... . k -
On this motion a debate of
the utmoß defultorincfs took
place, which was twice inter
rupted by motions that the com
mittee ftiould rile and twite
loft, ami which did not dole
till s oVlock.
Much perfonal recrimination,
chiefly on the cha'ge of delay
on the one fide, and precipita
tion on flic other, was exchang
ed, which we think it our duty
entirely to fupprefs.
1 he amendment was at lafb
l agreed to, a\ es 57.
1 he committee then role and
| reported the bill as amended.
The houfe immediately toolc
up the report < f the commits e,
agreed to the amcncirru nr , and
ordered the bill to be engrafted
for a third reading to-nn rrow.
If'ednejdyy January 0
According to the order of the
j day, the th:r t reading of the
j apportionment bill, was called
j for.
On which a motion was nu !c
to recommit rite bill to a com
-1 mittee ( f the wlv le houfe.
On this motion a deb re of
length enfued, during whicli
almoft every membe r accufto
med to fpcak, took the floor.
In f AVer cf ccfiur.itwenty it was
faid that as the fubjed was ac
knowledgedly of great import
ance, deliberation eerrclpondenc
jto it ought to be had that as
I there appeared to be informali
ties in level al of the returns of
the marshal , it became the
houfe to be cireumfpect before
they tufted upon them ; that
fomc of theft* informalities re
quited leg : dative provilion ;
\ that in the cafe of Tenneftee the
return made was made bejond
the legal period ; that in the
i cafe < t Mary lard there had been
t an additional return recently
made , and in the cafe of outh
! Carolina, the marfhal did not
appear to have been fworn in
the time prtfi ribed by law.—-
That itAvas a ferious confidera
tion, whether the houfe could
leceive and aft; upon informal
returns. But that - , at anv rate,
fuch informalities might require
the interpofirion of Cong r eft fl
before the paffage of this aft.
Againji the commitment , anti,
in favour of the pafiage of the
bill, it was contended that there
cxifted no ficion to preci
pitate a decifion on this or any
other fubjeft; that, in’truth, it
had been delayed from day to
day, and even from week to
week, to allow the fulleft time
for refieftionj that after this
time had been allowed, the
difcuflion had been patiently
entered upon, and the vari us
• arguments of gentlemen had
been heard without interruption,
that a decifion had at length'
been made in favour of a parti
cular ratio; and then, and not
! till then, after force gentlemen
