Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

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