Newspaper Page Text
COMO R ESSIOW AI..
IN SENATE,
Monday, February G, 1837.
Mr. MORRIS having presented a petition
from abolitionists in Ohio, which liesnid lie had
received during the preceding debate; and hav-
inrr moved that it be received, read, and referred,
with instructions to the committee to report on
various points which he specified. _
Mr. WHITE remarked that the two petitions
from Tennessee, which Mr. Morris had before
prison led, did riot originate in t uil ** uito. n
one of tlicm, the word “Ohio” had been erased,
and “Tennessee” substituted; and the place in
the other was left blank, so that it might have
come from any State in the Union.
Mr. KING, of Georgia, said he barely
wished to correct an expression of the Senator
from South Carolina (Mr. Calhoun,) that there
was a material diiference between the act.on
oil the petitions al lids session and the last. A
great proportion cf the petitions at the ast ses
sion were laid on the table precisely in the man-
nor as had just been done on motion of Mr.
Bayard. Tbc question of reception at the last
session was not, at first, discussed at all. But
when the question on reception was taken, Mr.
K. had voted in favor of receiving the petitions,
and be should still do so if the question should
arise. lie thought the Senate ought to take a
ground on which they could stand with all parts
of the country. Southern Senators, he said,
had been accused of becoming recreant to tiie
rights of their constituents. But the reception,
maintained, was a mere matter of form, to
satisfy the constitutional scruples of some of the
Senators.
Mr. CALIIOUN said he, for one, was ex
tremely pleased with the decision of the chair,
(ihat a mere objection required a vote on the
reception of the (ictitions.) But he ought to
go further, and put the question of reception,
whether the petition were objected to or not.
According to the rule, lie said the burden of
making a motion to receive should fall on those
presenting the petitions. Mr. C. had formerly
pressed the chair twice on this point, but was
then overruled. The question was, whether
we were bound to receive the petitions by the
constitution. That question the chair had now
yielded, and had admitted that ii was in the
power of the body itself to say whether or not
the petitions should be r. c.eived.
Mr. C. again argued that, if Congress were
bound to receive petitions, they were equally
bound to refer and act upon them.
Mr. Calhoun having concluded his remarks,
Mr. SOUTHARD, after adverting to the
deep feeling which was always excited in his
mind when this subject came up for discussion,
observed, that it was a great error on the part
of Southern gentlemen not to so; mate in this
matter things which should never have been
united. Some of these petitions related to the
abolition oAblavery in the District of Columbia,
while others prayed for the prevention of what
they denominated the slave trade in that district.
The two questions were entirely different, and
ought not to be blended together. Mr. S. then
adverted to the practice of slave dealers resort
ing to this district, and making it a mart for their
traffic, in the conducting of which great a.
buses were perpetrated, liotli in the sale of slaves
who had been stolen from their masters, and
of others wlm never had been enslaved before.
Mr. S. sought no interference with that relation
of master and servant which was recognised
hv the laws of some of the States, and was pro
tected by the constitution. But, into the latter
question he was willing to look, not as a north
ern or as a southern men, but in relation to the
great principles of government and of the Fed
eral Union. In this lie was hut following the
lead of gentlemen from the South. Jt was
from them that the proposition had first come;
ami the suppression of Crimes of this kind, in
stead of aggravating tliesn evils which the
youth most (eared, would go far toward allay
ing the spirit which sought to interfere with
slavery in the Southern Slates. The abuses
he adverted to would never bo tolerated at the
South; why then should they be suffered here?
Mr. PRESTON "replied with great warmth,
and insisted that the distinct ion made by Mr.
Southard was a distinction without a difference.
He objected to all interference with the subject
in anv shape. The proposition was delusive,
and lie regretted that it had been advanced by
the Senator from New Jers -y. The South was
sore on the subject. The attacks made upon
them were violent and incessant. Their nerves
were irritated. Propositions to meddle with
the slave trade in the district were but an en
tering wedge. If Congress once tampered with
•the rights of slave-holders at all; if the subject
got the least f jolliold in the Senate, he would not
give a rusli for the rights of the S«uth. lie
complained of the imputations cast by implica
tion in these petitions on the people of the south
ms violators of the laws of God, and living in
open vice and wickedness, practising a standing
sin, corrupting their own morals, and those of
their children. He considered himself ns in
volved it! the general denunciation. The
charge was individually insulting, and was ut
terly false and calumnious, whether in its gen
eral or particularoipplication. lie denied that
the language of the petitioners was respectful
and decorous; it cast foul and false aspersions
on him and his constituents, and ought not to
be admitted into the Senate. He would not
stoop to argue the truth ol the charge; lie plea
ded to the jurisdiction; the senate had no right
to entertain it; the south would not consent to be
arraigned at this liar.
Mr. SOUTHARD defended the position he
liad taken. In llic vehemence of feeling, men
were often unable to see distinctions that were
sufficiently obvious and palpable in their cooler
moments. He appealed to the whole history of
his life to show that he had not advocated the
principles of the abolitionists. lie had east no
imputation whatever on the people of the south.
He again adverted to the course of distinguish
ed southern gentlemen in reptobaling the man
ner in which the traffic in slaves was conducted
within the District, and even to bills which had
boon introduced by them into congress for the
purpose of suppressing it. All he asked was t
that two propositions, so entirely distinct as the
abolition of slavery in the District, and the sup.
pression of crimes and enormities in the traffic
in slaves, should bo kept distinct from each oth
er. The one he would not touch, nnd had at-
ways refused to touch; but on the other lie was
prepared to act. He complained that his pro.
position should have been represented as delu
sive, and •utteily disclaimed all intention of a
gradual interference with the rights of the south.
Mr. PRES TON admitted that southern toii-
tlemcn, especially Mr. Randolph, had taken the
ground adverted to, but lie strenuously insisted
on t lie difference of circumstances. The coun
try had not then been filled with abolition prin
ciples; nnd what might then have been done
very safely, would now be dangerous in the
extreme. Nothing could be done on the sub
ject of slavery in the District that would not
immediately affect all the south. He know no
thing of the abuses to which Mr. Southard re-
terred; but lie knew how the persons, who got
up those petitions, were' skilled in dwelling
on themes of that kind and in presenting false
and exaggerated pictures, with a view to rouse
the feelings of the community, and inflame the
fanaticism which was so widely kindled. Sure
lie was that, if Mr. Randolph could now bo on
that floor, lie would be the very last man to ad-
vocate a tampering with this subject.
Mr. BAVAllD observed that it was very ap
parent that this was a:i exciting subject, and he
had made the motion to lay on the table with a
view to avoid the two questions of the right of
petition being received. The constitution, as
at first draughted uod presented to the Status,
said Nothing about the right <,f ( >etition, nor
Heed it, for tli*t right did uot depend on the con-
stitution, but must pertain, of course, to evciy
people under a representative government of
any form. But, when the constitution was re
viewed, a clause was inserted, not to confer, but
to guatgl, this right of petition. Ii did not de
clare that the people It:-.! the right to petition, but
it prohibited congress from parking any law to
prevent them from assembling and exercising
that right. Mr. B. then made sonic observa
tions on the rules of the senate in reference to
the reception of petitions, and quoted the journal
to show that, under the rule, the question of re
ception might be raised, if any member chose
to call for it. The presentation of a petition
was in itself virtually a motion that such petition
be received, and, if no objection was made; the
reception fol'owcd of course, and the petition
might bo referred or disposer! of as the senate
thought fit. But if any one objected, the ques
tion ol'-receplion must be put, and that question
was subject to bo laid upon the table. Mr. B.
concluded by moving 10 lay the question of the
reception of the petition now before the senate
upon the table. He withdrew the motion at
the request of
Mr. WEBSTER, who wished to present
some petitions with which he had been charged
on the same subject, so that the whole might be
included under one. Having presented several
petitions, he stated that the petitioners were un
doubtedly of the opinion that these ten miles
square were the common properly of tho peo
ple of the United Slates; that they had a com-
mon interest in its condition, and in the charac
ter of its legislation; and lie repeated the senti
ment which he had often before expressed, that
the prudent and expedient course would have
been to refer these petitions to the commute for
the District, and lot that committee present a
report upon them. As to the right of petition,
the gentleman from Delaware was certainly
right; nor did tho right ol reception rest on
any rules of the house; it had a deeper founda
tion in the right of citizens to address their gov
ernment on what they conceived to be grievan
ces. The right of petition, though more em
phatic in a republic, belonged to the people un
der till governments, unless, indeed, a govern
ment like that of Turkey; for even govern
ments usually denominated despotic were sup
posed in theory to be formed for the good of the
people, and to proceed from them. It was ob
viotis enough, that the relation of congress to
the people of the District was peculiar, and us
inhabitants very naturally thought that in a mat
ter which immediately concerned themselves,
it was fit that they should take the lead. Most
of the petitions referred to two subjects; one
was the total abolition of slavery in the Dis
trict, the other was the regulation of abuses
connected with it; some of which were extreme
ly offensive, to the moral sense of the communi
ty. As the subject was one of common inter
est, if a petition was decorous in its language,
it was the right of the petitioners to have it re
ceived and considered, not to have it filed away,
and a resolve immediately passed uot to cortsi-
dcr it. Such a pioccss was not in any proper
sense the receiving of the petition. The re
ceiving virtually involved some consideration,
and lie could not sec how the senate fulfilled its
duty unless this was done.
Mr. Bayard further explained the ground he
had before taken. While the people under
every representative government had a rii;lil to
petition, the legisliituic had a right to judge of
the petition when received. Sup;-use a petiiiou
should bo presented to congress, praying them
to pass a resolution that there is no God, or that
the PVisideut of the United States be beheaded,
or any other request equally ext ravagant, would
the senate be obliged to entertain it? Certainly
they bad a right to exercise a sound discretion
in the case, anifthatfor this reason—11ie.se peti
tions did not possess the dignity dr authority of
having emanated from the majesty of the
whole people. It was assuming too much to
say that they spoke the voice of the people.—
They were sometimes signed bv several thou
sand petitioners; but what was this in compari
son to the people of the United Slates? If the
whole people spoke, congress would have no
discretion ir the matter.
Mr. CUTHBERT said that he had enter
tained the hope that the firs! decision in refer
ence to these petitions would have been the ln-ft.
He had hoped that they would all have been
suffered to accumulate and that one decision
would have settled the whole, lie regretted to
find that there was a corps tie reserve; that
some had been kept back by the gentleman from
Massachusetts, in the same manner as had been
done by him last year.
Mr. Webster explained, and observed that he
had not been in his seat when the petitions had
been presented in the morning.
Mr. Cuthbert said that so far then he with
drew the charge, but he proceeded to refer to
certain resolutions which had beet) adopted in
Boston, in 1819, in w hich that gentleman had
been concerned: one of which declared that
congress had authority to act on the subject of
slavery in the District of Columbia; and the
other, that congress had power to regulate the
transfer of slaves from one State to another.—
He adduced this to show that propositions on
this subject did not stand insulated, but ns fast
ns one was yielded another was pressed oil.—
Was it surprising that the indignation of the
South should bo raised to t.'ie highest pitch on
witnessing the commencement of a course
which was to end in the ruin of the c -untry?—
It was alleged, indeed, that there were some
points on which congress might act without
leading to that train of evils so justly appre
hended by tho people of the South. But he
appealed to every Southern senator to say
whether Congress could touch the smallest mile
connected with the entire subject without send
ing a thrill of dread and horror through all the
South. All who understand the human heart
must be aware that when a great and widely
diffused scheme of alleged improvement was oil
foot, the smallest acquisition could not be made
without exciting a hope among i’s advocates of
final success. The very sm illest concession by
this body in reference to slavery would iintru;,
diately be mado to ring through tho Union; yes,
through the world, as giving ground to expect
that the abolitionists would at last gain all that
they sought. The cry would bo raised, we
gain one point today, and another tomorrow;
and the slaveholders concede one tiling after a-
nothcr, until the great, the long-sought, the in
appreciable benefit of liberating the last slave
will have been accomplished. And were gen
tlemen prepared to sow that seed, tire harvest
of which must be universal blood and devasta
tion?
Mr. Cuthbert took another view. Since the
agitation of the abolition doctrine, there had
been established u medium of intercourse with
the slaves of the South, through which they
were made to understand whatever is done in
congress. Take one step in this matter, and
could any one satisfy the slaves that that step
would be the last? It was impossible. The
least tampering with the subject would excite
apprehensions in the South which nothing could
allay; would raise hopes at the North which noth-
ing could quench, and would excite in the body of
the slaves themselves expectations which must
render them restless nnd discontented. He
concluded by urging a total abstinence from
all interference with the subject.
Mr. WEBSTER, after referring to what
had been said ns to keeping back petitions, and
observing that he presumed senators were at
liberty tochoo.se their own time for attending to
their own matters, and regulating themselves
by their views ol the convenience of the senate
and the despatch of public business, went on to
speak of the resolutions to which Mr. Cuthbert
had referred. He had no recollection of the
circumstance alluded to, or of what the resolu.
tions contained; but there was not in his mind
a particle of doubt that congress had an unques
tionable right to regulate the subject of slavery
in flier District of Columbia, simply because
they constituted the exclusive legislature of the
District. It appeared to him little she t of an
absurdity to think that there were certain sub
jects which must ho tied up from all legislation.
Aud, ns to the other point, ^.c right of rcgulat-
iugtiie transfer of slaves from one State to an
other, lie did not know that he entertaiuyd.nny
doubt, because the constitution gave congress
the right to regulate trade and commerce be
tween the Stales. Trade in what? In what
ever was the subject of commerce nnd owner
ship. If slaves were the subjects of owner
ship, then trade in them between tho Slates was
subject to the regulation of congress. But
while he held this opinion, he had expressed
ftone on the one side or the other as to the m li
ter of expediency. He thought that ought to
be discussed by those who were most concern
ed in it. A strong appeal had been made by
the s nator from South Carolina (Mr. Calhoun)
on the morukind religious aspect of this subject.
The petitioners, he believed, felt fully aware of
the extent of those considerations; but while lie
held the right of congress to act on these peti- -
tions, he thought the more prudent course would
be simply to relcr them; and so as to the other
subject, far be it from him to say that it was ex
pedient for congress to interfere, and to attempt
to regulate the commerce in slaves between tho
Slates. It .may have been discussed so far as
related to the passage of laws to prevent slaves
from rutinin" away, or restore them when they
iiad.
[Mr. Southard was here understood to say
that luw» had repeatedly been passed on that
subject.]
Mr. W. then asked whether, instead of ex
hibiting so much indignation thnt lie should in
1319 have had any thing to do iu carry ing such
resolutions as hail boon referred to, it would not
have been better to show that the constitution,
in speaking of trade and commerce between the
States, did not mean to include staves? While
so much pains were exhibited to resist informa
tion on one side, there sliou d not be pains to
misrepresent on the other. To maintain the
light of congress was one thing, to hold the
expediency of exercising it was another,
Mr. CU J HBER l replied, and said that the
country now knew what were the sentiments of
the gentleman from Massachusetts, and it would
be impossible for him to give any other cast to
them than an encouragement to legislation on
the subject of slavery. The time and tiie cir.
cumstanccs under which the resolutions were
adopted rendered this impossible. They had
been passed in 1819, just after tho issue of the
Missouri question; taken in connexion with the
time nnd the circumstances, the doctrines in
the resolutions were calculated to revolt the
whole Southern States, nay, to revolt the entire
Union.
Mr. WEBSTER called upon the senator to
remember that lie had not admitted that the
doctrines referred to were contained in those
resolutions.
Mr. KING, of Georgia, made a few re
marks, the object of which was to show that the
right of petition in the people was perfcc'ly
compatible with tiie rules of congress as to the
consideration of petitions when presented. In
illustration of which position lie referred to a
petition recently presented by the authors of
Great Britain on the subject of copyright.—
There was no obligation on the part of con-
gress to receive memorials; it was wholly dis
cretionary; and so it might be in a multitude
of other cases. On the general subject, all the
South were perfectly agreed. Whatever he
himself possessed of earthly good was connect
ed with the tenure of slave property, and ho
perfectly agreed with the gentleman from South
Carolina (Mr. Calhoun) us to any interference
wiili it.
(7b be concluded In our tint.)
HOUSE OF REl’RESENTATIVES.
February 11.
ABOLITION.
Mr. Lane moved a re-conskleral ion of the
vote by which the Resolution declining,
“That any member who shall hereafter
present arty Petitions from slaves, of tills
Union, ought to be considered regardless
of the feelings of the House, the rights of
the Southern States, and unfriendly to
the Union,” was yesterday rejected.
The consideration of this motion was
posponed until this day, and the question
thereon coming up, the House agreed to re
consider. Acas, la!). Nays, 45.
Mr. Taylor, of New-York, submitted
the following:
Resolved, That slaves do not possess the
right ol’Petition, secured to the people of
lire United States, by the Constitution.
Mr. Pickens rose, to put himself rightbe-
lore the country, in the course he was
found to adopt, and in that, he was not ac
tuated by any factious feeling. He con
sidered the vote rejecting the Resolution
note to be rc-considcred, as being a negative
pregnant, politically and truly an expo
nent of the votes of the constituents of the
majority. He left to those who so acted,
the resposibility of setting themselves
right. He would not aid them in pro
ducing any false impression; and he cal
led on his Southern brethren, not to incur
that deep responsibility. They were on
the brink of a precipice, with ruin gaping
beneath their feet; and if they were to be
on a volcano, let them at least know it,
and be warned by its smoke, and then
they could prepare for the worst. He
would not vote at all; he considered this an
evasion of the Resolution, and in conclu
sion, he would say, that the people he rc-
fre
presented, were prepared to meet the
issue tr.nglc reil them by Congress. He
spoke lor those whom he knew could not
disdain a soldier’s grave, in the attempt
to transmit to their posterity, their glorious
inheritance.
Dir. Ingersoll proposed an amendment,
to strike out all after Resolved, and insert
the following. It was necessary to tran
quillize the country, and the only way to
do so, was to meet the question.
Whereas, an inquiry was propounded
Ii} - the member from Massachusetts, as to
the Petition from slaves being within the
scope of a Resolution, &c.
Resolved, That the House cannot re
ceive such Petitions, with a due regard to
our own dignity, the rights of a large class
of our citizens of the South and West, aud
the Constitution of the United States.
Mr. Vanderpoel congratulated the
House and the count ry, that the subject
was assuming a shape, in which it would
have the support of a large majority. He
was astonished at the course taken by Mr.
P., that lie should charge the former vote
as a lair exponent, when lion, mombers
declared they voted in the majority, be
cause, censure on the motives of the mem
ber from Massachusetts was implied. He
always went on this question with the
South, except on their reception, but he
was not and could not be influenced by
anything said. He said, he (Mr. P.) was
for harsh measures, and this stalled the
ranks of the abolitionists. This battle
was to be fought in the North, and he im
plored him to cease from the use of threats
which made that battle almost impossible
to gain.
ston,' 4 of Louisiana, said, that'
the moment t&6 House; voted that
slave* had theVighUof petition, be should
consider the'Union virtually dissolved,
and he sluihld feel it his dutv to retire
from the hnTl; he liked the strongest ex
pression, and proposed to add to Mr- Iu-
gersoll’s amendment, “And endangering
the Union.”
Mr. Anthony hoped his colleague would
not accept the suggestion. There was no
danger in any case to the Union.
Mr. Ingersoll declined it.
Mr. Patton would insist, that any sub
stitute offered for the original Resolution,
should not be less strong.
Mr. Sutherland concurred in the views
of Mr. Vanderpoel, deprecating the press
ing on tho North unnecessary agitation,
and particularly menaces as to. the disso
lution-of the Union.
Mr. W. Thompson said, as others were
interested he could not accept the sub
stitute offered by Mr. Ingersoll, but
which he admitted, was sincerely proffer
ed, and covered the whole ground, he
would vote for it himself, ancl was glad
there was an opportunity given to the
House, to reverse a vole, which would
have been productive of much mischief to
the South. He trusted that the Resolu
tion now before them, would ensure all
the conciliation which was so much de
sired.
Dir. Wise felt he had long been laboring
in vain, he meant to do so no longer, leav
ing to the majority who had the power to
act <as they chose, the gentlemen from the
North had brought this matter upon them,
lie objected to the Preamble, ajyt was
the Speaker who put the inquiry to the
House—instead of declining it—and not
the member from Massachusetts.
The preamble* ami rrst»luiion offered by Mr. Ingersoll,
were adopted by Mr. Taylor, as a substitute for his propor
tion, and were agreed to by larg.* majorities.
Wednesday, February 15.
R. DI.* WHITNEY’S CASE.
Dir. Ghobon then moved that the Ser-
geant-at-arms be directed to bring Reu
ben DI. Whitney to the bar of the House.
Dir. Briggssaid he had a motion to make
in reference to the subject, and he wished
to know if it could be made then, or after
the respondent was brought to tho bar.
The Chair decided that the accused
must be brouglnto the bar.
The motion to that effect was then
agreed to.
DR. Whitney then appeared, and was
conducted to tin place assigned him by
the Sergeant-at-a ins, accompanied by his
counsel, Walter Jones, and Francis S.
Key, Esq’rs.
The Speaker tuen addressed the res
pondent as follows:
Reuben M. Whitney: You stand charg
ed before this House with an alleged con
tempt of this IIous*, in having perempto
rily refused to give evidence in obedience
to a summons duly issued by a committee
of this House, which committee had, by an
order of the House, power to send for per
sons and papers.
You will say whether you arc ready to
proceed to trial in the mode prescribed
by the order of the House, of which you
have been informed; or whether you have
any request to make of the House before
you are put upon your trial. Ifyou have,
it will now be received, and considered
by the House.
Mr. Whitney said, Mr. Speaker, T am
now ready to proceed to trial, sir.
DIr. Briggs then submitted the follow
ing proposition:
Whereas, by the 11th rule of this House,
all acts, addresses, and joint resolutions,
shall be signed by the Speaker; and all
writs, warrants, and subpoenas issued by
order of the House, shall Ire under his
hand and seal, attested by the Clerk.
And whereas the subpoena, by virtue
of which It. DI. Whitney, now in custody
of the Scrgeant-at-arms of the House, by
order of the House, for an alleged con
tempt for refusing to appearand give tes
timony before one of the select commit
tees ol the House, was not under the hand
and seal of the Speaker, and attested bv
the Clerk, but signed bv the chairman of
the select committee. Therefore,
Rcsdhcd, That the refusal of R. DI.
Whitney to appear and testify before said
committee, was not a contempt of aliis
House.
Resolved, That the said Whitney be forth
with discharged from the custody of this
House.
Alter some remarks from DIcssrs.
Briggs, Gholson, Claiborne of Mississippi,
Ycli, and DIann of New York.
DIr. Vanderpoel moved to lay the pro
position on the tabic, and asked for the
yeas and nays, which were ordered, and
were—yeas 157, nays 35.
So the proportion ol DIr. Briggs was
laid on the table.
Mr. Hardin then submitted a motion
embracing a series of questions he design
ed to have propounded to the respondent.
DIr. Vanderpoel raised the point of or
der, that the order of the House, adopted
on DIonday, took precedence, and must
first be acted on.
The Chair ruled in support of the point
raised by DIr. V.
DIr. Vanderpoel moved that the House
proceed to the execution of that order;
agreed to.
The Speaker then addressed the res
pondent and informed him that, by an or
der of the House, he was then permitted
to examine witnesses before the House,
in relation to the alleged contempt against
him, and that he could then proceed to do
so. The Speaker further informed him,
that the witnesses he had named had been
summoned.
DIr. Key (one of the counsel) requested
that the witnesses might be qualilied and
sworn.
The following gentlemen, members of
the House, were then called to the Speak
ers chair and qualified: the lion. Joshua
DIartin, John Fairfield, R. H. Gillet, Thos.
H. Hamer.
Mr. Key then called the Hon. John
Fairfield of DIaine, and the following in
terrogatory, in writing, was then read by
the Clerk:
“Please state all the circumstances at
tending the dispute and disorder which
occurred before the select committee,
wbereofMr. Garland is chairman, on Wed
nesday, the —, and state, particular!}*,
all that was said or done by DIcssrs. Wise
and Peyton, as members of said commit
tee, and all that passed on said occasion.”
DIr. Calhoun, of Kentucky took an ex-,
ception to tliis question, and went into an
jqBjUmenton the objections.
Key replied; and the Speaker lin
ing about to propound the objection to the
House, under the order which said that
only the member objecting to any ques
tion, and the counsel of the accused, should
address the House, and that the question
should be taken without further -debate;
when
DIr. Bell raised the point of order, that,
the gentleman objecting should have the
privilege of replying.
The Chair referred to the limitation
of the order, and adverted to the prece
dents in Houston’s case, which made a-
gainst the point raised by DIr. Bell.
Mr. Bell then took an appeal from the
decision of the Chair.
Mr. Milligan asked for the yeas and
nays, which were ordered, anti were—
yeas, 94, nays 103.
_ So the House decided, according to the
terms of its previous order, that the gen
tleman objecting and the counsel of the
accused could only be heard on an objec
tion to a question.
The question then recurred on the ob
jection to the interrogatory raised by DIr.
Calhoon, (on whose call the yeas and nays
had been ordered,) and it was decided in
the affirmative—yeas 132, nays 50.
So the House determined that the in
terrogatory should be put.
DIr. Chambers, of Kentucky, then sent
to the Chair a resolution that* the further
examination of witnesses be suspended
until the accused be examined touching
bis contempt ol the House; and that the
Committee appointed to examine witnes
ses proceed to examine him accordingly.
The Chair decided this tube out of or
der at this time, because the House had
passed an order that the accused be now
permitted to exilnine witnesses, and a
witness was now before the House, and
an interrogatory propounded to him.
DIr. Chambers appealed from this de
cision; and after a few remarks in sup
port of his appeal,
Mr. Boon moved to lay the appeal on
the table.
DIr. Chambers called for the yeas and
nays which were ordered, and were—
yeas 104, nays 57.
So the appeal was laid on the table.
The testimony of DIr. Fairfield in writ
ing in answer to the above interrogatory,
was soon after read to the House, as fol
lows :
At the commencement of the affair al
luded loin the question, the different mem
bers of the committee were situated as
follows, as near as I can recollect; DIr.
Whitney sat at a small table in the cor
ner of the room, near the fireplace; DIr.
Peyton, DIr. Garland, Mr. Hamer, and Mr.
Gillctt, sat at a long table placed trans-
versly in front of the fire, DIr. Hamer at
the end nearest DIr. Whitney, DIr. Gillet
at the opposite end, and DIr. Garland and
DIr. Peyton in front, the latter nearest to
DIr. Whitney, and with his back turned,
or partially so, towards him—one propos
ing interrogatories, and the other answer
ing in writing, the questions and answers
being handed to the chairman, and by him
read to the committee. DIr. Wise, Mr.
DIartin, and myself were sitting on a sofa
at the side of the fireplace opposite DIr.
Whitney. DIr. Pierce and DIr. Johnson
were not present.
When the chairman read the answer of
DR. Whitney to the interrogatory of DIr.
Peyton, both of which have been publish
ed, tiie latter turned towards Mr. Gar
land without arising from his seat, and
said: “DIr. Chairman, I wish you to in
form this witness that be is not to insult
me in his answers, if he does, God damn
him, l will take his life upon the spot.”
He then rose and turned towards DIr.
Whitney, and said: “I want you to un
derstand, sir, that I claim no protection
from the Constitution, and ii" you insult
me, you damned dog, I will take your
life.” Mr. Wise rose and advanced to
the sale of DIr. Peyton, and addressing
himself to Mr. Whitney, said: “Yes, this
damned insolence is insufferable.” DIr.
Garland and other members of the com
mittee were, during this time, endeavor
ing to preserve order, and to prevent an
affray. DIr. Peyton turned from DIr. Whit
ney, and, standing with his back to the
fire, said, by way of soliloquy, or without
addressing himself to any one in particu
lar, “hitherto I have treated him with
marked respect—damn him—I have treat
ed him just as if he had been a gentleman;
be thus insulted by a damn’d thief and
robber! damn him, he shan’t do it.” While
uttering the last words of this sentence,
lie became apparent!}*, more excited, and
turned toward DIr. Whitney, who rose
and said he claimed the protection of the
committee while he was before it; when
DIr. Peyton said, “God damn you, you
shan’t speak—you shan’t say- a word
while you are in this room; ifyou do I will
put you to death,” and made towards him,
at the same time putting his hand in his
bosom. DIr. Wise, who had previously
gone round the long table, and placed
himself near DR. Whitney*, here interpos
ed; and he, with DIr. Garland, who was
standing between DIr. Peyton anti DIr.
Whitney, and DIr. DIartin, who was by
his side, endeavored to calm him, and to
prevent Ins going towards. DIr. Whitney.
DIr. Wise said, “Don’t Peyton; damn him,
he is not worth your notice,” or words to
that ellect. Judge Martin here moved
that the examination of the witness be sus
pended. DIr. Hamer opposed it; and ad
dressing himself to the chairman, went on
to make some remarks, but I do not dis
tinctly recollect them.
DIr. Peyton then resumed his scat, and
turned towards DIr. Whitney, and said:
“Damn him, his eyes are on rne. God
damn him, he is looking at me—hesha’n’t
do it—he sha’n’t look at me!” DIr. Ha
mer made some further remarks, when
Mr. Garland suggested that the witness
should retire to another room, which he
did. Mr. Peyton then apologized to the
committee, and DIr. Hamer offered the
resolution which has been published; on
the passage of which, DIr. Whitney was
recalled, and the resolution was commu
nicated by the chairman. DIr. Whitney
said that if he had done any* thing which
the committee considered disrespectful,
he regretted it, and apologized for it. An
other interrogatory* was proposed to him,
which he answered; and then the com*
jnittee rose.
A series of other interrogatories were
also propounded through the Chair to this
witness; the answers to which, with the
questions thertisclves, and p. synopsis of
the objections raised to them, will be pub
lished as soon as they can .be prepared lor
the press.
The examination of the first, witness
(the Hon. Mr. Fairfield) was continued np
to the hour of six o’clock; when,
On motion of DIr. Calhoon,
The House adjourned.
From the Columbus Enquirer.
Eumjdciii, Stewart Co. Cla. }
February 9, 1837. $
DIcssrs. Editors—For the information
of the public, and to prevent my recent
act with the Indians from being misun
derstood, you will please publish the fid-
lowing:
On Sunday, 29th January, I received
by express, intelligence of the battle, be
tween Gen. Win. Wellborn and a party
of hostile Indians, in which I was called
upon by the citizens of Alabama, to aid
in putting down further hostilities. 1 im
mediately called upon the citizens to as
semble, and organise a company which
was done, and the company honored ine
with the command, assisted by Lieut.
Thos. J. Stell and Jno. D. Pitts. Ar
rangements were made for subsistence,
and on Wednesday 1st inst. the compa
ny crossed the Chattahoochee River at
Florence, and marched to the residence
of the Rev. J. E. Glenn, whom I found in
a Fort. Thursday the 2d, I march thro’
t he swamps of Cowiga, to Geu.Wellborn’s
quarters, at Battle’s plantation, and learn
ed that he had marched to Martin’s, near
itis buttle ground, at which place I joined
the companies, of Gen. W. and Captain
Morris of Franklin, Gu. Theline of march
was taken up for the battle ground, and
from its peculiar location, I must add,
that nothing but the military skill and bra
very which has ever characterised Gen.
W., caused him to escape without tho
loss of every man, lie not having sufficient
force to break their lines. We continued
to scout until near sunset, and discovered
a fresh pony track, coming in a direction
to the battle ground, and soon discovered
that we had been seen, and the course of
the poney had changed about from whence
itcame. We had not proceeded far, when
we discovered a large number of foot
tracks, lately* made, which like the ponfv,
faced about. It soon became too dark to
trail them, and we encamped. Next,
morning, we pursued the trail, which led
in a direction lor the supposed friendly
camp of Indians, on Swamp Creek, in
charge of Lieut. Sloan, of the U. S. Army*.
We followed them about twelve miles,
until all were satisfied that they had ei
ther gone into the camp, or were lurking
around it to screen themselves from that
punishment which they justly* merited. A
council of officers was called, and deter
mined to go to the camp, and, if possible,
arrest the offenders, and remove the camp
from the dense swamps which surrounds
it. The march was continued to Stones,
Creek Stand, on the Federal Road, at
which place we encamped, seven miles
from »l:e Indian Camp. We sent a mes
sage to Lieut. Sloan to visit our camp,
which he did, accompanied by three In
dians and a negro interpreter. In coun
cil, lie informed us that there was then
about sixty warriors in his camp, that 42
who refused to give up their arms, had
quit the camp, and they had not returned
to his knowledge. We informed him of
the course of the trail, and our earnest be
lief that the Indians who had fought Gen.
Wellborn were at, or near the camp, and
consulted him, the Lieut., upon the impor
tant necessity of removing tiie camp to
some more elevated location whereby all
communication with hostile and supposed
friendly Indians, might be cutoff, to which
he most strenuously objected, saying he
had every* confidence in those at his camp
and knew them to be friendly and harm
less, and from his opposition, Gen. W.
thought best to take two of the Indians
aful repair to his quarters at Battle’s plan
tation. My company, anil the company
of Capt. DIorris, wtts joined this evening
by a company of citizen soldiers of Russell
county*, Ala. under the command of capt.
Park, who, with a loud voice, said the
camp ol Indians under its present manage
ment, was much to the annoyance and
greatly excited the fears of the citizens.
A council of officers was called,aril agreed
to visit the camp next mom ing nnd disarm
and remove the Indians. A motion was
made and agreed to, to organise the three
companies into a battalion, after which I
was called to the command.
Next day, I ordered a march to the
camp, and having learned the locality, I
divided my battalion so as to surround
the camp, and move the Indians to Lieut.
Sloans’ quarters, with orders to each offi
cer to ellect the work in a manner least
calculated to excite their fears and pre
vent their escape, and the result was fa
vorable—some few attempted to take the
swamp but were arrested, anil a general
march from all quarters to the centre.
The officer in charge seemed much ex
cited, and remonstrated against the course
pursued, which was received by the citi
zens, as no mark of his friendship towards
them.
I ordered a search for arms and am mu
nition, and notwithstanding the report of
their being disarmed, 1 found upwards
of forty guns, in the possession of Indians,
and a good supply of ammunition, all of
which, together with about 30 guns, in
possession of Lieut. Sloan, was brought
to my quarters, spiked, flints taken out,
anil put under guard. The camp was
surrounded until next morning, when I
assembled the warriors and explained
to them the object was to keep them mulct
guard until they were removed to Arkan
sas; and notwithstanding "the report ofLt.
Sloan, saying there was but GO warriors at
his camp, I marched 92 efiective men and
boys, besides leaving eight or ten aged and
infirm men, who were not able to stand
the travel. I moved them and their arms
to Capt. Young’s camp on the Tuskegee
Road, at which place I left them, iu charge
of Capts. DIorris and Parke.
I immediately repaired to Fort Mitchell
and informed Capt. Page of what had
been done, and whatever may be the
feelings of other officers towards me, who
have the management of Indians, I am
happy to say*, that Capt. Page approved
of my act.
The course 1 have taken, has but obey
ed the voice of a sufferin'.
tige ui a suuermg cotnnm n i tv
ana shou lathe warriors return fror **■
rida to our borders, w ith privilege to
Flo
through the country in arms, ff lc
part
ii j ... UHU.N, inc R
voice will be heard, aad nothing -short
their being immediately disarmed :u d
speedy removal, will quiet the fears ay
restrain the movements of that sufft-rj
community. »
HENRY W. JERNIGAN,
Major Com. Volunteers.
From the Washington City Globe.
The opinion of the President on that iian
the proceeding of tho Court of Inquiry, n 0w •
ting at Frederick, which relates to the damn ^
against the Creek Indians, is given below. tP
proceedings of the court, in respect to tho r ?
ure of the campaigns under Generals G-
and Scott, against the Seminoles, so fa, a 5 ln **
gar-Js the case of Major General Scott, have i"
so been submitted to the President; but wo Un "
dersiand that in consequence of the necess.-
connexion between tho casesof the two comma
dors, the President has suspended his o.\amin *
tion of the proceedings in respect to Maj.
Scott, until he shall have received the jiroceed*
ingsin the case of Maj. Gen. Gainus, when tl 10
whole subject will be taken up and disposed „(■
OFFICIAL.
OPINION OF THE PRESIDENT
On the proceedings of the Court of Inquiry or
dered to Investigate the Causes' of U le ,\ (] j
in the Campaign against the ('reek Indians.
The President has carcfttlfvexamined tho nr ’
ceedings of the Court of Inquiry recently
at the city of Frederick, by virtue of orders
No. 65 and 68, so far as tiie same relate to the
causes of the delay in opening and prosicutinw
the campaign in Georgia and Alabama, against
the hostile Creek Indians, in the year 1336; and
has maturely considered the opinion of the court
on this part of ihe subject referred to it.
The order constituting the court directs it
among other things, “to inquire and examine in-’
to the causes of the delay in opening and prose,
cut ing the campaign in Georgia and Alabama
against the hostile Creek Indians, in the year
1836, and into every subject connected with ths
military operations in die campaign aforesaid-
and after fully investigating the same, to report
the facts, together with its opinion on the whole
subject, for the information of the President.”
It appears, from the proceedings, that after
the testimony of nine witnesses had been receiv
ed by the court, and after more than one linn,
dred documents, bearing on the subject, had al
so been produced in evidence, and after Major
General Scott had addressed the court on the
subject, tho court proceeded to pronounce iu
opinion, as follows:
“Upon a careful examination of the abun.
dant testimony taken in the foregoing case, ths
court is of opinion that no delay, which it was
practicable to have avoided, was made by Ma.
jor General Scott in opening the campaign a-
gainst the Creek Indians. Oil the contrary, it
appears that he took the earliest measures to
provide arms, munitions, and provisions for his
forces, who were found almost wholly destitute;
and as soon as arms could be put into the hands
of the volunteers, they were, in succession, de-
tached and placed in position, to prevent tha
enemy from retiring upon Florida, and wheats
they could move against the main body of the
enemy, as suou as equipped for offensive ojier*.
tions.
“From the testimony of die Governor or
Georgia, of Major General Sanford, comman
der of the Georgia volunteers, and many other
witnesses of high rank and standing, who wers
acquainted with the topography of the country,
and the position and strength of the enemy, ths
court is of opinion that the plan of campaign a.
dopted by Major General Scott, was well calcu
lated to lead to successful results, and tiiafit was
prosccu'cd by him, as far as practicable, with
zeal and ability, until recalled from the com
mand, Upon representations made by Major
General Jesup, his second in command, from
Fort Mitchell, in c letter bearing date the 2Uih
of June, 1830, addressed to F. I*. Blair, Esq.
at Washihgton, marked “private,” containing
a request that it be shown to the president,
which letter was exposed and brought to light
by the dignified and magnanimous act of ths
president, in causing it to be placed on file in
the Department of War, as an official docu.
meet, and which forms part of these proceed,
ings, (see document No. 214.) Conduct so ex.
iraordinary and inexplicable on tiie pai l of -Ma
jor General Jesup, in reference to the charac
ter of said letter, should, in the opinion of tha
court, be investigated.”
The foregoing opinion is not accompanied by
any report of f.cis in the case, as riquircti
by the order cou.-tiutting the court; on the con
trary, tiie facts are left to be gathered from lint
mass of oia.l and documentary evidence con
tained in the proceedings; and thus a most im
portant part of the duty ns-ign-d to the court
remains unexecuted. Had the court stated the
facts of the case, as established to its satisfac
tion by the evidence before it, the president on
comparing such state of facts found by the court,
with its opinion, would have distinctly under
stood the views entertained by the court in in
spect to the degree of promptitude and fciitr??
which ought to bo displayed in a campaign »•
gains'. Indians—a point manifestly indispensa
ble to a correct appreciation of the opinion, anJ
one which the president’s examination ol the
evidence has not supplied, inasmuch as lie mu
no means of knowing whether the conclusions
drawn by him from the evidence agree will
those of the court.
The opinion of the court is also arguments*
live, and wanting in requisite piccision; inas
much as it states that “no delay, which it test
practicable to hare avoided, was made by Major
General IScott, in opening the campaign ngnM*
the Crock Indians, &c. iVe.;” thus leaving i 11,1
be inferred, but uot distinctly finding, that there
was some delay, and that it was made bysoinu
|>crson other than Major General Scott; without
specifying in what such delay consisted, " liC ' n
it occurred, how long it continued, nor l>J
whom it was occasioned. Had the court lbu:d
a state of facts as required by the order cub*
stituting it, the uncertainty tfbw existing in'-l ,u
part of the opinion would have been obviated,
and the justice of the opinion itself readily «*•
tennined.
That part of the opinion of the court
which
animadverts on the letter addressed by Muj" r
General Jesup to F. 1*. Blair, Esq- liea r,n J
date the'JUtli of June, 1836, and which present*
the same as a subject demanding mve»iig;i- IUil >
appears to the president to bo wholly unauthotj
ized hv the order constituting the court, *n
quiry
iiicli its jurisdiction was confined toanjn*
' into the causes of the delay in i>;x.*mu®
anil prosecuting the campaign against the t"**’
tile Creeks, and into such subjects as were c* -
nectcd with the military opci aliens in that rt®*
paign. Bhe causes of the recall of Dlnj. Gen-
Scott from the command, and the propriety ®
impropriety of the conduct of Gen. J ( ‘ SI 'P 1
writing the letter referred to, were not sU '
ted to the court as subjects of inquiry,
court itself appears to have been of this opmtot^
inasmuch as no notice was given to Gen.
of the pendency of the proceedings, nor had
any opportunity to cross examine and interro
gate the witnesses, nor to be heard in rL ‘ s i 1 *^
to his conduct in the matter remarked oa ,
the court. ,
For the several reasons above assigned, 1,1
President disapproves the opinion ofthc. c°u t
and remits to it tiie proceedings in question, 1
the end that the court may resume tho considers
tion of the evidence: and fiom the same, a
from such further evidence as shall bo taken, l 1
take In
case the court shall deem it necessary to t
with
ther evidence,) may ascertain and reports,
distinctness and m coision—especially as tutn y *>