Virginia Argus

FRIDAY, Jan. 14.

FILLING THE RANKS, &c.

The engrossed bill encouraging enlistments, &c. was read a third time.

Mr. Sheffey offered the following new section by way of rider to the bill.

"And be it further enacted, That the troops to be enlisted shall be limited to the defence of the territories of the United States or the frontiers thereof, or such part thereof as the President of the United States shall select and determine."

After some objections on the question of order as to the admission of a rider to a bill, being contrary to practice, and a discussion on the principle of the proposed rider, the question on its passage to a second reading was decided in the negative, as follows:

For Mr. Sheffey's motion—54
Against it—103

The bill was then put on its passage, and a warm debate ensued till 7 o'clock in the evening; when the Previous Question was required (which precludes further debate) and decided thus:

For the previous question—76
Against it—68

The main question was then put—"Shall the bill pass?" and decided as follows:

AYES—Messrs. Alexander, Alston, Anderson, Archer, Avery, Bard, Barnett, Beall, Bowen, Bradley, Brown, Burwell, Caldwell, Calhoun, Chappell, Cheves, Clark, Clopton, Comstock, Conard, Crawford, Creighton, Crouch, Dawson, Desha, Duvall, Earle, Eppes, Evans, Findley, Fisk of Vt. Fisk of N. Y. Forney, Forsyth, Franklin, Gholson, Glasgow, Gourdin, Griffin, Grundy, Hall, Harris, Hasbrouck, Hawes, Hubbard, Humphreys, Hungerford, Ingersoll, Ingham, Jackson of Va. Johnson of Va. Kennedy, Kent of N. Y. Kent of Md. Kerr, Kershaw, Kilbourn, Law, Lefferts, Lowndes, Lyle, Macon, M'Coy, M'Kee, M'Kim, M'Lean, Montgomery, Moore, Murfree, Nelson, Newton, Ormsby, Parker, Piper, Pleasants, Rea of Pa. Rea of Ten. Rich, Ringgold, Roane, Roberts, Robertson, Sage, Sevier, Seybert, Sharp, Skinner, Smith of Pa. Smith of Va. Tannehill, Taylor, Telfair, Troup, Udree, Ward of N. J. Whitehill, Wilson of Pa. Wright, Yancey—[92]

NAYS—Messrs. Baylies of Mass. Bayly of Va. Bigelow, Boyd, Bradbury, Brigham, Caperton, Champion, Cilley, Cooper, Cox, Culpeper, Davenport, Davis of Mass. Dewey, Ely, Gaston, Geddes, Grosvenor, Hale, Hefty, Jackson of R. I. Kent of N. Y. King of Mass. Miller, Moffit, Moseley, Market, Oakley, Pearson, Pickering, Pitkin, Post, Potter, J. Reed, W. Reed, Ridgely, Ruggles, Schureman, Sheffey, Sherwood, Shepherd, Smith of N. Y. Stanford, Stockton, Sturges, Taggart, Thomson, Vance, Ward of Mass. Webster, Wheaton, Wilcox, Wilson of Mass. Winter—[71]

And the House adjourned.
The debate which took place in the house of representatives on Friday last, and occupied the house till 7 o'clock in the evening, and at length required the previous question to terminate it, was of an interesting nature, not destitute of acrimony. After the bill was put on its passage, Mr. Grosvenor of N. Y. briefly explained, his objections to the bill, as Mr. Sheffey of Va. had done just before him, on the ground of general opposition to affording any force to assist in an offensive war. Mr. Webster of New Hampshire, followed in an elaborate & ingenious speech, of considerable length, in opposition to the general course of administration, to the object and principles of the war and of course to the bill before the house. The principal object, however, of Mr. Webster's antipathy and reprobation, was the conquest of Canada. To this speech, and particularly to the latter part of it, Mr. Ingersoll of Pa. replied in an able speech of some length. Mr. Miller of N. Y. followed in a speech of great length, characterised by much warmth and perhaps a little violence. Mr. Bradley of Vt. replied, in a brief and neat speech, to a few of the observations of Mr. Webster and Mr. Miller. Mr. Troup of Ga. expressed his hope that the general debate on the war, now unseasonably introduced, would be postponed to some more suitable occasion—because the recruiting service was now suspended, and every moment consumed on this bill delayed its recommencement. Mr. Grosvenor rose, evidently with a design to make a long speech against the bill, which indeed he announced his intention to do—for which purpose he wished the house to adjourn, it then being so late. The adjournment was negatived; and before Mr. Grosvenor could get the floor again the previous question was called, decided in the affirmative, and thus the debate terminated. This debate appeared to us too fraught with important matter, particularly as indicating the sentiments and views of the federal party, to be reported, in the abbreviated form our reporter has recently adopted. It will therefore be reported at length as soon as possible.