The Enquirer

CONGRESS:

IN SENATE.

Tuesday, March 24.

The Vice-President being absent, as on yesterday, from indisposition.

On motion by Mr. Lloyd, the Senate proceeded to the choice of a President pro tempore, as the constitution provides; & WILLIAM H. CRAWFORD was elected on the first ballot. The Secretary of the Senate was directed to wait on the President of the U. States & House of Representatives & inform them of the said appointment.

Mr. Pope reported the bill from the house for the relief of the officers and soldiers who served in the late campaign on the Wabash, amended.

The report of the committee of conference on the Navy bill was taken up, concurred in, and the bill amended accordingly and sent to the House.

Mr. Campbell of Ohio obtained leave of absence for the remainder of the session.

Wednesday. March 25.

The Senate resumed the consideration of the report of the managers at the conference on their part of the subject of the disagreeing votes on the bill establishing a Quarter Master's Department, and for other purposes; and it was

Resolved, That they recede from their disagreement to the amendments of the House of Representatives, so far as to agree to the report of the managers, and that the bill be so modified.

The Senate resumed, as in committee of the whole, the consideration of the bill for the relief of the officers and soldiers who served in the late campaign on the Wabash, together with the amendments reported by a select committee; and after debate, the further consideration thereof was postponed until to-morrow.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

Tuesday, March 24.

Mr. Reed presented a petition of Samuel, Jeremiah and John Peabody, of Massachusetts, owners and masters of the schooner Equality, praying that half of the nett proceeds of a quantity of cotton which was found by them floating on the high seas, and has been regularly libelled and condemned, may be paid to them.-Referred.

Mr. Reed also presented the petition of Elisha Thorndike, deceased, William Haman and Benjamin Giles of Massachusetts, praying indemnification for the loss of their vessel and cargo, which was illegally captured by a Spanish ship of war in the year 1809. Referred to the Secretary of State.

Mr. Pitkin said, that he held in his hand a statement and representation, on oath, of Capt. Samuel Chew of New-Haven in the state of Connecticut, which he would beg leave to present to the House. This Deposition is found in another part of this day's paper.

Mr. P. said, that this statement, with the original document annexed, in the French language, and under the hand of the commodore of the squadron, had been forwarded here, for the information of the government: that the character of capt. Chew was such as to entitle him to full credit wherever he was known. Believing, therefore, as he did, in the truth of these statements, and that the document annexed is genuine, thought it his duty to present it to the house for their information. The House, after hearing them read, can dispose of them by referring them to the Secretary of State, or otherwise, as they may think proper.

The papers presented by Mr. Pitkin having been read--

Mr. M'Kim moved that they lie on the table, until time should be afforded for the arrival of these persons in the United States, whose testimony might confirm the facts stated.

Mr. Pitkin also wished them to lie on the table, that they might be examined by gentlemen, and receive that attention to which the importance of their contents might entitle them.

The papers were accordingly ordered to lie on the table.

Mr. Wright, from the committee on Military affairs reported a bill for the establishment of an ordnance department; which was twice read and referred to a committee of the whole.

Mr. Bacon, after some remarks on the subject of the petition of George Blagden & others, praying compensation for work done on the public buildings, offered the following resolution:

Resolved, That the President of the United States be requested to cause to be laid before this House an account, in detail, of all sums now due, and to whom, for labour, materials and other services of every nature and kind whatsoever, which have heretofore been furnished and performed, towards erecting and repairing the Capitol and the President's House, or for procuring furniture for the same--also, whether any and what compensations are now allowed for the service of superintending those objects and the nature of those services.

Mr. Stanford opposed the resolution, as not couched in respectful terms to the Executive, because it supposed that he had sanctioned contracts for expences not authorised by law. He had rather it had been in form of an enquiry whether there was any deficit in former appropriations to these objects, or in some form which did not imply a violation of law, &c.

Mr. Bacon had no objection to any amendment the House should think proper to make. The fact was known from the petitions of the individuals concerned, that money was due for work, and the only source from which the House could obtain information on the subject was through the Executive.

The resolution was agreed to, and Mr. Bacon and Mr. Piper appointed a committee to present it to the President.

The bill to incorporate the Trustees of Washington College was read a third time.

Mr. M'Kee objected to the bill because it granted to the institution incorporated all the powers possessed by other corporate bodies, and that the corporation was without limitation. This provision might vest in the corporation the power of creating & putting in motion bank capital to any extent. He knew by experience that laws had passed Legislatures vesting powers not understood at the time of their passage. He therefore objected to the latitude of expression in this bill, and moved to recommit it to a select committee for amendment.

Mr. Lewis said the committee had paid considerable attention to this subject, & he should be unwilling to recommit it; yet, although it was not usual to limit the existence of such corporations or the amount of property they may hold, if the House had a disposition to make it more specific, he had no objection to it.

The bill was recommitted.

The House proceeded to consider the report of the committee of the whole on the following resolution:

"Resolved, That it is expedient to make provision by law for the payment of the following descriptions of claims, to wit: 1. Loan office certificates; 2. Indents of interest on public debt; 3. Final settlement certificates; 4. Commissioners' certificates; 5. Army certificates; 6. Credits given in lieu of army certificates cancelled; 7. Credits for the pay of the army for which no certificates were issued; 8. Invalid pensions; 9. Lost or destroyed certificates:--notwithstanding any statute of limitation to the contrary, under such restrictions as shall ensure payment only to the original claimant, his heirs, executors, or administrators."

The resolution was agreed to, and referred to the committee of claims to bring in a bill pursuant thereto.

Another resolution to instruct the Committee of claims to enquire into the merit of revolutionary claims, was also agreed to; and sundry reports on such petitions were recommitted to the committee of claims.

The bill for the organization of a corps of artificers, passed through a committee of the whole, Mr. Bassett in the chair, was amended and ordered to be engrossed for a third reading.

The House spent some time in committee of the whole, Mr. BRECKENRIDGE in the chair, on the bill to amend the patent laws; about the usual hour of adjournment, the committee rose, reported progress, and obtained leave to sit again.

Wednesday, March 25.

The bill for the organization of a corps of artificers, was read the third time & passed, without a division.

Mr. Milnor submitted the following resolution:

-Resolved, That the Attorney General of the U. S. be requested to examine and report to this House whether the penal code of the U. S. requires any, and if any, what alterations, amendments, and additions, to render the same less sanguinary and more efficient.

Mr. M. begged leave to state two or three objects which he should consider as coming within the range of the Attorney-general's enquiries under this resolution. It had been found by the experience of gentlemen conversant with the criminal code, that in many instances crimes, made such by the laws of the United States, are not defined with sufficient precision. With respect to the jurisdiction of maritime crimes and offences, in the district which he represented several difficulties had occurred; for instance, in the case of a mortal blow given at sea and death on shore, and vice versa, there was no place pointed out by the laws of the U. S. for trial. For the common case of assault and battery on the high seas, there was no court vested with jurisdiction to try the offence. Jurisdiction, it was true, was constantly assumed by the courts, ex necessitate rei, but 't was highly proper that there should be some legislative provision placing this beyond doubt. There was a doubt, under the act relative to scuttling vessels for the purpose of defrauding the underwriters, whether an act of fraud thus committed on a company would fall within the provisions of the law, which speaks of persons; both cases were unquestionably intended to be embraced by it: So in case of an owner directing a Captain to sink a vessel with a crew to defraud the underwriters. It was doubted whether such captain was indictable. The whole phraseology this law was so extremely obscure that it was necessary it should be made more distinct.

Another very serious object with me, said Mr. Milnor, is the consideration of the question whether the punishments inflicted by the laws of the United States in a variety of cases ought not to be accommodated to the prevailing sentiments of the people, as expressed by the legislatures of the several states in regard to punishments. In almost all the states within a few years past an amelioration had taken place in the penal laws, lessening the number of crimes punishable with death; in Pennsylvania only one was punishable with death, and a law for abolishing that one had been recommended to the early attention of the next Legislature. Mr. M. spoke of the disadvantages of sanguinary punishments, not the least of which was, that as the evidence must be very strong indeed to produce conviction, the object of punishment was frequently defeated from the impulse of humanity, &c.

Another subject requiring attention, Mr. M. said, was the doctrine of challenge. The right of challenge of persons indicted for penal offences was in some states more extended than in others, not being uniform. This inequality arose from inadvertence on the part of the legislature, and required remedy.

Another object he had in view was to provide for cases not already provided for by law. Without going to others, he would advert to one such: that there was no law, in the opinion of the legal authorities, by which perjury, or false swearing in procuring the necessary proofs, preparatory to clearance at the custom-house, were punishable. There were various other obvious defects in the laws; and it appeared to him there could be no better mode of remedy than laying the subject officially before the Attorney-general, who between this time and the next sessions would have ample time to make a satisfactory report.

The House then agreed to consider the resolution.

There appeared to be no difference in sentiment in the House on the object of the mover, viz. a revision of the penal code, as to the propriety of which there seemed to be a general concurrence of opinion. Some difference arose as to the mode of accomplishing this object.

Mr. Lacock moved to strike out of the resolution the words "the Attorney-general of the United States be directed," and insert the words "a committee be appointed," so as to devolve the duty of making the necessary revision on a committee of this House.

This motion was supported by Messrs. Lacock, Macon, Newton, M'Kim & Blackledge and opposed by Messrs. Smilie, Milnor, acon, Findley, Mitchell, and Wright. The supporters of the amendment said that to call on the Attorney-general for his opinion of the expediency of a measure would be undignified; that this was a fair subject for the exercise of the powers of this House, and one to the investigation of the expediency of which professional knowledge was not necessary, though it might be useful in framing the details of a bill: that to refer in this unqualified manner to an Executive officer was surrendering the Representative privileges, and blending together departments which ought to be forever kept distinct. On the other hand, it was said that the experience and legal talent of the Attorney-general must eminently fit him for the contemplated revision; that his report was merely to be for the information, not the guidance, of the House; that a similar course had been adopted in several state governments; and a precedent was shewn at the 2nd session of the 1st Congress of the U.S. in which a similar course had been taken.

The motion to amend was negatived, Yeas 36, Nays 63.

Mr. Roberts said that he did not know that the House had the power to compel the Attorney-General to make such a report unless their requisition assumed the form of law. Otherwise, the application to the Attorney-General should be made through the Executive, who had the power to require the opinion of the Attorney-General. As there was at least some difficulty about this business, he moved that the resolution lie on the table, to give time for further consideration.--Motion lost, Ayes 27.

Mr. Little moved to strike out the words "Attorney-General," and insert "President of the U. States;" who might, he said, officially require the proper report from the law officer of the U. States.-Motion negatived.

The question on the whole resolution was then taken on suggestion of Mr. Roberts (whose objections were to the mode and not to the principle) by Yeas and Nays & carried. Yeas 69. Nays 45.

Thursday, March 26, 1812.

The House took up the message of the Senate announcing the concurrence of that body in the report of the committee of conference on the navy bill, as noticed in our last.

The House concurred in the report.

Mr. Wright being very desirous of calling up his bill on the subject of seamen, on motion of Mr. D. R. Williams, the unfinished business of yesterday was ordered to lie on the table.

And the House resolved itself into a committee of the whole, Mr. BRECKENRIDGE in the chair, on the bill for the protection, recovery and indemnification of American seamen. Mr. Wright spoke nearly two hours in support of the bill; when the Committee rose, reported progress, and obtained leave to sit again.

Mr. Seaver presented certain resolutions of the Legislature of Massachusetts, representing the ability of that state to supply certain articles of supply for the use of the Indian tribes and for public service. Mr. S. moved that they lie on the table.

Mr. Newton suggested the propriety of a reference of the subject to the committee on Indian affairs.

Mr. Seaver assented.

Mr. Morrow, in the absence of the chairman of the committee on Indian affairs, observed that these resolutions were predicated on a letter from the Secretary of War, addressed to the committee on Indian affairs, but on which they had not conceived it within their province to act. He had understood that the chairman (Mr. McKee) had proposed to refer it to the committee of Commerce and Manufactures.

Mr. Newton varied his motion, so as to refer the resolutions to the Secretary at War, that he might be apprized of the capacity of the U. States to furnish the articles necessary for Indian supply. Whilst up, said he, I will observe that the letter of the Secretary at War was not referred to the committee of Commerce & Manufactures: and I thank God that it was not.
The reference to the Secretary at war was then agreed to.

Mr. Wright, from the committee of conference on the Quartermaster's bill, reported the result of the conference; which was agreed to, So that this bill has at length passed both Houses of Congress.

The bill to authorise the Secretary at War to exchange lands with the Ursuline Nuns, of the city of New-Orleans, was read a third time and passed.

Friday, March 27.

Soon after the meeting of the House--

Mr. Smilie observed that this was a day (Good Friday) on which many members had rather spend the day otherwise than in attending on the business of the House; and although he might not himself feel any scruples on that score, he was willing to accommodate those who did, and therefore proposed to move an adjournment. Previous to which however, as it was well known no business was ever done on Saturday, from so many committees sitting on that day, he should move that when the House adjourn, it should adjourn to meet on Monday next.

Mr. M'Kee opposed and Mr. Wright supported the motion, which was carried by Yeas and Nays, 52 to 42.

Mr. Smilie then moved an adjournment-- Carried, 51 to 46.