Gazette Of The United States

CONGRESS.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
Friday, April 29.
The following petitions were presented in favor of appropriating to carry the British treaty into effect, viz. seven by Mr. Glenn from the county of Albany, and from the city, signed by 455 persons; one by Mr. Kittera from Lancaster county, signed by 183 persons; sundry petitions by Mr. Rutherford, from Frederick, in Virginia; one by Mr. Isaac Smith from 69 inhabitants of Mount-Holly, one from 217 of Springfield, and one from 231 of Tuckerton, in New-Jersey; one by Mr. Hartley from 517 inhabitants of York-County, one by Mr. Sitgreaves from 80 inhabitants of Montgomery, one from 160 from Delaware, and one from 50 inhabitants of Bucks, one by Mr. Gallatin; from 154 inhabitants of the western country, 1 by Mr. Bradbury, from 3 or 400 merchants, traders and others, of Newburyport, one by Mr. Goodhue, from a town meeting at Salem, signed by 626 inhabitants, one by Mr. Van Alen, from two hundred inhabitants of Laningburgh, 1 by Mr. Christie from 230 inhabitants of Chestertown, 1 by Mr. Muhlenberg from 100 inhabitants of the liberties of Philadelphia; and one by Mr. Sprigg from the inhabitants of Fredericksburg.
Mr. Bourne also presented a memorial from a meeting of merchants, traders and citizens of Providence signed by 15 persons in behalf of the meeting praying that the consideration might be resumed of appropriating the supplies for carrying into effect the British treaty, on the supposition that they had been already refused.
Mr. Gallatin presented a petition from 21 inhabitants of the State of Delaware against the treaty.
The above petitions were disposed of as usual.
Mr. Sedgwick informed the house that he had in his hand a letter from Boston, addressed to the Representatives of Massachusetts in Congress, informing them that a public meeting had been held to consider upon the propriety of petitioning that house to request that necessary measures might be taken to carry the British treaty into effect, at which it was supposed that 2200 persons were present, and that more than 1800 were in favor of the measure. As it appeared the petition which was agreed on at that meeting would not come to hand until the next post day, and as the question to which it related might in the mean time be taken, he and his colleagues thought it necessary to make this communication.
The house then resolved itself into a committee of the whole, Mr. Muhlenberg in the chair, on the state of the Union, and the resolution for carrying into effect the British treaty being under consideration, Mr. N. Smith and Mr. Dayton (the speaker) spoke in favor of the motion. Mr. Christie spoke also a few words in condemnation of the treaty; but observed, as he found the greater part of his constituents were desirous that the treaty should be carried into effect (though they had not attempted to influence his vote) he should sacrifice his own opinion—sacrificing his opinion for his constituents.
The question being called for, and every part of the committee appearing to concur, a division took place, when there appeared 49 gentlemen in favor of the motion and 49 against it. The chairman, after some little hesitation, said,
He was not altogether satisfied with the form of the resolution: but as he supposed it would undergo further discussion when it came before the house and perhaps some modification of it might take place, he should give his vote in favor of it.
The question was accordingly carried.
The house took up the resolution, when the ayes and nays were called for.
Mr. Giles wished some modification to be made in the resolution before them, or an additional one introduced, so as to express the sense of the House upon the treaty: he said it was observable, that several gentlemen voted for the present resolution who thought the treaty a very bad one. He was not prepared at present with a proper resolution. The reason why he thought some qualification necessary was, that as a part of the treaty was only to continue in effect for two years, and at the end of that time a fresh negotiation would probably take place, if the sense of that House, it might, in some degree, operate with him in a renewal of that part of the treaty.
Mr. Jackson wished, as he discovered some of the members of the House were now absent, and as the yeas and nays were to be taken upon the question, that a call of the House should be made previous to the taking of it. He said he should vote against the treaty, and should be able to give satisfactory reasons to his constituents for so doing; he wished, therefore, that, on this important decision, the name of every member should appear on the list of yeas and nays. He hoped, therefore, the question would be postponed for the purpose.
Mr. Macon also wished the question to be postponed. He said he had yet doubts in his mind, respecting the construction of the 9th article, relative to the holding of lands, and if the construction which some gentlemen had thought it would bear was the true construction, this question would be of greater importance to the state of N. Carolina, than the declaration of independence itself. He should speak much within bounds, if he was to say one half the lands in that state would be affected by that construction.
Mr. Holland & Mr. Gillespie also expressed their doubts on this head.
Mr. Swanwick hoped the question would be put off till Monday; in the mean time gentlemen might have an opportunity of making up their minds on the subject, so as to harmonize together.
Mr. S. Smith said it would be imprudent and improper to force the decision of the question at present. He hoped it would not be insisted upon: Mr. Williams said any delay in their decision would add to the loss already sustained by the trade of agricultural productions. For the sake of accommodation he would, however, consent to a postponement of the question till to-morrow.
Mr. Tracy hoped the question might be postponed, if gentlemen wished it, either till to morrow or Monday.
Mr. Hillhouse hoped the question would be postponed till Monday, when he hoped more unanimity would prevail in the decision.
Mr. Bourne, Mr. Christie and Mr. Cooper, wished the adjournment to be till to-morrow only.
The question was put and carried for to-morrow.
Mr. Gillespie then moved that a call of the House be made for to-morrow at 12 o'clock, which was agreed to.
Mr. Goodhue, chairman of the committee of commerce and manufactures, reported an act to continue in force an act in the State of Maryland, for the appointment of an Health Officer at the port of Baltimore, which was twice read, and ordered to be engrossed for a third reading.
Mr. Baldwin called up the bill relative to the military establishment; upon which the House formed itself into a committee of the whole, and after agreeing upon some amendments, one of which was the introduction of a troop or two of light dragoons into the establishment, the committee rose, and had leave to sit again. Adjourned.