Alexandria Daily Gazette, Commercial & Political

CONGRESS.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

MONDAY, May 29.

[Taken for the Alexandria Gazette.]

Three other members appeared, were qualified and took their seats.

Mr. Gardenier moved to amend the journal, and after some time spent in conversation upon the motion, the question was called for, and the motion ordered to be reduced to writing, according to the standing rules of the house; this the mover refused to do, and the motion consequently fell.

Another attempt was made to kidnap time, on a question of order, agitated by Mr. Randolph, and succeeded to perfection for the matter of an hour.

Mr. Randolph called for the consideration of his resolution, approbatory of the President's conduct in his late measure of negotiation with Great Britain.

Mr. Jackson said the motion of the gentleman was not in order, agreeably to a decision of the chair, confirmed by the house, that an hour should be appropriated in the morning for reading petitions and other communications, that more than an hour had elapsed in discussing that question, but not an hour for the usual business.

Mr. Jackson's objection was overruled by the Speaker.

When the resolution with the amendment was read,

And the question taken, Will the house now consider the said resolution? and decided in the affirmative, ayes 66, nays 61.

When the question on indefinite postponement occurred.

Mr. Dana. Whatever may be my opinion on the proposition to pass such a resolution, I cannot agree to an indefinite postponement. I am now ready, however, to give an opinion on the conduct of the president—of him I have nothing to hope or fear. What has been said on the question proposed I have listened to with attention. Is there anything in the time or transaction requiring a vote of this house? And what was the situation of this country prior to the ascendancy of the present administration? It was on the very verge of dissolution, through internal dissentions. Now reproaches are turned to gratulations, and an extensive harmony prevailing: At the last session the executive was authorised to suspend certain laws under certain conditions; he was left the power of consulting his own judgment if such conditions were complied with. And it is this which requires the legislative interposition—whether he acted according to the true interpretation of the law? if we pass an approbatory vote we thus give sanction to his interpretation.

The British government gave assurances of performing certain acts which the President accepted; and upon the faith of these assurances took the steps which he has taken; and the question is, whether these steps were accordant with the spirit of the law?

For my part, I feel no disposition to retrench from the president & secretary who conduct his negociation the praise which I conceive they merit in their spirit of accomodation. As to the attack on the Chesapeake it was an attack on the honor of the nation; and which has been held as an authority for declaring war, if unatoned. The President is made by the constitution the legal agent of negociation; but if he has not the power to make a positive peace, should not congress express an opinion to sanction a nominal one, to strengthen his late amicable conduct? I will give my approbation to the transaction.

[This days proceedings to be continued.]