MARCH, 1804.

The answer is ready; Judge Chase had prejudged that the objection was not a good one: but I think differently, and believe that it was his duty to set aside the eighth juror. I cannot, and will not believe, with this evidence staring me in the face, that Callender was tried by an impartial jury of his country; the eighth juror at least, must have possessed a mind far from impartial towards the author of The Prospect. It is proved that the Judge denied to the prisoner the great Constitutional privileges of compulsory process for witnesses, and trial by an impartial jury; but we shall be told that these were errors in judgment. I do not suspect him of corruption, but I believe him to be impeachable for conduct of this description, whether it be the consequence of passion, prepossession, or party-spirit. To allow judges to disregard the Constitution, and shelter themselves under the doctrine that they are not punishable for errors of judgment, would be giving them a dangerous latitude indeed. It is true that Judge Chase, in the latter part of the trial, appears to have been cool and candid.

I am a friend to the Constitutional independence of the Judiciary, but opposed to giving that department an oppressive and overwhelming power, destructive to the liberties of the people. I regret extremely that it has become our duty to accuse a man so eminent for talents and learning, particularly for legal learning, of high crimes and misdemeanors. I wish I could ascribe his conduct to the passion of the moment, or to those ordinary prejudices which invariably constitute a part of the infirmities of human nature. I consider myself as one of a numerous band of sentinels posted around the temple of justice. It is our duty to guard it with more than vestal vigilance, and to prepare punishment for those who appear to us to have presumed, with unhallowed hands, to minister at its sacred altars!

The question was then taken on agreeing to the first resolution, and carried-yeas 74.

The Committee then agreed, without a division, to the second resolution relating to Richard Peters. The Committee rose, and reported their agreement to the report of the select committee.

The House immediately took the report into consideration.

The first resolution respecting Mr. Chase having been read,

Mr. R. GRISWOLD observed that in the select committee appointed to inquire into the official conduct of Samuel Chase there had been no discussion, and no points settled, except those contained in the resolution. No part of the documents contained in the report had been taken up and discussed. I would, said Mr. G., myself have undertaken on this occasion to enter minutely into the testimony, were I not of opinion that the sentiments of the House are already formed. I have examined the depositions critically, and I am ready to say that they constitute no grounds for impeachment. But I have been lamentably convinced, by a mournful experience, that nothing which can be said in the case of impeachments will have any effect on this House. I shall therefore, say noth

H. OF R.

ing on this resolution, at this time; but shall content myself with calling for the yeas and nays. Mr. J. RANDOLPH.-Like the gentleman from Connecticut, it is no part of my intention to enter into a consideration of the report of the committee appointed to inquire into the official conduct of Mr. Chase and Mr. Peters. On this occasion, as on another, in which I had the honor of being one of those to whom was confided the management of an impeachment, I am willing to rest the decision which I shall give on the testimony before the House. But I think the observations which have fallen from the gentleman from Connecticut require, in justice to himself (for he was a member of the committee appointed on this occasion,) and as an act of justice to that committee, some remarks in reply. For what purpose he has made these observations I shall not undertake to determine. From them it would appear as if a discussion had been particularly invited. The committee consisted of seven members. On the motion of different members, sometimes in consequence of personal application, at other times by letters, addressed to the committee, testimony was ordered to be taken. A day was then appointed for the meeting of the committee; they did meet. At the time appointed for the meeting some gentlemen of the committee were engaged in the character of managers of an impeachment before the Senate. The gentleman from Connecticut, and a gentleman from South Carolina, (Mr. HuGER.) also a member of the committee, waited in the library until the other members thus engaged should be in readiness. As soon as they were ready to meet, a message was sent to the library for the two gentlemen. Before this it had been intimated to the managers that the House wanted a quorum. We, therefore, dispatched a message into the House for the two gentlemen. We received no answer. The committee decided the conduct of Mr. Chase impeachable, in relation to the trial of Fries, and the conduct of Mr. Peters not impeachable. In consequence of this decision, five members being present, the Chairman was directed to draught the report. The report, however, not being presented, owing to the adjournment of the House, and the committee being unwilling to submit it before it had been considered by all the members of the committee, it was again submitted to the committee, who were summoned, for that purpose, the next morning; when it was reconsidered, and agreed to in the presence of the members previously absent.

Mr. R. concluded by expressing his regret at having to trouble the House with so dry a detail; and said he had made it to show, that if there had been no discussion, it was because there was an indisposition on either side to provoke it.

Mr. HUGER. It was my wish and determination to have avoided saying anything on the present question, and to have contented myself with giving a silent vote-nor should I now have risen but for the allusions, which have been made by the gentlemen from Connecticut and from Virginia, to what took place in the Committee of Investigation. The statements given by both these gentle

H. OF R.

men are, as far as they go, correct; but I must beg leave to add one or two additional observations on the subject.

The committee had been duly summoned to meet on the morning of the day preceding that on which the report now under consideration was presented to this House. Both the members from Connecticut and myself accordingly attended at, or about the usual hour of attendance; but on going to the room, in which we had always met, we found it occupied by the committee who had been appointed to impeach Judge Pickering. Most, I believe indeed, all the gentlemen, except the member from Connecticut and myself, who composed the Committee of Investigation, were likewise members of the committee, and as they had already met on other business, we of course retired. On my return to the House, I met the honorable Chairman at the door, who expressed a wish that our committee should forth with meet; but on my observing, that the most of the members of it were on the Committee of Impeachment in the case of Judge Pickering, which was then assembled, he proceeded to join them; intimating, if I did not mistake him, as he left me, that he would send me word should our committee meet. I received no message, however, nor heard anything on the subject until a few minutes before the House adjourned, when to my astonishment the gentleman from Connecticut informed me that he had been told the committee had met during our absence, and come to the determination of reporting to the House a resolution recommending the impeachment of Judge. Chase.

The gentleman from Virginia, however, has informed the House that before the committee proceeded to business, one or two messengers had been sent to summon both my friend from Connecticut and myself, and he had before given me the same information in private. And most certainly, sir, I have not the smallest doubt but that this was done; for the assertion of any fact, made by the gentleman from Virginia, will ever receive from me the most ready and implicit belief. It nevertheless, so happened, that neither the member from Connecticut nor myself received the summons, or attended the committee, in which it was determined, during our absence, that a report should be drawn up and made to the House, recommending the impeachment of Judge Chase. This circumstance did, I confess, surprise me in the first instance, and until the matter was explained to me. I still regret it; for we had never had any previous discussion in the committee, on the merits of the various charges exhibited against the judge, and I certainly did expect, that each particular case would have been thoroughly sifted and canvassed in the select committee, and a separate and distinct vote taken on each of them before any report was made. Under this impression I had intended to have objected, had I been present, to the committee's coming to any final decision until we had received the deposition of Mr. Robertson from Petersburg; and I had also (as I observed to the committee on the following morning) intended to have requested, that the

MARCH, 1804.

depositions of Mr. Edmond Randolph, late Attorney General of the United States, and some other gentlemen, (whom I had just learned were present at the trial of Callender,) might be taken; for as the only depositions before us in this case were solely those of the parties immediately and individually concerned, and who were not merely the political opponents of Judge Chase, but personally interested; as the propriety of their own conduct in the trial was involved in the question at issue between them and the judge. I did not wish to make up my mind, or give a final vote on a case, in which there was evidently no other than perfectly ex parte evidence before us. The committee, however, having, as has been stated, met during our absence, and decided in favor of an impeachment, I was virtually precluded from making the proposition I had intended.

It is indeed true, Mr. Speaker, and the gentleman from Virginia is perfectly correct in stating, "that the whole of the committee met the next day, and the report, as it now stands, was submitted to our final decision, when every individual member was present." He is equally correct in the observation, that the report was open to the objections, which might be offered from any quarter. But, after five out of seven members had already on the preceding day decided in favor of the principle it contained, I certainly, sir, had not the vanity to suppose that anything I could say would effect a change of opinion; and I conceived, that after what had passed, it would be regarded as mere cavil on my part, and only done from a wish to embarrass and create unnecessary delay, to propose, when the question of impeachment was already acted and decided upon, that we should wait for further testimony. I therefore acquiesced, and (after having expressed, as above stated, what I should have wished to have been done, and had intended to propose, had I been present in the committee the preceding day) I deemed it my duty, (as believing the evidence in question before us, to be entirely ex parte) to give in the select committee, as I shall again do on the present occasion, my decided negative to that part of the report, which includes the resolution for impeaching Judge Chase.

The question was then taken, by yeas and nays, on concurring in the report of the committee, agreeing to the first resolution, and carried—yeas 73, nays 32, as follows:

YEAS-Willis Alston, Isaac Anderson, John Archer, David Bard, George M. Bedinger, William Blackledge, Walter Bowie, Adam Boyd, John Boyle, Robert Brown, Joseph Bryan, William Butler, Levi Casey, Thomas Claiborne, Joseph Clay, Matthew Clay, John Clopton, Frederick Conrad, Jacob Crowninshield, Richard Cutts, John Dawson, William Dickson, John B. Earle, Peter Early, James Elliot, William Findley, John Fowler, Samuel Hammond, James Holland, David Holmes, James Gillespie, Peterson Goodwyn, Andrew Gregg, Walter Jones, William Kennedy, Nehemiah Knight, Michael Leib, Matthew Lyon, Andrew McCord, Wil liam McCreery, David Meriwether, Andrew Moore, Nicholas R. Moore, Jeremiah Morrow, Anthony New, Thomas Newton, jr., Joseph H. Nicholson, Gideon Olin, John Patterson, John Randolph, Thomas M. Randolph,

MARCH, 1804.

John Rea of Pennsylvania, John Rhea of Tennessee, Jacob Richards, Cæsar A. Rodney, Thomas Sammons, Thomas Sandford, Ebenezer Seaver, James Sloan, John Smilie, Henry Southard, Richard Stanford, Joseph Stanton, John Stewart, David Thomas, Philip R. Thompson, Abram Trigg, John Trigg, Isaac Van Horne, Joseph B. Varnum, Marmaduke Williams, Richard Winn, and Joseph Winston,

NAYS-Simeon Baldwin, Silas Betton, John Campbell, William Chamberlin Martin Chittenden, Clifton Claggett, Manasseh Cutler, Samuel W. Dana John Davenport, Thomas Dwight, Thomas Griffin, Gaylord Griswold, Roger Griswold, Seth Hastings, William Helms, Benjamin Huger, Joseph Lewis, jun., Henry W. Livingston, Thomas Lowndes, Nahum Mitchell, Thomas Plater, Samuel D. Purviance, John Cotton Smith, John Smith of Virginia, William Stedman, James Stephenson, Samuel Taggart, Samuel Tenney, Samuel Thatcher, Killian K. Van Rensselaer, Peleg Wadsworth, and Lemuel Williams.

The report of the committee, in relation to the second resolution, was agreed to unanimously.

Mr. J. RANDOLPH moved that a Committee be appointed to appear at the bar of the Senate, to impeach, in the name of the House of Representatives, Samuel Chase, of high crimes and misde

meanors.

The motion was adopted, and Messrs. J. RANDOLPH and EARLY appointed the committee.

TUESDAY, March 13.

Mr. NICHOLSON, from the committee to whom were referred, on the twenty-fifth of January last, the memorials of Alexander Moultrie, of the State of South Carolina, in behalf of himself and others; and of the Virginia Yazoo Company, by William Cowan, their agent, together with the report of a select committee thereon; made a supplementary report; which was read, and ordered to lie on the table.

Mr. LATTIMORE, from the committee appointed on the tenth instant, presented, according to order, a bill to suspend, for a limited time, the execution of a part of the twelfth section of the act, entitled "An act regulating the grants of land, and providing for the disposal of the lands of the United States south of the State of Tennessee;" which was read twice and committed to a Committee of the whole House to-morrow.

On a motion made and seconded that the House do come to the following resolution:

Resolved, That there shall be a call of the House at ten o'clock each morning, during the present session; and there shall be deducted one day's pay from the compensation of each member who shall fail of attending such call, unless he shall render to the House satisfactory reasons for such neglect:

The question was taken that the House do now proceed to take the said motion into consideration, and passed in the negative.

A message from the Senate informed the House that the Senate have agreed to the resolution of this House of the twelfth instant, "to instruct the Joint Committee of Enrolled Bills to wait on the President of the United States respecting a variance between an engrossed and enrolled bill,"

H. OF R.

also to the resolution of this House, of the sixth instant, for an adjournment of the two Houses of Congress, with an amendment; to which they desire the concurrence of this House. The Senate have passed the bill, entitled "An act making an appropriation for carrying into effect the Convention between the United States and the King of Spain, on the eleventh of August, 1802," with several amendments; to which they desire the concurrence of this House.

The House resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole on the bill making provision for the disposal of the public lands in the Indiana Territory. and for other purposes; and, after some time spent therein, the bill was reported with several amendments thereto; which were severally twice read, and agreed to by the House.

The said bill was then further amended at the Clerk's table, and, together with the amendments, ordered to be engrossed, and read the third time

to-morrow.

Mr. JOHN RANDOLPH, from the committee appointed on the twelfth instant, reported—

That, in obedience to the order of the House, the committee had been to the Senate, and in the name of the House of Representatives, and of the people of the United States, had impeached Samuel Chase, one of the Associate Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States, of high crimes and misdemeanors; and had acquainted the Senate that the House of Representatives will, in due time, exhibit particular articles against him, and make good the same.

And further: That the committee had demanded that the Senate take order for the appearance of the said Samuel Chase, to answer to the said impeachment. On motion, it was,

Resolved, That a committee be appointed to prepare and report articles of impeachment against Samuel Chase, one of the Associate Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States, who has been impeached by this House, during the present session, of high crimes and misdemeanors; and that the said committee have power to send for persons, papers, and records.

Ordered, That Mr. JOHN RANDOLPH, Mr. NICHOLSON, Mr. JOSEPH CLAY, Mr. EARLY, and Mr. BOYLE, be appointed a committee, pursuant to the said resolution.

66

to

per

Mr. JOHN RANDOLPH, from the Committee of Ways and Means, who were directed by a resolution of this House, of the second ultimo, inquire into, and report their opinion upon the expediency of discontinuing the allowance of drawbacks of the duties on spirits, gunpowder, soap, candles, and playing cards of foreign manufacture; and of allowing, in lieu of drawbacks, gallon on all spirits exported both of foreign and domestic manufacture," made a report thereon; which was read, and ordered to be referred to the Committee of the whole House to whom was committed, on the tenth instant, the bill for imposing more specific duties on the importation of certain articles; and, also, for levying and collecting light money on foreign ships or vessels.

The House proceeded to consider the amendment proposed by the Senate, to the resolution for

DOLPH and Mr. EARLY, at the bar of the Senate, impeached Samuel Chase, one of the Associate Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States, of high crimes and misdemeanors; and acquainted the Senate that the House of Representatives will, in due time, exhibit particular articles of impeachment against him, and make good the same.

"And likewise demanded, that the Senate take order for the appearance of the said Samuel Chase, to answer to the said impeachment: Therefore,

Resolved, That the Senate will take proper order thereon, of which due notice shall be given to the House of Representatives.

Resolved, That the Secretary of the Senate notify the House of Representatives of this resolution." "Attest, SAM. A. OTIS, Sec." The House took up Mr. J. CLAY's resolution for the appointment of a committee to inquire into the expediency of authorizing the Legislature of Pennsylvania to lay a certain tonnage duty for improving the navigation of the river Delaware and the port of Philadelphia. After a few remarks made by Mr. C. in support of the resolution, it was negatived-ayes 36 noes 42. GOVERNMENT OF LOUISIANA.

The House went into a Committee of the Whole on the bill, from the Senate, providing for the government of Louisiana,

Mr. LEIB moved to amend the section fixing the salary of the Governor of Orleans, by striking out five thousand dollars. for the purpose of inserting three thousand dollars.

The sum of five thousand dollars was, he observed, higher than that allowed some of our Heads of Department, and was, in his opinion, above the necessary allowance.

H. OF R.

the inhabitants of Louisiana the naturalization act of the United States.

Mr. R. GRISWOLD opposed the amendment, from an impression that it was not expedient to vest the courts of Louisiana with the power of naturalization.

went to extend to the inhabitants of Louisiana Mr. J. CLAY supported the amendment; as it the privileges promised them by the treaty. Whether the proposed amendment would have this effect, he was not ready to say. If it would not, he hoped his colleague would move one that would have that effect. This privilege had been promised and ought to be granted. He presumed that a residence of five years would be required, as the privileges promised were to be received under the Constitution. Mr. C. concluded by saying there was a wide difference between naturalizing the inhabitants of Louisiana, and admitting them into the Union, and though gentlemen might have objections to the one object, they ought not, on the same ground, to object to the other.

The question was taken on the proposed amendment, and passed in the negative-ayes 32.

Mr. SLOAN moved an amendment inhibiting the admission of slaves into Louisiana, as well from the United States, as from foreign places.

Mr. S. concisely stated his reasons in favor of this provision, when the question was taken, and the amendment agreed to-ayes 40, noes 36.

Mr. G. W. CAMPBELL proposed an amendment, withholding from the parties to a civil suit the right of waiving a jury trial. The bill provides a jury trial in all cases in which either party shall require it.

This amendment, after being supported by Mr. G. W. CAMPBELL; and opposed by Messrs. HOLLAND, SOUTHARD, and DANA, was negatived-ayes 12.

Mr. G. W. CAMPBELL moved to strike out that part of the bill which renders every person settling on lands of the United States liable to a fine of one thousand dollars, and to one year's im

This produced a debate of some length, and more animation: in which the motion to strike out was urged by Messrs. G. W. CAMPBELL, LYON, and CLAIBORNE'; and opposed by Messrs. GREGG, NICHOLSON, BOYD, SMILIE, MACON, SLOAN, and HOLLAND.

The question was taken, and the amendment was negatived-ayes 23.

40, noes 44.

Mr. LEIB moved an amendment extending to 8th CON.-38

Mr. RHEA, of Tennessee, offered the following new section:

"And be it further enacted, That all grants for lands within the territories ceded by the French Republic to the United States, by the treaty of the thirtieth of April, in the year one thousand eight hundred and three, the title whereof was, at the date of the Treaty of Ildefonso, in the Crown, Government, or nation of Spain, and every act and proceeding subsequent thereto of whatever nature, towards the obtaining any grant, title, or claim, to such lands, and under whatsover authority transacted, or pretended, be, and the same are hereby declared to be, and to have been from the beginning, null and void, and of no effect, in law or equity."

Mr. EARLY said, he hoped this resolution would