it will be heard and felt. I did cherish a hope, sir, that something would at length be done, to enable the Government to lay a foundation for permanent fortifications. Low as the sum is now reduced for this purpose, still we find objections to it. It is this, which I think ought to arouse our feelings. ence. Gentlemen have alluded to a document from the War Department, to show that the money already appropriated for fortifications has not been expended. I shall always mention the head of that Department with great respect and deferI have before explained the probable reason why that money has not been expended. The money was not granted for the erection of new works. Even this small sum of $100,000, added to the money unexpended of the former appropriation, will enable the Government to lay the foundation of an efficient plan of defence. Let it be once understood, that this is the wish of the nation, and I have no doubt it will be done. It is very possible, that if we determine to do nothing but patch up old works, the Government may find a difficulty in expending even the small sum we may appropriate. I did hope, sir, when my honorable colleague came forward with his proposition, that we should be able to obtain a larger sum; but since that seems now out of the question, I do still hope that the appropriation will not be suffered to dwindle into nothing. Mr. NELSON said he did not mean to have troubled the House with any remarks on this point. But when he heard gentlemen talk on a subject which they did not understand, however well they might be acquainted with other subjects, he considered himself called upon to say something. He thought it very unlike a gentleman of the profession of the gentleman from New York to call upon them to prove a negative. This was a new doctrine. He thought it would be most regular for the gentleman himself to show the practicability of defending the port of New York. The onus probandi ought surely to fall on those who advocated this measure. Ay, but say the gentlemen, let us have a few batteries, for the purpose of throwing from them hot bombs. This thing, Mr. N. said, was entirely new to him, and was his reason for saying he thought the gentleman from New York did not understand the subject. He could not understand the expression hot bombs; and, indeed, the gentleman's knowledge on this point so surpassed his, that military men and engineers ought to apply to him for information. But, says the gentleman, shall we not defend our ports and harbors? Mr. N. said he believed the fortifications would not be of use unless they were manned, as he had never heard of fortifications defending themselves. And what number of men would their defence require? A hundred thousand men would be incompetent to the task. What kind of men? The militia of the country, engaged at home in agricultural and other pursuits? No. It would be impossible to get these; and, if they could be procured, they would be incompetent to the duty. The defence of the works would require experience and pecu H. OF R. liar knowledge. If, indeed, they undertook the fortifying all the ports and harbors of the United States, would a hundred thousand men be sufficient? If gentlemen thought so, they were egregiously mistaken. But is the House ready to raise a hundred thousand regulars? And is there any man bold enough to say, if they should, that such an establishment would not endanger the liberties of the nation, and be in the highest degree oppressive to the citizens of the United States? This is the application I wish to be made of the remarks I have offered, viz: that fortifications will be of no possible service unless they are manned, and to man them we must have a large standing army; and to know from the House whether they are prepared to adopt a system tha will require the raising of above a hundred thousand men? Mr. N. WILLIAMS.-After the specimen the honorable gentleman from Maryland has given us of his military skill and prowess, in his proposed plan of flying to the mountains for defence, I shall never think of contending with him for superiority upon that subject. I would remind that gentleman, however, that before he undertakes to criticise upon the observations of others, it would be well for him to be very sure that he is correct himself. Perhaps, if he would take the pains to investigate a little, he would find that our bombs have generally a little fire in them, and consequently may chance to be rather hot. He may likewise have in remembrance that we have none of us arrived to that sublime height of perfectability which some philosophers have supposed the human mind capable of attaining. We are yet wandering in the region of error. I forewarn that gentleman, therefore, not to act upon the idea that he has himself attained to perfection. Mr. Cook moved to fill the blank with 200,000. Mr. STANTON said, the idea that because fortifications could not do everything they could do nothing, was futile. He was for doing as much as could be done for the defence of the country. In support of his remarks, Mr. S. referred to a variety of instances on the page of history. Mr. Cook said, he hoped before gentlemen rejected the motion under consideration, they would assign more satisfactory reasons than had as yet been adduced. We all, said Mr. C., profess to reverence the prowess and conduct of the late General WASHINGTON. Did he ever instruct the officers and soldiers under his command to abandon without a contest the cities to the enemy? And will any rational man say that measures, which even do no more than give time for the security of property, are not highly useful in time of war? I consider the people in the Atlantic States entitled to an equal defence with their Southern brethren on the frontiers, and to the expenditure of an equal sum of money for that purpose. How much had we expended for them? Fifteen millions have been appropriated on one occasion. Let me not be understood as applying to this measure the language of complaint. But I only adduce the circumstance to establish our claim, and I hope the gentlemen who represent that part of the United States which has been so abundantly defended, and at so great an expense, will be willing to accord to us that protection which our situation requires. JANUARY, 1807. is taken to market is raised. The State he represented was as much interested as the State of New York, or any other State in the Union. Mr. R. NELSON moved to fill the blank in the 2d resolution with '300,000.' Mr. M. said he imagined by this time the peoMr. SOUTHARD said he considered the question ple of the Western country thought they had fully before the Committee to be, whether the port of paid the debt of fifteen millions-they had been New York could be so fortified by land batteries so often told of it. He, however, was one of those as to annoy the enemy. Mr. S. said he was of who viewed the purchase of Louisiana as no local opinion that it would be, at least so as to annoy measure, or as being peculiarly beneficial to any any vessels that might attack the city for the pur- one part of the Union. The navigating States poses of insult or contribution. He was of this were deeply interested in it, and so likewise were opinion from the little which he had seen in the the Southern States in removing to a distance a year 1776. From the observation he had then dangerous neighbor. He had always considered made, he believed, if proper batteries were erected, it as a measure in which they were all concerned. it would be impossible for frigates or ships-of-the- The Committee then divided as follows-on line to burn or batter down the city. With re-filling the blank with 200,000-yeas 42, nays 65; gard to some remarks which had been thrown 100,000-yeas 51, nays 60; 50,000-yeas 38; 20,out, he had himself no idea that our citizens were 000-yeas 57, nays 42. to run away on receiving an attack from a few frigates. Neither was he of opinion that it would be proper to fortify all our towns. Gentlemen well knew that there were few ports in the United States that an enemy would consider it an object to attack. He, therefore, thought everything which had been said of the necessity of raising a hundred thousand men, and of enslaving the country, inapplicable to the subject under consideration. Mr. S. further said that he had no idea of an invading enemy. His only fear was from the insult and depredation of pirates, whom he was, therefore, anxious to be prepared to give a warm reception. For this purpose he did not believe it necessary to appropriate a large sum of money. He concluded by expressing a hope that the Committee would concur in making a moderate appropriation. Mr. LYON advocated a liberal appropriation. Mr. MACON (Speaker) observed that the arguments of gentlemen were almost entirely confined to the policy of defending the port of New York; whereas the measure under consideration was much broader, and extended generally to the protection of the ports and harbors of the United States. The only question then really before the Committee was, what sum was now requisite for this object. The chairman of the select committee, to whom this subject has been referred, proposed to fill the blank with $20,000. He has informed us, on the authority of the Department of War, that this sum, added to the unexpended balance appropriated last year, is as much as can be advantageously expended this year. It appears to me, said Mr. M., that this is all gentlemen can require. No abstract question is involved in this measure, whether the port of New York is defensible, or whether we shall defend it. The second resolution contemplates the building of a number of gunboats. The remarks of gentlemen as to the defenceless state of our ports and harbors apply generally to the whole United States, unless they consider New York as more important than any other port. They labor under a great mistake when they consider the country as not equally interested in this question. Any injury that befalls the ports will necessarily affect the whole country where the produce that Mr. MUMFORD moved to fill it with '3.000.' Mr. R. NELSON.-If gunboats are built, we ought to build enough to answer the purpose intended. The proper department has informed us that $300,000 will be necessary for that purpose. For myself, I am wholly ignorant of the utility of gunboats, but, from information received from those who ought to understand the subject, I believe they are the best species of defence. They are constructed so as to operate in shallow water, where frigates and larger vessels cannot come. I believe they are the natural mode of defending our ports so far as they are capable of any defence. But I am really astonished at the motion of the gentleman from New York (Mr. MUMFORD) Just now he was for granting a million towards the defence of our harbors, and now he thinks $3,000 are quite enough. I leave it to him to reconcile his opinions. Mr. MUMFORD.-Gunboats may answer in rivers and in the Southern States, where the water is shallow; but they are inadequate to any useful purpose of defence in the Northern States, where the waters are rough. Mr. Cook was in favor of gunboats, though he thought they ought not to be the exclusive means of defence. The motion to insert 300,000 was lost-yeas 36, nays 46. Mr. THOMAS moved to insert 250,000. That sum would build fifty gunboats. The motion was agreed to-yeas 53, nays 33. Mr. R. NELSON then proposed to fill the second blank with fifty. Had the House agreed to fill the first blank with 300,000, he should have proposed sixty for the second blank. Mr. D. R. WILLIAMS hoped the Committee would not agree to this motion, and for this reason: the sum of $250,000, would not be sufficient to build fifty gunboats. Look at the documents on the table, and you will see, said Mr. W., that the lowest sum expended on the building of a gunboat exceeds $10,000. Mr. R. NELSON said he did not understand the reasoning of the gentleman from South Carolina. It appeared to him demonstrable that if $300,000 JANUARY, 1807. Suspension of the Writ of Habeas Corpus. would build sixty gunboats, $250,000 would build fifty. This was all that was required by the gentleman at the head of the Navy Department, and he believed these gentlemen were not in the habit of asking too little. Mr. D. R. WILLIAMS said he had only risen to warn the House against a surprise. They had better documents than this estimate of the Secretary of the Navy. By his reports it would be seen that there had not been a single gunboat built for less than $10,000. Mr. Cook observed that it appeared, from the most correct information, that some of the gunboats could be built for $5,000. The motion to fill the blank with "fifty," was then agreed to-yeas 53, nays 32. Mr. R. NELSON then offered an amendment to the following effect: an estimate thereof. This motion was objected to by Messrs. SMILIE. HOLLAND, and LLOYD, principally on the ground that if any such inquiry were made, it ought to be extended so as to apply to the other ports of the United States, and was negatived-yeas 39, nays 46. The Committee then rose and reported the bill. Mr. VAN CORTLANDT moved an amendment to the addition to the second section, introduced at the instance of Mr. R. NELSON, authorizing the President at any time to man and equip such of the other armed vessels as he may deem proper. Messrs. VAN CORTLANDT, ELMER, MUMFORD, and Cook, supported; and Messrs. FISK and BURWELL opposed this amendment. When on motion of Mr. SOUTHARD the further consideration of the subject was postponed till Monday, to which day the House adjourned. MONDAY, January 26. Another new member, to wit: WILLIAM W. BIBB, fron Georgia, returned to serve as a member for the said State, in the place of Thomas Spalding, who hath resigned his seat, appeared, produced his credentials, was qualified, and took his seat in the House. A message from the Senate, informed the House that the Senate have passed a bill, entitled "An act for the relief of Seth Harding, late a captain in the navy of the United States;" and also a bill. entitled "An act establishing circuit courts, and abridging the jurisdiction of the district courts in the districts of Kentucky, Tennessee, and Ohio;" to which they severally desire the concurrence of this House. Mr. ALEXANDER, from the committee appointed H. OF R. on the second instant, presented a bill prescribing the effect of records of judgments and decrees of courts of one State in another State; which was read twice and committed to a Committee of the Whole on Thursday next. A Message was received from the President of the United States, enclosing an affidavit of General Wilkinson, charging Messrs Samuel Swartwout, Peter V. Ogden, and James Alexander, with being concerned in a conspiracy. The Message amd affidavit were read, when Mr. THOMAS inquired if the documents alluded to therein did not accompany them, and received for answer that there were no further documents transmitted to the House. SUSPENSION OF THE HABEAS CORPUS. A message was received from the Senate, by Mr. SAMUEL SMITH, as follows: Mr. SPEAKER: I am directed by the Senate of the United States to deliver to this House a confidential message, in writing. The House being cleared of all persons except the members and the Clerk, Mr. SMITH delivered to the SPEAKER the following communication in writing: Gentlemen of the House of Representatives : The Senate have passed a bill suspending for three months the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, in certain cases, which they think expedient to communicate to you in confidence, and to request your concurrence therein, as speedily as the emergency of the case shall in your judgment require. Mr. SMITH, also delivered in the bill referred to in the said communication, and then withdrew. The bill was read as follows: A Bill suspending the writ of Habeas Corpus for three months, in certain cases. Be it enacted, by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Ĉongress assembled, That in all cases, where any person or persons, charged on oath with treason, misprision of treason, or other high crime or misdemeanor, endangering the peace, safety, or neutrality of the United States, have been or shall be arrested or imprisoned, by virtue of any warrant or authority of the President of the United States, or from the Chief Executive Magistrate of any State or Territorial Government, or from any person acting under the direction or authority of the President of the United States, the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall be, and the same hereby is suspended, for and during the term of three months from and after the passage of this act, and no longer. Mr. P. R. THOMPSON moved that the message and the bill received from the Senate ought not to be kept secret, and that the doors be opened. Mr. BURWELL and Mr. SMILIE spoke in support of the motion. Mr. EARLY thought that a previous order should be taken to remove the injunction of secrecy. To open the doors and admit strangers to hear the debate, and yet continue the injunction of secrecy on members would present a singular spectacle. Mr. J. RANDOLPH said they could not be bound to secrecy except by their own vote. If there was H. OF R. Suspension of the Writ of Habeas Corpus. any charm by which they could be bound, except their own act, he wished it might be dissolved. Mr. G. W. CAMPBELL hoped the usual course would be pursued; read the bill a second time, and then refer it to a Committee of the Whole. Mr. ALSTON thought the question, whether the bill should pass to a second reading, first in order. The SPEAKER decided that the motion to open the doors was in order, and the question on that motion must first be taken. The yeas and nays being demanded by one fifth of the members present, they were ordered to be taken. The question then was put on the motion, That the message and bill received from the Senate ought not to be kept secret, and that the doors be now opened; and resolved in the affirmative-yeas 123, nays 3, YEAS-Willis Alston, junior, Isaac Anderson, John Archer, David Bard, Joseph Barker, Burwell Bassett, JANUARY, 1807. when the bill was communicated, and no additional documents presented. He could, therefore, only be governed by that information which the House had received; and he believed that it would justify the motion before the House. The Pre-ident, in his Message of the 22d, says, "on the whole the fugitives from Ohio and their associates from Cumberland, or other places in that quarter. cannot threaten serious danger to the city of New Orleans." If that be the case, upon what ground shall we suspend the writ of habeas corpus? Can any person imagine the United States are in danger, after this declaration of the President, who unquestionably possesses more correct information than any other person can be supposed to have. In another part of the Message, we are informed been embarked for some of the Atlantic ports, probably "That the persons arrested at New Orleans have George M. Bedinger, Silas Betton, William W. Bibb, be expected during the present agitations of New Oron the consideration that an impartial trial could not Barnabas Bidwell, Phanuel Bishop, John Blake, jun., Thomas Blount, James M. Broom, Robert Brown, John leans, and that that city was not as yet a safe place of Boyle, William A. Burwell, William Butler, John confinement. As soon as these persons shall arrive, Campbell, John Chandler, Martin Chittenden, John they will be delivered to the custody of the law, and Claiborne, Joseph Clay, Matthew Clay, George Clin left to such course of trial, both as to place and process, ton, jun., Frederick Conrad, Orchard Cook, Richard as its functionaries may direct; the presence of the Cutts, Samuel W. Dana, Ezra Darby, John Davenport, within a few days, the means of pursuing a sounder highest judicial authorities to be assembled at this place junior, William Dickson, Theodore Dwight, Elias Earle, Peter Early, James Elliot, Caleb Ellis, Ebenezer El-Executive means, should the judges have occasion to course of proceedings here than elsewhere, and the mer, William Ely, John W. Eppes, William Findley, use them, render it equally desirable, for the criminals James Fisk, John Fowler, James M. Garnett, Charles as for the public, that being already removed from the Goldsborough, Peterson Goodwyn, Edwin Gray, Andrew Gregg, Isaiah L. Green, Silas Halsey, Johu Ham- place where they were apprehended, the first regular ilton, Seth Hastings, William Helms, James Holland, arrest should take place here, and the course of proceedDavid Holmes, David Hough, John G. Jackson, Wal-ings receive here its proper direction." ter Jones, James Kelly, Thomas Kenan, Nehemiah The President evidently holds out the idea, that Knight, John Lambert, Joseph Lewis, jun., Henry W. the correct and proper mode of proceeding can be Livingston, Edward Lloyd, Duncan MacFarland, Pat-had under the existing laws of the United States. rick Magruder, Robert Marion, William McCreery, David Meriwether, Nicholas R. Moore, Thomas Moore, Jeremiah Morrow, John Morrow, Jonathan O. Mosely, Gurdon S. Mumford, Jeremiah Nelson, Roger Nelson, Thomas Newton, jun., Gideon Olin, Timothy Pitkin, junior, John Porter, John Pugh, Josiah Quincy, John Randolph, John Rea of Pennsylvania, John Rhea of These persons may be transferred from the military to the civil authority, and be proceeded against according to law. Those, therefore, who fear the escape of the traitors already apprehended, and would, by this measure, obviate the difficulty, must perceive that consequence would not ensue. Mr. B. said, he should consider the susTennessee, John Russell, Peter Sailly, Thomas Sammons, Thomas Sandford, Martin G. Schuneman, Ebe- pension of the habeas corpus as holding out an nezer Seaver, James Sloan, Dennis Smelt, John Smilie, idea of danger and alarm, which was highly imJohn Smith, Samuel Smith, Henry Southard, Richard proper, inasmuch as it did not exist. It is true, Stanford, Joseph Stanton, William Stedman, Lewis B. this conspiracy was once formidable, extensive, Sturges, Samuel Taggart, Benjamin Tallmadge, Sam- and threatening; but it has been dissipated by the uel Tenney, Philip R. Thompson, Thomas W. Thomp- vigilance of Government. He would ask gentleson, Uri Tracy, Abram Trigg, Philip Van Cortlandt, men, if they seriously believed the danger suffici Killian K. Van Rensselaer, Joseph B. Varnum, Daniel ently great to justify the suspension of this most C. Verplanck, Peleg Wadsworth, John Whitehill, important right of the citizen, to proclaim the Robert Whitehill, Eliphalet Wickes, David R. Wil-country in peril, and to adopt a measure so pregliams, Marmaduke Williams, Richard Winn, Joseph Winston, and Thomas Wynns. NAYS-Josiah Masters, David Thomas, and Nathan Williams. nant with mischief, by which the innocent and guilty will be involved in one common destrucion? He said this was not the first instance of the kind since the formation of the Federal Government; there had been already two insurrections in the United States, both of which had de Mr. EPPES moved that the bill be rejected. This motion was afterwards withdrawn to give place to another motion, but with the idea of re-fied the authority of Congress, and menaced the newing it again. Mr. BURWELL said, he was unacquainted with the particular reasons which had induced the Senate to pass this bill. None had been assigned Union with dissolution. Notwithstanding one of them justified the calling out of fifteen thousand men, and the expenditure of one million of dollars, he had not heard of a proposition to suspend JANUARY, 1807. Suspension of the Writ of Habeas Corpus. the writ of habeas corpus. What, then, will be said of us, if now, when the danger is over, firm in the attachment of the people to the Union, with ample resources to encounter any difficulties which may occur, we resort to a measure so harsh in its nature, oppressive in its operation, and ruinous as a precedent? While, in former times, it was thought unsafe to suspend this most important and valuable part of the Constitution, he would ask, whether the necessity at the present time could be considered greater? With regard to those persons who may be implicated in the conspiracy, if the writ of habeas corpus be not suspended, what will be the consequence? When apprehended, they will be brought before a court of justice, who will decide whether there is any evidence that will justify their commitment for farther prosecution. From the communication of the Executive, it appeared there was sufficient evidence to authorize their commitment. Several months would elapse before their final trial, which would give time to collect evidence, and if this shall be sufficient, they will not fail to receive the punishment merited by their crimes, and inflicted by the laws of their country. H. OF R. Mr. B. said he hoped he had shown that, admitting the two cases specified in the Constitution existed, they were not accompanied with such symptoms of calamity as rendered the passage of the bill expedient. What. in another point of light, would be the effect of passing such a law? Would it not establish a dangerous precedent? A corrupt and vicious Administration, under the sanction and example of this law, might harass and destroy the best men of the country. It would only be necessary to excite artificial commotions, circulate exaggerated rumors of danger, and then follows the repetition of this law, by which every obnoxious person, however honest. is surrendered to the vindictive resentment of the Government. It will not be a sufficient answer, that this power will not be abused by the President of the United States. He, Mr. B. believed, would not abuse it, but it would be impossible to restrain all those who are under him. Besides, he would not consent to advocate a principle, bad, in itself, because it will not, probably, be abused. For these reasons, Mr. B. said, he should vote to reject the bill. Mr. ELLIOT said, that he regretted the motion Mr. B. said, he could conceive no injury that to reject the bill had been made, because, considwould result on this score; and, indeed, if some ering the subject of very great importance, he persons should elude justice, it would not endan- thought it most proper that it should take the ger society so materially as to come within the usual course of business, that the bill should be terms of the Constitution. He observed, it ap-read a second time, and referred to a Committee peared to him the commencement of an insurrec- of the Whole, for the purposes of deliberation and tion was the only time when the writ of habeas discussion. corpus ought to be suspended; when the seizure Called upon, however, said Mr. E., to answer of the ringleaders, by dismaying the inferior to the question, Shall the bill be rejected? I must agents, would enable the Government, without answer that question in the affirmative, as I should the effusion of blood, to suppress it. But it was deem it my duty to advocate its rejection, in any manifest that, at this moment, everything intend-form which it might assume, and in any stage of ed by the conspirators was effected, or they were its progress; and I deem it equally my duty, on in the hands of the civil authority; there was, the present occasion. to express my sentiments therefore, no good reason to take this precaution upon the subject. It is, indeed, difficult for me, ary step with that view; while on the one hand, consistently, with the sincere and high respect it would unavoidably produce unnecessary alarm, which I entertain for the source from whence this and much inconvenience to the citizens of the measure originated, to express, in decorous terms, United States. Nothing but the most imperious the hostility which I feel to the proposition. I necessity would excuse us in confining to the Ex- am therefore disposed to consider it as an origiecutive, or any person under him, the power of nal proposition here; as a motion in this body to seizing and confining a citizen, upon bare suspi- suspend, for a limited time, the privileges attached cion, for three months, without responsibility, for to the writ of habeas corpus. And, in this point the abuse of such unlimited discretion. Mr. B. of view, I am prepared to say that it is the most said, he could judge from what he had already extraordinary proposition that has ever been preseen, that men, who are perfectly innocent, would sented for our consideration and adoption. Sir, be doomed to feel the severity of confinement, and what is the language of our Constitution upon undergo the infamy of the dungeon. What repa- this subject? "The privilege of the writ of haration can be made to those who shall thus suf-beas corpus shall not be suspended, except when, fer? The people of the United States would have just reason to reproach their representatives with wantonly sacrificing their dearest interests, when, from the facts presented to this House, it seems the country was perfectly safe, and the conspiracy nearly annihilated. Under these circumstances, there can be no apology for suspending the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, and violating the Constitution, which declares "the writ of ha'beus corpus shall not be suspended, unless when, in cases of invasion or rebellion, the public safety may require it." in cases of invasion or rebellion, the public safety shall require it." Have we a right to suspend it in any and every case of invasion and rebellion? So far from it, that we are under a Constitutional interdiction to act, unless the existing invasion or rebellion, in our sober judgment, threatens the first principles of the national compact, and the Constitution itself. In other words, we can only act, in this case, with a view to national self-preservation. We can suspend the writ of habeas corpus only in a case of extreme emergency; that alone is salus populi which will justify this lex |