H. of R.

Bounty to Deserters.

SEPTEMBER, 1814.

be filled by ragamuffins of all descriptions; and, by the adoption of such a measure as that proposed by this resolution, we should make a direct appeal to the worst passions of the worst men. Are we reduced to this? Have we not resources to maintain an open and manly contest without appealing to this most unheard of and disgraceful course? If such policy were pursued by the Government, he should forever despair of a suc

of disposing of this species of persons, so that they might be useful rather than burdensome to the community, he proposed the following resolve: Resolved, That the Committee on the Public Lands be instructed to inquire into the expediency of giving to each deserter from the British army, during the present war, one hundred acres of the public lands, such deserter actually settling the same; and that the committee have leave to report by bill or othewise. The question to take this motion into consider-cessful issue to the contest in which we are enation, the yeas and nays having been required by Mr. OAKLEY, was decided-For consideration 82, against it 45, as follows:

gaged. He hoped gentlemen would reflect deeply this inquiry. If considerations sufficiently powon this subject, before they gave their consent to YEAS-Messrs. Alexander, Alston, Anderson, Avery, erful to arrest the measure do not press upon the Barbour, Bard, Barnett, Bradley, Brown, Burwell, feelings of men, it would be in vain for him to Caldwell, Chappell, Clark, Condict, Conard, Crawford, urge them. There were, he said, some proposiCreighton, Crouch, Culpeper, Cuthbert, Dana, Davis tions which outraged at once so greatly all the of Pennsylvania, Denoyelles, Desha, Eppes, Evans, feelings of honor and propriety, that it seemed unFindley, Fisk of Vermont, Fisk of New York, Forney, necessary to oppose them by argument. Since Forsyth, Franklin, Gholson, Glasgow, Goodwyn, Gour- the resolution had been introduced, there must be din, Griffin, Hall, Harris, Hawes, Hawkins, Hubbard, some reasons to urge or justify its adoption. But Humphreys, Ingersoll, Ingham, Irving, Irwin, Jackson could the invitation to and encouragement of treaof Virginia, Johnson of Kentucky, Kent of Maryland, son come fairly within the scope of our views? Kershaw, Lefferts, Lowndes, Lyle, Macon, McCoy, Shall the United States, after having year after McKee, McKim, McLean, Montgomery, Murfree, New-year held out their conduct as an example of ton, Piper, Pleasants, Rea of Pennsylvania, Rhea of public faith and honor; after arraigning the eneTennessee, Rich, Roane, Sage, Sevier, Seybert, Sharp, my at the bar of nations for his disregard of jusSkinner, Stanford, Strong, Tannehill, Telfair, Troup, tice, and for his violations of the rules of warfare; Udree, Ward of New Jersey, Wilson of Pennsylvania, shall the United States, after all this, go as far and Yancey. of war, as he has gone beyond all other nations? beyond the enemy in his violations of the usages Shall we, by so doing, draw a veil over the atrocity of his acts, and place us on an eminence of guilt which no nation ever before reached? He called upon gentlemen, by their regard for their own honor and the character of the nation, to stop this proposition in its outset. The House, by their vote to consider the resolution, had already gone too far in sanctioning a proposition which strikes at the root of those principles which bind together the civilized world. It would be to offer a bounty to treason. He did not know to what it might lead. There was enough of bitterness and animosity already infused into this war. Our enemy now affect (for affectation he must suppose it) to accuse us of a violation of the usages of civilized warfare, and presume to place their severest measures on the ground of retaliation. Adopt this measure, and they are justified for every measure of atrocity to which they may think fit to resort. It will not be in your mouths hereafter to complain of the burning and ravaging of your towns, or of the unreasonable rupture of negotiations. He called upon gentlemen, then, to reflect whether the adoption of this measure would not infuse into the present contest a temper which will defeat all hopes of an early peace.

NAYS-Messrs. Baylies of Massachusetts, Bigelow, Boyd, Bradbury, Brigham, Caperton, Cooper, Cox, Davenport, Duvall, Earle, Ely, Farrow, Gaston, Geddes, Grosvenor, Hanson, Hulbert, Jackson of Rhode Island, Kent of New York, King of Massachusetts, Law, Lewis, Lovett, Markell, Miller, Moffit, Moseley, Oakley, Pearson, Pickering, Post, John Reed, Ruggles, Sherwood, Smith of Virginia, Stockton, Sturges, Thompson, Vose, Ward of Massachusetts, Wheaton, White, Wilcox, and Winter.

On the suggestion of Mr. MCKEE, of Kentucky, the resolution was amended, so as to refer the subject to the Committee on Military Affairs, within the scope of whose duties it appeared to him more properly to come.

The yeas and nays having been ordered on the passage of the resolution

Mr. OAKLEY, of New York, said he had asked for the yeas and nays on the question of considering this resolution, to mark his opposition to it in every stage. With deep regret, he might truly say, had he seen this resolution before the House. He had hoped, to whatever extent of sacrifice Congress might determine to go in the prosecution of this war, although we might all agree to lay down our lives and fortunes in its support, we shall still retain something like national honor. He was scrry to see a proposition before this House which he considered to be levelled at the root of it. He did not speak from exteusive knowledge, but he believed he was justified in saying it was the only proposition of the kind ever submitted to any legislature. He did not know, at least, that it had ever entered into the scope of policy of this Government to encourage the commission of crime by those most likely to perpetrate it. The ranks of the enemy were known to

Mr. Fisk, of Vermont, denied that this proposition was of the character ascribed to it; and said that he was not conscious of possessing a disposition to sanction any such measure. What does the motion propose? That the deserters coming among us, instead of becoming nuisances to society, may be provided with the means of becoming good citizens. But, says the gentleman

SEPTEMBER, 1814.

Bounty to Deserters.

H. OF R.

permitted to carry it into ours. They would one and all decide in favor of the former. The people begin to find we are at war with a nation whom no considerations of peculiar modesty or generosity prevent from carrying into effect any measures to which her power is adequate. Still, however, could dishonor attach in any way to the measure which he proposed, he would not support it. But even humanity demanded such a provision. The deserters from the enemy now infesting our cities were at once a burden to themselves and a nuisance to society; but, planted on our frontiers, they would not only form a barrier against savage incursions, but would become useful citizens. Mr. F. compared the advantages of thus diminishing the enemy's effective force with the expense of doing it in any other way, and drew a conclusion favorable to his motion. He was determined to support this war by every proper and honorable measure; and he considered this one of that description. Desertions from the enemy, he said, were daily and numerous. Something like five or six hundred men had already deserted from the enemy at Plattsburg-many of them useful, enterprising men, who wish to become citizens. My wish, said Mr. F., is to make them useful, by giving them the means of support by honest industry.

from New York, this is a violation of all principle. I have never understood that nations at peace with each other were precluded from receiving each other's deserters; and is it understood, that, when you are at war, we may not provide the means of support for those who desert from our enemy? Did gentlemen desire, in order to maintain this ideal national dignity, this high standing among nations, that we should return to the enemy those deserters who came within our lines? Would the gentleman from New York advocate such a measure? And which is more criminal, if criminality can attach to such conduct, to foster them when coming among you in time of peace, or provide the means necessary to prevent their being a burden to the community in time of war? If we take the first step of receiving deserters, why not take the other which is now proposed? But the gentleman had said, this would be inviting deserters from the enemy. Mr. F. said they were already invited by the nature of our institutions, by the freedom and protection they afforded to strangers. And would the gentleman change our form of Government, lest in its present shape it should tempt the soldiers of the enemy to desert? The resolution proposes to introduce no new principle. We do now receive deserters; and there is no gentleman who will rise in his Mr. GROSVENOR, of New York, said, that as he place and move that all deserters be sent back. was bound to believe that any gentleman who The gentleman supposes the measure to be with- made a motion in this House considered it honorout precedent. Let the gentleman read Lord able and proper, when he pronounced the measure, Wellington's proclamation while in Spain, offer- now proposed, to be dishonest, dishonorable and ing a bounty to every deserter from the French inexpedient, he did not mean to reflect personally army of twelve crowns. This precedent had been on those who moved or advocated it. He did set by the very nation with whom we are at war. think so, and he did conceive also that the sugAdmiral Cockburn, too, had not long ago publish-gestions offered against them by the gentleman ed a proclamation to all who wished to leave the from New York had been in no degree met by country to appoint a place of rendezvous, and he the mover. Had they been met? The gentlewould furnish the means to carry them off. Look man talked about the crimes of Britain; and seemalso at General Brisbane's proclamation to the ed to infer because she had violated principle in people of Vermont and New York, inviting them one way, we might in another. This resolution all to stay at home, in other words, to desert the would indeed at once reduce us to the same depth standard of their country, and to furnish his army of guilt in which the gentlemen say our enemy with provisions, &c. Gentlemen might even look is wallowing. The measure embraced in the back to times of peace, and see similar conduct motion before the House, being in the nature of on the part of the enemy. During the existence retaliation, was different from all other such meaof our embargo law, which was very oppressive sures. It was wicked in itself, because it encourin its operation on our present enemy, though, to aged crime. It could not therefore be justified be sure, his friends in this country spoke very on that ground, nor indeed on any other. For lightly of its effect, they invited our citizens to his part, Mr. G. said, he had voted against the violate it, offering them protection and safe con- consideration of the motion, because in principle duct in so doing, not only to any British port, but it was wrong, and therefore he would not even to any port whatever. Whatever new distinc- inquire into it. Without regard, he said, to the tions may be drawn on this head, yet, if we look insinuation of particular sensibilities, the usual at the effect of measures, a more direct invitation cant in this House, on such occasions, he should to rebellion, even in time of peace with us, could candidly discuss this question. If he knew himnot be imagined. From some cause or other, a self, he observed, there was not a gentleman on great deal of sensibility was always exhibited in the floor who would go further than he would at this House when certain subjects were touched. this moment, to rescue the country from the danThe House was told again and again to beware gers which environ it, to repel the foe that tramof provoking the enemy's wrath. This kind of ples on the soil. But, let the danger be what it false sensibility was, Mr. F. said, fast vanishing. would, unless the existence of the nation was Ask the citizens of Plattsburg, Buffalo, Havre- absolutely in jeopardy, he could not, under any de Grace, Hampton, Georgetown, and this place, pretence, consent to prostrate its honor and digwhether they had rather the war should be car-nity by plunging into crime. The question, then, ried into the enemy's territories or he should be arose whether the proposed measure was or was

H. OF R.

Bounty to Deserters.

SEPTEMBER, 1814.

not of a criminal nature; and this question he ed, they would suffer death. The gentleman had wished fairly to consider. What was this pro- talked of humanity; was there any humanity in position which was to be adopted as a national this? In its consequences, as well as its principrinciple, as a portion of our national morality, ples, it is utterly objectionable. Whenever the to stamp our character, now and forever? He nation is pushed to the last extremity, such a asked gentlemen to say if they would, by adopt- measure might present a question for consideraing this proposition, offer a bounty for the com- tion; but we are not driven to this extremity. mission of crime? Let gentlemen look into the This country is abundantly capable of defence. books on national law, they will find desertion to Let its means be brough forth; the people are be an offence of so black a dye that not even en- ready and willing to raise their arms in its defence. emies are to encourage it. It is an offence in There was no occasion for such degrading mearegard to which it is a common expression, that sures as this. men love the treason but hate the traitor. A na- Mr. SHARP, of Kentucky, commenced some retion must receive the traitor, but hates him at the marks by saying, that on all subjects requiring same time; because the crime of deserting the the deliberation of Congress, he was pleased to allegiance which a man owes to his country, is see a sentiment of jealous regard for the national one of the deepest dye, one which you are daily honor and character pervading the House, and punishing with death on your frontier. It is now felt disposed to allow the sincerity and candor of proposed to offer a bounty on an offence, to which every gentleman who made professions of it. your own laws have decreed the punishment of After hearing very attentively, however, all that death. Why stop here? Why not offer a bounty had been said on this subject, and giving due to every man who commits treason of any kind? credit to the ingenuity of gentlemen, whose arWhy stop here? Why not at once adopt the guments are certainly very specious, his mind principles of the Old Man of the Mountain, as he had not been convinced but that the measure now is called, and offer a bounty for the assassination proposed to the House perfectly comported with of the King, Governors and Generals of your en- the national honor. It was true, indeed, that emy? Why stop short by giving a bounty on when we consult the conduct of nations, and desertion? Why not at once give a bounty for those usages which have the force of laws, we the assassination of every man in your enemy's shall find many traits that do not quadrate entirecamp, and pay the perpetrators of the crime when ly with the principles deemed honorable in social their daggers reek with their blood? There is life. But, in considering subjects of this kind, little or no distinction, in principle, between these we must disentangle our minds from the considoffences. Mr. G. repeated that he was ready, and eration of municipal laws which have no bearing gentlemen would find it in his conduct, to travel on this subject. Treason is a crime of the highevery honorable length in defending his country. est grade against the nation to which the traitor But nothing short of preserving the independence belongs. To withdraw allegiance from one naof the country, and not till that independence was tion and transfer it to that nation's enemy, during prostrate on the ground, could induce him to war, is treason against the sovereign authority to adopt a measure, embracing a principle like this. which allegiance was due. But how ought we And what would gentlemen gain by it? It was to consider this crime? Though a crime against already universally understood that the soldiers a man's own country, it is no crime against that of the enemy deserted whenever they could. But to which he deserts. The desertion of a soldier say, that by this measure we gained ten thousand from our enemy is surely no crime against the men-would it be a feather in the scale; would United States, and therefore, as to us, no crime at this indemnify us for the black disgrace which it all. Mr. S. examined at some length the nature would stamp on the very forehead of the country? of allegiance and of the obligations it imposed. But look at the further consequences, said he. To screen a criminal of any kind was particiBelieve you that the enemy will not retaliate? pating in his crime, and becoming accessory after That after you have committed this crime against the fact; but it had been the practice of all nahuman nature, she would not enter the Southern tions to receive deserters from their enemies, and department of your country, and kindle a fire to permit them to settle among them if they bewhich you could not quench? This she had not haved as good citizens ought to do. The nice yet attempted, though she had the power. Be- principles of honor the gentlemen had laid down, lieve you she would not capture your unoffending extended far enough, would impose on a nation citizens on the ocean, and keep them as hostages the necessity of restoring to an enemy his deserttill you delivered up those whom you had enticed ers, and enabling him to punish their offence away? Yes, sir, she would not stay her arm. with death. If, however, as public law exists, we Look at a further consequence of such a measure. may give them aid and comfort, and afford them We are to settle these ragamuffins on our fron- an asylum, we may as well add to other inducetiers. Was there a man who believed that these ments as those which, the gentleman says, already men, who were picked from the jails of Europe, operate so powerfully on the soldiers of our enthese sixpenny men, would settle down as farm-emy. In so doing, the principle, which is not ers? No; they were men of dissolute lives, men not acquainted with the useful arts. Mr. G. said he would not offer inducements to such poor wretches to commit a crime, for which, if detect

controverted, is extended but little further than at present, and in its moral consequences is certainly not so enlarged as to affect the national honor. The force of the enemy's examples had been

passed over in silence by the gentleman, and their correctness tacitly admitted-their authority being denied only by the general intimation that such conduct was contrary to national law. The proposed measure therefore derived strength from the preceding conduct of the enemy. But, examine all history, ancient and modern, what had been the usual course of all nations at war? To weaken the hands of their opponents and strengthen the hands of themselves. Perhaps precedents derived from the Revolutionary war might not be considered by gentlemen as bearing on this point, since Britain then claimed us as her colonies. Recollect, however, her proclamations inviting our citizens to withdraw from their allegiance. Our history, it is true, is not ample, owing to the recency of its date. But it will be recollected that in the war with Tripoli, our gallant officer conducting the war on the land united himself on that occasion with a pretender to the Tripolitan throne, and took advantage of his rebellion to divide the forces of the enemy. Who censured that act? Who blamed Eaton for his conduct? Yet it was thus only the Dey was compelled to come to terms which he had before refused. This measure was clearly distinguishable from a bounty for assassination, to which it had been likened. Employing persons secretly to kill an enemy was a warfare worthy only of savages; it was an unmanly way of getting rid of those whom an army dare not meet in a field of battle. But to withdraw soldiers from an enemy's standard was not of this character, and was besides more correct under present circumstances, inasmuch as the enemy's army is not composed of soldiers of his own country, but of soldiers from Germany and other countries-men who owe no national allegiance to Britain, but are mere mercenaries in her ranks-who fight for those who pay them best. They are calculated to be the most dangerous enemies, but are willing to desert their leaders and join our standard on sufficient inducements. If they employ men owing them no allegiance, have we not a right to withdraw them if we can, and employ them to strengthen our own frontier? As to the objection that they would not settle, that objection is refuted by the terms of the resolution, which require actual settlement on the land. Let gentlemen acquainted with the Revolutionary war recollect how many of the good citizens of Pennsylvania and other States were deserters from the British ranks, Hessians, Germans, &c., and have become among our best and wealthiest and most useful citizens. Mr. S. concluded by observing that this was a clear question of expediency, perfectly within the scope of our policy, not contrary to national honor, merited the attention of the House, and ought to be referred as proposed to one of its committees.

After rejecting a motion made by Mr. BRADLEY, of Vermont, to lay the motion on the table, the question on its adoption was determined For the motion 80, against it 55, as follows:

H. OF R.

Burwell, Caldwell, Chappell, Clark, Comstock, Condict, Conard, Crawford, Creighton, Crouch, Dana, Davis of Pennsylvania, Denoyelles, Desha, Eppes, Evans, Findley, Fisk of Vermont, Fisk of New York, Forney, Forsyth, Franklin, Gholson, Glasgow, Goodwyn, Gourdin, Griffin, Hall, Harris, Hawes, Hawkins, Hubbard, Humphreys, Ingersoll, Ingham, Irving, Irwin, Jackson of Virginia, Johnson of Kentucky, Kent of Maryland, Kerr, Kershaw, Lefferts, Lowndes, Lyle, free, Newton, Pickens, Piper, Pleasants, Rea of PennMcCoy, McKee, McKim, McLean, Montgomery, Mursylvania, Rhea of Tennessee, Rich, Roane, Sage, Sevier, Seybert, Sharp, Tannehill, Telfair, Troup, Udree, Ward of New Jersey, Wilson of Pennsylvania, and Yancey.

NAYS-Messrs. Baylies of Massachusetts, Bayly of Virginia, Bigelow, Boyd, Bradbury, Bradley, Brigham, Butler, Caperton, Champion, Cooper, Cox, Culpeper, Davenport, Duvall, Earle, Ely, Farrow, Gaston, Geddes, Goldsborough, Grosvenor, Hanson, Hulbert, Jackson of Rhode Island, Kent of New York, King of Massachusetts, King of North Carolina, Law, Lewis, Lovett, Macon, Markell, Miller, Moffit, Moseley, Oakley, Pearson, Pickering, Post, John Reed, Ruggles, Sherwood, Skinner, Smith of Virginia, Stanford, Stockton, Sturges, Thompson, Vose, Ward of Massachusetts, Wheaton, White, Wilcox, and Winter. So it was adopted by the House.

HONOR TO THE BRAVE. Mr. HAWKINS, of Kentucky, in introducing the following motion, adverted to the unpropitious events attending the commencement of the war, the more mortifying because unexpected, which had caused to be overlooked by the National Councils some displays of valor and military skill which deserved the notice of Congress. This omission had been the more marked because of the almost unlimited plaudits during the same time bestowed on the officers of the Navy, &c. Had the nation noticed by civil honors the merits of a Pike, a Taylor, a Croghan, a Miller, and some others, perhaps they would have done but sheer justice. But his object in rising now was to present a motion limited in its character, and confined to objects which must meet the approbation of the House. The resolution he proposed, and which he had hoped some other member would before now have offered, was in the following words:

Resolved, That the thanks of the United States, in Congress assembled, be presented to Generals Brown, Scott, and Gaines, and their companions in fame.

Resolved, That General Brown be requested to communicate to the other officers and solders under his command the thanks of the United States in Congress, and the high sense of gratitude entertained for victories so splendid, achieved in contests so unequal.

Considerable desultory debate took place on this motion, not in opposition to the principle, but from difference of opinion as to the mode.

Mr. OAKLEY moved to commit the same to the Committee of Military Affairs, with instructions to inquire into the expediency of returning the thanks of Congress to such other officers and soldiers of the United States as may have distinAr-guished themselves during the present war.

YEAS-Messrs. Alexander, Alston, Anderson, cher, Avery, Barbour, Bard, Barnett, Bowen, Brown,

A motion was made by Mr. SHARP, to amend

Amendments to the Constitution.

Several other members, to wit: from New Hampshire, BRADBURY CILLEY; from New Jersey, JAMES SCHUREMAN; from Maryland, NICHO-terest in the banking establishments within their LAS R. MOORE; appeared, and took their seats.