JAN. 20, 1837.]

FRIDAY, JANUARY 20.

MILEAGE OF MEMBERS.

The House then took up the following resolution, sub. mitted on a former day by Mr. UNDERWOOD:

“Resolved, That the Sergeant-at-arms be directed to lay before this House a statement showing the mileage claimed and the sums paid therefor to the members of this House and the delegates from the Territories, respect- | ively, during the last and present session of Congress; and that he also procure and lay before this House a similar statement in regard to the Senators in Congress."

Mr. Boox had moved to strike out of the resolution that part relating to the mileage of the Senators of the United States.

The question pending was the motion of Mr. Boon to lay the resolution on the table; and on this motion Mr. CRAIG bad called for the yeas and nays, which were ordered.

The motion to lay on the table was decided in the negative: Yeas 40, nays 126. And the question recurring upon the amendment of Mr. Boon, it was rejected: Yeas 58, nays not counted.

Mr. ADAMS thought that the greatest respect was due to the Senate of the United States; he would sug gest, therefore, that the Clerk of the House was a more appropriate officer to procure this information than the Sergeant-at-arms.

Mr. UNDERWOOD thereupon modified his resolution by inserting the word "Clerk," instead of "Sergeant-at-arms."

Mr. CLAIBORNE, of Mississippi, sent the following amendment to the Chair:

"And be it further resolved, That a select committee of five be appointed, with power to send for persons and papers, to inquire into and report to this House what deduction, if any, the members of the House of Representatives have made in their accounts for per diem compensation when absent in attendance on the Supreme Court of the United States, or on the courts of adjacent States, or on their own private business elsewhere."

Before the question was put, Mr. CLAIBORNE said that, personally, he cared nothing for the adoption of the resolution submitted by the gentleman from Kentucky, [Mr. UNDERWOOD.] He was as able to bear its pressure as any other man; but he protested against the imputation which it seemed to cast upon many members of this body. Sir, I charge my mileage by the river route, as being the way usually travelled to the seat of Government, upon a principle sanctioned by a distinguished gentleman, (Mr. Clay,) when he occupied that chair, and by every Speaker who has succeeded him. When my deceased colleague (General Dickson) and myself arrived here last winter, we were ignorant of the rale. He inquired, looked at the record, and found that our predecessors had charged by the river routethe only one ever travelled; that the members from Louisiana and other States had adopted the same practice for years; that it was sustained here by official decisions, and we charged accordingly.

Sir, for our privations, fatigue, and exposure, on our way hither, no money can compensate us. We were ice-bound in the Ohio for days, and detained week after Week for want of a conveyance. My colleague sunk under its effects, and I have never recovered from it. Sir, print these facts in your resolutions; publish them in Roman capitals, and send an electioneering handbill to every plantation in Mississippi. Tell my constituents that you, who refused time after time to grant them relief to give them the poor privilege of pre-emption to purchase their hard-earned homes; that you, who have Conopolized all the public treasure; that you, who tax sur labor and industry with a high tariff, and then dis

[H. OF R.

tribute out the proceeds by millions to yourselves, and a few pitiful thousands to us; that you believe that their representatives are paid too much for travelling to the seat of Government! Sir, do you think they will disturb the honored ashes of the dead, to pronounce a verdict against him? If my colleague lived, if he could be revived, to reoccupy that still vacant seat, he would rebuke you in language that I cannot imitate. Thank God, Mr. Speaker, I represent a liberal and a generous people; none of your superannuated districts, where every thing is in its dotage; where you gloat upon a dollar, and starve upon the memory of a prosperity that is past. We have no lordly proprietors and fawning vassals among us; no miserable, half-fed wretches mourning over the vestiges of colonial affluence and bondage. Ours is a young and thriving country; mine a people liberal to a fault, prodigal in their benevolence, and who will never stoop to inquire whether their representatives are paid one hundred or one thousand dollars. Sir, we make no money here; not one man from the planting States carries home with him a cent. We do not come here to hoard up fortunes and save picayunes.

Mr. Speaker, the people of the South are a travelling people. Your public places, from Virginia to Saratoga, are crowded with the citizens of Mississippi and Louisiana every season; and out of ten thousand who leave home, probably not one hundred travel by land. roads, in fact, in the winter and spring, are impassable. We have no stages there; and I myself was twelve hours travelling twenty miles on horseback, on my way last year to this city-such was the condition of our roads.

Our

Sir, I repeat it, the passage of this resolution would not affect me personally; but I protest against its injurious operation upon others in the distant States. It would completely change the representation in this House. It would cut off and exclude every man in moderate circumstances in the States to which I refer. Many of our public men are poor. The public men in the old States are, generally, men of fortune, and able to live here upon their own incomes. But we have no family influence in the new States; no hereditary representation; no descent of office from one generation to another; and the majority of our legislators, here and at home, are young men, without fortunes, who have risen by their own exertions. Sir, I will vote for no measure that will have the most remote tendency to check the aspirations or cripple the energies of those who have no fortune to depend upon. I will not consent to create an aristocracy here, or to fill this hall exclusively with rich manufacturers or purse-proud nabobs. Let it remain in the power of all to come here, who have the industry, or the talent, or the merit, to win their way, whether they be rich or poor.

In relation to the amendment, Mr. Speaker, it is right that I should say it is aimed at no particular individual. I have heard much, but my curiosity has never led me to inquire after names. I would scorn to examine the accounts of gentlemen; that I leave to those who choose to do so, and believe it is their duty. I will never attempt to win my way to fame or popularity by any leg'slation intended to injure others. But while I intend nothing personal, I must insist upon the equity of the investigation proposed in my amendment. It is notorious that gentlemen in both branches of Congress do absent themselves without leave, for days and weeks. They go to Philadelphia, New Jersey, Maryland, Virginia, and elsewhere, to attend the courts. What deductions have been made in their accounts? They attend the Supreme Court in this city. Yes, sir! the very men who are voting for this ad captandum, this popularity-hunting resolution, go there day after day upon professional busi

ness.

Sir, do we go there? Do we pocket large fees for court services, when we are sent here to serve the

people? No, sir, not a man of us. Not one that this resolution is intended to prostrate ever leaves his seat here to receive fees in the courts of law; we leave that to those distinguished gentlemen who are so much alarm. ed about this miserable mileage. While they are making thousands out of this House, or feasting at some splendid mansion, we are industriously-perhaps unprofitably attending to our duties here. Sir, we will not shrink from this investigation; we challenge it; let us have the ayes and noes on my amendment, and on another to be proposed by my friend from Arkansas, [Mr. YELL.] In the vernacular tongue of the West, give us a fair shake," and we will balance accounts with you. We will leave it to the people to decide who are most censurable-the members from the new States who charge by the route that every one travels-by the only route that can be travelled-who charge according to immemoral usage, and by the official sanction of offi. cers acting under oath-or those who leave this House, day after day, and the service of their constituents, to practice law for extravagant fees.

Mr. YELL sent the following amendment to the Chair:

"And that said committee be instructed to inquire into the expediency of providing by law for reducing the compensation allowed to members of Congress to six dollars per diem; and also into the expediency of providing by law for the removal of the seat of Government of the United States to some point on the Ohio or Mississippi river, on or before the first day of January, 1840."

Mr. YELL took the floor, and said that it was obvious that the original resolution was intended to throw censure upon the members coming from the distant West, although it has not the boldness, the candor, the manliness, to avow such intention. For one, he was willing to admit that he charged by the river route, under the authority of a distinguished predecessor (Mr. Clay) of yours, Mr. Speaker, under your authority, and that of your predecessor, and under the example of a gentle. man (Mr. Sevier) as scrupulous, as honest, and as honorable, as any one on this floor, however immaculate they may wish to appear. He charged only for the distance he travelled, and that distance was accurately estimated, not mere guess work. Sir, let gentlemen look at home; let them pluck the mote out of their own eye; let them cut down their own compensation to six dollars per day; and then attend to the duties of the House instead of travelling off during the continuance of the ses sion, to practice law, or riot in luxury on their splendid estates. He was disposed to test the sincerity of gentlemen. Let them stand up before the country, and vote for his amendment, and for the salutary proposition submitted by the gentleman from Mississippi, whose address has just produced so much sensation in the House. Let there be no skulking, but give us an unequivocal vote by ayes and noes.

Sir, why is this war upon the West? What new po litical evolution is to be made? Who does the gentleman from Kentucky propose to affect? It is strange, sir, very strange, that this proposition should emanate from a party opposed heretofore to retrenchment and an economical administration of the Government; a party that had endeavored to thwart General Jackson's administration, from its very organization, in all its salutary measures; a party that relies upon latitudinarian constructions alone to justify their extraordinary assumptions when in power. Sir, this their veil of gossamer will be stripped away, and the people of the West will see in it only an ignis futuus, an artifice to gull and delude them. If they were sincere, let them vote for the proposition of his friend from Mississippi; let them vote for the amendment now submitted by himself; let

[JAN. 21, 1837.

them say whether they will favor the removal of the seat of Government from a lateral to a central position; from a poor, exposed, worn-out country, to a point central to the great in'erests of this Union; in the midst of a wealthy and improving region, surrounded by a population as brave, as patriotic, as any in the universe. Mr. Y. addressed the House at length, and concluded by urging the adoption of his amendment.

Mr. UNDERWOOD observed that the gentleman from Arkansas [Mr. YELL] had not been here at the last session, or he would have seen that he (Mr. U.) had not moved in this subject with a disposition to criminate any of his brother members of the House; but that he had done so with the full conviction that some legisla tion was necessary. The keen perspicuity of the gen tleman from Arkansas seemed to discover that Mr. U. intended to cast reflections and offer an insult to those persons who had charged by the river route. Mr. U. would assure the gentleman that he meant no such thing; but had only honestly endeavored to bring to the consideration of the House and the country what he believed to be an existing evil, and one, too, which he considered it his duty to endeavor to correct. It was a notorious fact, not to be denied, that a large portion of the members of the House from the South and West claimed and received compensation for their mileage by the river route, which amounted to a much larger sum than that charged by the land route; and gentlemen justified themselves in doing so. Now, Mr. U. did not propose to controvert the reasons which gentlemen assigned for their conduct, nor did he say that gentlemen acted corruptly in making these charges, but he conscientiously believed they misconstrued the law on this subject; and, as a member of the House, he considered it his duty to endeavor to correct what he conceived a misrepresentation of that law. The act fixing the compensation of members of Congress was passed at a time when there were no steamboats on the Western waters, and he be lieved it was now wrong for gentlemen to charge by these circuitous routes. If, however, gentlemen could reconcile this with their own consciences, he had nothing to sy; but he thought they ought to have some uniform rule of action in these cases; and, for the purpose of procuring this uniform system, he had moved in this matter, and made these exertions, and for no other purpose whatever.

Mr. WHITTLESEY here moved that the House proceed to the orders of the day; which was agreed to. Several bills from the Senate were then taken up, twice rad, and referred.

The House took up the bill for the relief of

N. & L. DANA & CO.

lands the Atchafalaya Railroad and Banking Company;" which was concurred in. The bill having been brought into the House, on motion of Mr. LINCOLN, was taken up, on its engrossment.

Mr. PARKS had the same objection to the passage of this bill, in its present state, which he had to all other bills of this kind; which was, that it contained no provision for carrying the mails of the United States, public stores, &c.; consequently, these corporations charged the Government an extravagant price for carrying the mails. Where these charters were granted by the States, and they were under the exclusive jurisdiction of the States, the Government could do nothing with them; but, where they go through the public lands, he held it to be the duty of Congress to provide some power by which these corporations might be compelled to carry the mails, munitions of war, &c., for a reasonable compensation. It might be necessary (as, for instance, in the case of the Seminole war) that the Government should transport troops, provisions, and munitions, from one point to another; and, unless some provision was made by the Government for compelling these companies to carry Government property, they might charge their own price, or even refuse to carry it. He therefore moved that the bill be committed to the Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads, with instructions to inquire into the expediency of adding a section providing for carrying the mails of the United States for a reasonable and just compensation.

Mr. REYNOLDS, of Illinois, said that he hoped to be excused for a few minutes, while he would explain to the House the unreasonable grounds of opposition to the passage of this bill. He condemned the practice of detaining the House a long time on small matters; but the motion of the gentleman from Maine, [Mr. PARKs,] to refer this bill to the Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads, was in itself so decidedly repugnant to his (Mr. R's) notions of propriety and justice to the new States, that he could not remain silent and at his ease when such a question was under discussion. The gentleman wanted the company to be charged with the carrying the United States mail, and other services to the Government; and for what? For the simple right of Waysay a few feet of land on each side of the railroad. This is the consideration on the part of the Government. Is this a reasonable consideration? Is this such consideration as the gentleman would have exacted in a private Contract? Mr. R. hoped not.

Such great and national improvements were not only a great benefit to the United States in her commercial transactions, but, in fact, enhanced the price of the pub. lic lands to a vast extent; the Government was making more by this improvement than the company; thousands of dollars more would be realized to the Treasury of the United States, by the operation, than would be if the Country were permitted to remain in its present unimproved state. Yet, with all this advantage to the Goverament, the gentleman wanted to clog and encumber the improvement with more burdens. This seems like settled hostility to the growth and prosperity of the Western section of the Union.

Mr. R. observed that these great and laudable improvements are not only a great advantage to the United States, but an honor to the country, and should receive from the hands of Congress all the fostering care that is Compatible with the rights and interests of other sections of the nation. The railroad from Charleston, South

Carolina, is one of these stupendous works of improveent, which we all ought to hail as an honor to our Sammon country. No unnecessary impediment should te placed in its march to completion and perfection. Mr. R. said the same observations would apply to the provement in the State of Illinois. A company had

[H. OF R.

been chartered to construct a railroad four or five hun dred miles in length, through the centre of that Slate, extending from the termination of the canal to the mouth of the Ohio. Should such notions and objections prevail as gentlemen urge, this great and national work must wither and die. This is the inevitable consequence. These companies are like all others of mankind; they will not do a great deal for nothing. Load them down, and our country is not improved. If the United States gave this company lands by which the road was to be made, it might be right to ask something from the company in consideration of the same. If the Government even granted a right of pre-emption to a part of the land over which the road would pass, a consideration with more reason might be demanded. But this is not the case. This company asks nothing but a small slip of land, not to die on, but to live on. Mr. R. hoped the gentleman's motion would not prevail, but that the bill would be passed into a law, which would be serviceable to the Government, and the people also.

Mr. PARKS was sorry the gentleman from Illinois should have become disturbed on this subject, by the simple proposition of referring it to a committee, to inquire into the expediency of adding a provision which Mr. P. considered right and proper. The gentleman had said that this provision would be requiring these corporations to carry your mails for nothing. This was not the case; the provision simply asked them to carry the mails for a liberal and just consideration. As to the idea which the gentleman from Illinois advanced, that Mr. P. held any enmity to the interests of the Western country, he must tell the gentleman that he knew no more about it than the man in the moon. The gentleman made charges against Mr. P. which were not justified by the facts; and he hoped the gentleman would forbear from setting him down as opposed to the interests of the West, until some subject came up which would make it more apparent than the present that he had any hostile feelings towards the West.

Mr. LINCOLN said this bill had been introduced for the purpose of getting a great public improvement completed. There was no pre-emption granted them, but they were merely granted the privilege of locating their road on the public lands. The company had asked for one hundred and sixty feet in width, but the committee had cut it down to one hundred feet, therefore, they thought it no more than reasonable to grant them this right of location. In regard to the motion made by the gentleman from Maine, [Mr. PARKS,] it seemed to him (Mr. L.) that it imposed an invidious distinction between the rights of this corporation and those granted to other corporations. No longer ago than yesterday, there were two bills ordered to be engrossed, containing the same provisions as this bill, without objection from the gentleman from Maine, or any other gentleman. There had been many bills passed containing similar provisions, and he saw no reason why they should place restrictions on this corporation which they had not imposed upon other companies. He would call to the attention of the gentleman the fact that there was a provision requiring these corporations to transport troops and munitions in time of war; and not only that, but the Government had the right to take the road, the engines, and all the fixtures, and convert them to its own use; and, in regard to the transportation of the mails on these roads, he considered that in a short time they would find it to their interest to carry them; and he had no doubt but that the transporta

tion of the mail would be sought for by these corpora

tions.

Mr. PARKS remarked that he was not aware that any bills had been engrossed on yesterday of the nature of the one now before the House. If it was so, and he had it in his power when they came up on their third read

We

Mr. ANTHONY was favorable to the amendment proposed by the gentleman from Maine, [Mr. PARKS,] but he did not think it necessary to go into details at this stage of the bill. He perfectly concurred in the views of that gentleman, that it was proper to begin with some restrictions of this kind. In relation to the suggestion of the gentleman from Virginia, [Mr. MERCER,] that the Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads might make some general arrangement with these corporations, he considered it fallacious. When these corporations once got privileges granted to them, it was impossible for committees of this House to make any arrangement with them, unless it was made on their own terms. have seen already the evils arising from granting these unlimited privileges; we can now scarcely get our mails carried upon these roads, when, if we had taken them in time, we might have brought them to our own terms. From day to day, in this House, we are pointed to precedents and examples; and it is said now, that because we have granted other railroads the privilege of locating on the public lands without any restriction, that we should do the same with this company. He would submit it to the House, however, whether, because they had once done wrong, they must continue to do wrong. They now had the power of imposing a provision of this kind, and now was the accepted time. Let these corporations carry the mail at the same rate they carried other produce or property; or, if the risk was greater than on other property, pay them more; but let them be confined to something like a reasonable price. It was necessary for something of this kind to be done, because experience had shown that these corporations would not carry the mail unless they were paid a very extravagant price. Mr. GARLAND, of Louisiana, made a brief explanation in reference to the importance of the passage of this bill to the United States, opening, as it would, a vast body of the finest lands in the State of Louisiana. He also adverted to the fact that, unless this bill were speedily passed, it would be useless to pass it at all, and entail ruin upon the company. The charter was incorporated, and bears date the 10th of March, 1835, and it was made compulsory on the company to commence their work within two years from that date, or forfeit their charter. Unless, then, this bill passed soon, it would be inoperative. The company were ready to proceed, had gone on to make contracts and prepare materials as they did last year.

At the last session of Congress it passed the Senate without the slightest hesitation; but on referring it to the Committee on Public Lands, that committee, conceiving the company justly merited some return for the advantages about to accrue to the United States in consequence of their labors, reported the bill back with an amendment, giving them the right of pre-emption to alternate sections along the line of the road. In consequence of that amendment the bill was then lost, and the original bill was now revived, merely giving them the right of way to the extent of one hundred feet in width.

Mr. G. further explained, that under no circumstances did the company anticipate a profitable return from the railroad, for its construction was imposed upon them as a bonus for their bank charter; and, so far from being a benefit, would be a heavy charge. Under these circumstances, therefore, he did hope the gentleman from Maine would not insist upon his motion to send the bill to the Committee on the Post Office, since it would lead to the inevitable loss of the bill.

[JAN. 23, 1837.

Mr. JOHNSON, of Louisiana, also opposed the amendment, on the same ground as his colleague. He descri bed the character of the country through which the road was designed to pass, which was overflown every spring; but it would pass a body of land, now inaccessible, that would bring millions into the Treasury. He expressed his surprise that there should be a solitary objection to the bill.

The motion of Mr. PARKS was disagreed to without a

count.

On motion of Mr. MERCER, the bill was so amended as to give the company "eighty" instead of "one hundred" feet; and it was then ordered to be engrossed for a third reading on Monday next.

THE MINT.

On motion of Mr. OWENS, the Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union was discharged from the further consideration of the "bill to amend the act establishing branches of the United States mint," and the same was brought into the flouse.

Mr. OWENS explained that the bill related to the establishment of branches of the mint at New Orleans, Charlotte, in North Carolina, and Dahlonega, in Georgia. These several branches were now ready to go into operation, and the director of the mint was anxious for it; but, until the bill under consideration passed, the President could not appoint the necessary officers.

The bill was then read, and ordered to be engrossed for a third reading on Monday next.

The House took up the bill for the relief of

EBENEZER BREED.

This bill proposes to return to the memorialist the amount of duties paid on a quantity of wine imported into the district of Boston, in August, 1829, which was placed in a storehouse, by order and under the direction of the collector, under bond, which was given in the usual form in such cases, without surety for the duties; which wine, with other property of the memorialist, was destroyed by fire, while in the possession and under the key of the Government.

The question pending was on the engrossment of the bill.

After some remarks by Messrs. LAWRENCE, CAVE JOHNSON, INGERSOLL, PEARCE of Rhode Island, CAMBRELENG, PARKER, CUSHING, GIDEON. LEE, HARPER, PHILLIPS, and ADAMS,

Mr. DUNLAP moved the previous question; which was seconded by the House: Yeas 99, nays not counted. The main question was then ordered to be put, when Mr. CAVE JOHNSON called for the yeas and nays on the main question, (which was on the engrossment of the bill;) which were ordered, and were: Yeas 87, nays 65.

So the bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time.

The remainder of the day was spent in the consideration of private bills.

MONDAY, JANUARY 23.

ABOLITION OF SLAVERY.

When the reading of the journal had been concluded, The SPEAKER announced that the unfinished business was the petition presented on Monday last, by the gentleman from Massachusetts, [Mr. CUSHING,] from the merchants of Boston, praying the interference of the Government of the United States in relation to unnecessary quarantine imposed on American vessels by the Danish Government at Elsineur.

Mr. ADAMS rose to a point of order. A question was undecided on a petition presented by himself, this

day fortnight, from certain inhabitants of Dover, in the county of Norfolk, State of Massachusetts, praying for the abolition of slavery and the slave trade in the District of Columbia. The subject came up last Monday, (a gentleman from North Carolina [Mr. BINUM] being entitled to the floor,) but was postponed until this day. At the time of its postponement the question on the reception of the petition was undecided, and the gentleman from North Carolina was in the midst of an argument in opposition to its reception. Mr. A. inquired whether this subject was not entitled to precedence.

The SPEAKER said that, strictly speaking, probably it was; but that, by a subsequent order of the House, that petition had been disposed of. It had been laid on the table by a resolution adopted since the petition was presented.

Mr. ADAMS inquired whether the Speaker considered that the question pending on the petition had been decided.

The SPEAKER said he felt himself constrained by the terms of the resolution so to decide.

Mr. ADAMS asked that the resolution might be read. The resolution, which is in the following terms, was accordingly read:

"Resolved, That all petitions, memorials, resolutions, propositions, or papers, relating in any way or to any extent whatever to the subject of slavery, or the abolition of slavery, shall, without being either printed or referred, be laid on the table, and that no further action whatever shall be had thereon."

The SPEAKER said it was his opinion that this resolution embraced every possible case that could arise. Mr. ADAMS said he wished the decision of the Chair to be entered on the journal. The question he made was, whether that resolution did, in fact, cut off, root and branch, debate on another subject which was under consideration at the time the resolution was adopted.

The SPEAKER said that, at the last session of Congress, a resolution of this character was adopted, anticipating the action of the House on this class of petitions. The Chair had given to that resolution the most liberal construction, and had been disposed to entertain the question of reception. An appeal was taken, and the House had given a different construction from that of the Speaker. In pursuance of this decision of the House, the Speaker felt himself compelled to make the decision he had now made. The decision now given, however, could be entered on the journal.

Mr. ADAMS said that this decision changed the order of the business of the House; it suspended and altered the rules of the House. The resolution was not introduced in the form required for all resolutions changing or suspending the rules of the House. Every such reso bution required one day's notice; but this resolution had been offered without notice. The rule also required the vote of a majority of two thirds to change the order of business; this resolution had not been carried by a vote of two thirds.

The SPEAKER said that, in both respects, the very same thing had occurred at the last session of Congress; and the Chair was of opinion that this was not a change in the order of business. Petitions were presented in the same way, and at the same time, as though the resolution had not passed. But the House, in adopting the resolution, had determined what disposition should be made of a particular class of business. The order of the reception, or the time of presentation of these petitions, had not been changed.

Mr. ADAMS said that the question on the reception f the petition was, on his coming to the House this morning, a part of the unfinished business of a former day. The rule of the House, as he understood it, was, that, from Monday to Monday, the unfinished business should VOL. XIII.-90

[H. OF R.

be first taken up. It was a part of the general rule of the House to the same effect. The Speaker now, as it appeared to him, (Mr. A.,) changed that rule by de-ciding that this suspended business should not be taken up, because it had, in the interval, been decided that the petition was thrown out of the House by a resolution adopted since that petition was offered-a resolution adopted without a day's notice, and without the votes of a majority of two thirds of the members. If this did not change the order of business, he (Mr. A.) did not know what did. So completely was this petition a part of the unfinished business when the House adjourned on the previous Monday, that the gentleman from North Carolina [Mr. BYNUM] was cut off in the very midst of his argument against the reception of the petition; and now he (Mr. A.) was told that the unfinished business had been, in the interval, decided; not by itself, not by any debate on its own merits, but by another resolution of a different character, introduced without notice, and carried without a majority of two thirds. He wished that the decision of the Speaker might be made on this statement of facts, and on those objections made by him (Mr. A.) to it. He intended to appeal from the decision of the Speaker, and to ask for the judgment of the House on that decision.

The SPEAKER again stated the question, and the grounds of his decision. He decided, without any dif ficulty, that the resolution adopted by the House disposed of all propositions whatsoever, having any reference to the subject of slavery, or the abolition of slavery, and that there was nothing in the terms of that resolution, taken in connexion with the construction given to a similar order at the last session of Congress, that would authorize him to pronounce the present case to be an exception to the general rule.

Mr. ADAMS said he wished the House to mark one strong difference which existed between this and other

cases.

The resolution which had been read related to the petitions and memorials to be presented, which, by the terms of that resolution, were to be "laid on the table, without being printed or referred." The present was a petition which had been presented prior to the adoption of that resolution; the question was raised on its reception, and on that question of reception there was a debate pending. This was neither "a paper," nor "a memorial," nor "a resolution," to be presented; it was a debate pending in the House. The decision of the House at the last session of Congress had no application whatsoever to this principle. It was the crushing of a debate pending in the House, by a resolution referring to petitions to be presented in future in relation to slavery and the slave trade. So far as the principle was concerned, it was perfectly immaterial whether this petition related to slavery or any thing else. The debate was pending, and the question was an undecided question. This principle went to the suppression of all debate, after debate had once been commenced. He hoped the House would consider this distinction as existing. There could be no inconvenience in taking the question on reception at this time. The question was on reception. The petition was under the control of the House on the question whether it should be received or not; and that question could not be decided by this resolution, which had been subsequently passed. wished, therefore, to have the judgment of the House; and if the House thought that debate should be suppressed, so be it.

He