The bill to regulate the deposits of the public money in the State banks having been taken up, Mr. BROWN briefly explained the reasons upon which he intended to vote, viz: that the terms prescribed in the bill upon which the State banks are to receive the deposits, were calculated to defeat the object in view. Mr. EWING admitted there was much force in what was said by the gentleman from Kentucky, but he did not think that the present act of legislation went to sanction the removal of the deposits. [FEBRUARY, 1835. nunciation and reproach, only by pronouncing our own condemnation by our votes. He assures us that he has no desire or intention to degrade the Senate, but the position in which he would place us is one of deep degradationdegradation of the most humiliating character -which not only acknowledges error, and admits inexcusable misconduct in this legislative branch of the Government, but bows it down before the majesty of the Executive, and makes us offer incense to his infallibility. Mr. BIBB desired to change his vote in regard to this bill, on the ground that he could not I am neither unprepared, Mr. President, nor approve of the provision relative to the amount reluctant to plead, for myself, not guilty, to this of specie these banks should be required to indictment; nor shall I hesitate to record my have in their vaults. And he did not feel him- vote upon the issue which is forced upon us. self at liberty to give any vote that might Be the final close of the controversy what it seem to sanction the late unconstitutional re-may, I have conscientiously chosen my ground moval of the deposits from the Bank of the upon the questions which are involved, and will United States. abide the sober and deliberate judgment of the country. The resolution of the 28th March, which it is proposed to expunge, asserts that the Executive had performed certain acts in relation to the public revenue, and that these acts were in derogation of the constitution and laws. It is no longer necessary to debate the truth of the first assertion. The removal of the money was the act of the Executive, on his and his advocates as highly meritorious, doown responsibility, and is now claimed by him manding increased admiration and renewed expressions of gratitude from a thankful people. The character of the acts only, and the right of the Senate to express its opinion, are now in question. On motion of Mr. BLACK, the yeas and nays were demanded on the passage of the bill, and were taken as follows: YEAS.-Messrs. Benton, Black, Calhoun, Cuthbert, Clayton, Ewing, Frelinghuysen, Goldsborough, Kent, Knight, Leigh, Linn, McKean, Mangum, Moore, Por ter, Prentiss, Preston, Robinson, Robbins, Swift, Smith, Southard, Tomlinson, Tyler, Waggaman, Webster, White-28. NAYS.-Messrs. Bibb, Brown, Buchanan, Hendricks, Hill, Kane, King of Alabama, Morris, Poindexter, Buggles, Shepley, Tallmadge-12. up, So the bill was passed. Expurgation of the Journal. The resolution of Mr. BENTON again coming Mr. SOUTHARD said the resolution of the 28th March, 1834, declared, as the opinion of the Senate, that the President, "in the late executive proceedings in relation to the public revenue, has assumed upon himself authority and power not conferred by the constitution and laws, but in derogation of both." Upon these I have heretofore declared the views which I entertain; and I shall not trouble the Senate by a particular exposition of them at this time. I regarded the conduct of the Executive as a violation of law. The statute gave to the bank the right to be the depository of the public money; and it was not provided, in that statute, that the President might, of his own mere will, take it away. The charter was a solemn contract between the nation and the stockholders, which the Government was bound to regard, by every consideration which can operate upon national honor and justice. For this contract the holders of the stock had paid one and a half million of dollars, and performed most important and valuable services. It was a gross breach of the public faith to deprive them of their part of the bargain. If the bank had misbehaved, if its directors had made ilThe object of this resolution (said Mr. S.) is legal claims upon the Government, if they had not to obtain an expression from the Senate improperly opposed the election of an indithat their former opinions were erroneous, nor vidual to the presidency, or in any manner that the Executive acted correctly in relation broken their charter, the mode of punishment to the public treasury. It goes further, and was prescribed by law, and the courts of the denounces the act of the Senate as so unconsti- country were open; in which, if guilty, they tutional, unjustifiable, and offensive, that the might have been condemned. The tyrant's sic evidence of it ought not to be permitted to re-volo-I will it could not properly be exercised main upon the records of the Government. It in such a case. The resolution now under consideration (said Mr. S.) orders that of 28th March to be expunged" from the journals, and assigns the reasons for so doing. แ is an indictment against the Senate. The Sen- But we are now required to expunge the exator from Missouri calls upon us to sit in judg-pression of our opinion from the journals, and ment upon our own acts, and warns us that we to erase the resolution. And I, Mr. President, can save ourselves from future and lasting de-stand here a commanded man-ordered by the Legislature of my own State to denounce my own act-to obliterate my own vote to violate the journals of this body-to degrade this high constitutional assembly-and to disregard my own sacred obligations to sustain and support the constitution of my country, according to the dictates of my judgment. Sir, in such a condition, hesitation would be criminalobedience would be treason against conscience and duty. Mr. President, have we the constitutional power, right, or authority, to pass this resolution to expunge from the journals of the Senate the resolution which was passed and recorded at the last session? It is a solemn question. It requires a solemn answer, and must be met without evasion, and in its true import. The resolution does not call upon us to put upon the journals, at this time, a declaration that we were then in error. It does not require us to rescind or alter, or in any mode overrule the former decision. The instructions of the Legislatures do not call upon us to do this, but to expunge. They know the mover of this resolution is not ignorant of the term expunge. Obedience to the instructions requires us to obliterate, erase, alter the journal; in substance, to tear from it the entry which is there made. Any thing short of this is evasion; it is disobedience. He who is instructed to expunge, and votes for any thing short of expunging, or any thing different from expunging, may evade his orders, but he does not obey them. He may cavil about the meaning, and tell us he does something which is equivalent, and which will satisfy the Legislature which instructed him; but he offers insult to them, in the very act of professed submission. Are they ignorant of the meaning of their own orders or instructions? Or will they be satisfied with partial obedience? If they have the authority to command, shall their servants tell them, You did not mean what you said; you will be content if I construe your orders in my own way, and if I do not what you did command, but what you ought to have commanded. This course will not answer. Mr. President, let us meet the question fairly and openly. The object of the mover, the object of the instructing Legislatures is, to take out of the journals what they choose to call the condemnation of the President, so that it shall remain there no longer. We are expected to follow the example of the English House of Commons, in the case of John Wilkes; to order our Secretary to obliterate the journal, to stop the business of the Senate, to command silence, and sit by while the act is performed. Can we do it.? What says the constitution? In the third item of the fifth section of the third article are these words: "Each House shall keep a journal of its proceedings, and, from time to time, publish the same, excepting such parts as may, in their judgment, require secrecy; and the yeas and nays of the members of either House, on any [SENATE question, shall, at the desire of one-fifth of those present, be entered on the journal." The journal which we are now called on to deface is the journal thus prescribed in the constitution. The resolution which we are to expunge is a part of that journal. The yeas and nays have been entered upon it, and stand there in testimony-perpetual may that testimony remain-of the opinions and action of the Senate. It has been published and scattered to the four corners of our Union. We may reverse our decision and change our votes, but can we expunge that decision and obliterate the record? In my judgment, it would be an infraction of the constitution, a sacrilegious violation of a document which has all the inviolability which the constitution can confer on any instrument. The Senator from Missouri, after great deliberation upon the subject, has announced his opinion that we may expunge. He has told us, in substance, that the order of the constitution is that we must "keep a journal," and that this order will be satisfied if we write down from day to day memoranda of what we do; but that, having done this, we have obeyed the constitution, and are at liberty afterwards to erase from it what is incorrect and unconstitutional. This I understand to be his argument. And I must be permitted to express my astonishment at such a construction of this portion of the constitution. I will not say that it is suited to the times, lest it might be considered disrespectful. We are to keep a journal. May we keep it falsely? Misrepresent our acts and votes? Enter upon it what did not take place, or enter untruly that which did? May we state the ayes and noes incorrectly? May we omit decisions which are made, and acts performed? May we insert those which have no existence? If we may not, the reason is that our record must be true and faithful. But if it must be true and faithful when made, have we the right, afterwards, at any period to make it false and untrue? Does the constitution mean that we are to note down truly, day by day, our proceedings; and yet, that a week, or month, or year afterwards, we may alter it as we please falsify it? May we send it down to posterity with a falsehood upon its face? Is this keeping a journal, in the meaning of the constitution? No, sir. The constitution had important objects in view in this provision, and it deals in no double meanings. It intended that an honest record of our acts and votes should be made for the information of our fellow-citizens, and that it should remain a perpetual testimony of our faithfulness, or infidelity, to the constitution and the interests of our country, where our contemporaries and our posterity, in all time to come, might see, not our deeds only, but the history of the legislation of the Government. Our constituents have a right to know what we say and what we do, and we have no right to withhold this SENATE.] Virginia Military Land Warrants. knowledge from them; and I rejoice that mine may see and know all that I, as their agent, have done; and that there is no lawful power to hide it from them. The consequences of this modern notion of expunging from the journal what may be unpleasant or offensive to the existing majority, are calculated to alarm those who take an interest in the permanence and prosperity of our institutions. Shall I allude briefly to two or three of them? The striking of our clock and the approaching dissolution of Congress remind me that I must, on every topic, aim rather at brevity than fulness of illustra tion. [FEBRUARY, 1835. motives have governed, if treachery to the best interests of the people have been exhibited, if a responsibility has been assumed which may overwhelm the guilty when the journal shall be published, and their conduct exhibited, how easily will this doctrine now to be established, and this example now to be given, enable them to conceal for ever their guilt, and evade the account which the public might require. It was better to have no journal of our secret sessions, but to leave every member to give such relation of our actions as his interest dictates, or his regard for truth might require. Mr. President, will you look to another conThe changes of parties in our country are sequence? Entries are made on these journals rapid. The possessors of the "spoils " to-day of the votes and proceedings which create, enbecome the antagonists of power to-morrow. act, and give validity to the laws of the land; They who enjoy popular confidence now, may and to all those acts which are enjoined on the shortly find themselves bereft of that confidence, Senate by the constitution-laws, treaties, apand sinking unhonored into the mass of the pointments, judgments on impeachment, every community which will no longer regard them thing. Shall we calmly establish the docwith respect. Opinions alter with the interests trine that these votes may be expunged, and and condition of the country; and honest, in- these constitutional acts be left unsustained by telligent, and wise men who have formed their the authority which gives them sanction and policy on existing circumstances, are often validity? For, sir, even the proceedings and obliged to give way to others better skilled in judgments upon an impeachment may as well the approaching or expected wants and rela- be expunged, as any other item in that record. tions of the nation. All this does take place; It is a process of nullification new in the theory all this may and will take place hereafter, in and practice of our Government, now first atthe progress of society. I am no railer at popu- tempted, and whose consequences no man can lar changes. I have as much confidence as any anticipate or depict. For me, sir, it is imposman in the intelligence, firmness, and stability sible to bring myself to a belief in its correctof the people of this country; and certainly do ness. The constitution commands us to keep not yield, on this point, to any noisy demagogue, a journal. It must be true and faithful; it who supports to-day principles which he held must remain inviolable; and when you shall up to scorn yesterday-with professions of have expunged any thing from it, you will have devotion to the people on his tongue, and pur-disregarded one of the plainest and most imposed deception and selfish ambition in his portant injunctions of our great constitutional heart. I speak only of facts-changes have charter. happened. If society shall progress and be prosperous and free, they must happen hereafter. It is the condition of every human society, especially when it is free. There are, there must be, frequent changes in public men and public measures. Shall it be established as the constitutional doctrine, that, on every change the triumphant majority may erase from our records the acts and votes of their predecessors? If you pass this resolution, and it be established that we may alter and falsify the journals, such may, and not improbably will, be the course of our future history. The worst men in power will have the strongest temptation to erase the acts of the best. The most servile devotees of the favorite of the hour will be most likely to seek his favor, by expunging whatever may be obnoxious to him, or an obstacle in the way of his purposes. Your journal will cease to be a record of your acts; and may be made an instrument to aid the advance of corruption and despotism. Observe the danger of this doctrine in another aspect. The Senate sits in secret, when advising the President upon treaties, appointments, &c. The record of their acts, with closed doors, is a part of the journals. If base | Virginia Military Land Warrants. The Senate considered, as in Committee of the Whole, the bill granting an additional quantity of land in satisfaction of unlocated Virginia military bounty land warrants. Mr. CLAY opposed the bill, on the ground that the number of acres appropriated would not be sufficient for the purpose of satisfying all these claims; we did not know when we should ever stop. The gentleman from Virginia (Mr. TYLER) informed him, formerly, that the last appropriation would be sufficient, and yet we appeared to be no nearer the end of this business than we were then. Mr. EWING would much rather appropriate the sum of $687,500, instead of five hundred and fifty thousand acres, and then we should know what we were about. Mr. LEIGH made some remarks in favor of the bill. He said this appropriation could not be considered as made to Virginia, any more than to Ohio, Kentucky, or Tennessee, for not one-twentieth of these claimants reside in that State. Mr. TYLER said, if the original appropriation of five hundred thousand acres was just and MARCH, 1835.] Attempted Assassination of the President. correct, a further appropriation ought to be made to cover all the claims, even if it should amount to five millions of acres. The report made on the subject showed that the great mass of these claims were already satisfied, and he did not think we would be much troubled on the subject hereafter. Mr. CLAY said that the main cause of this great increase was in consequence of the bills passed giving pension and bounty lands, &c. Since the passage of the act of 1830, they have found in the attic story of the Capitol, a large mass of revolutionary papers, out of which the greater part of these claims have sprung. There seems to be no end of these claims; he was willing to vote for the five hundred and fifty thousand acres, provided it was to be the last. Mr. POINDEXTER offered an amendment requiring all claimants hereafter to file their claims in the office of the Commissioner of the Land Office within two years, or their claim shall be barred. The amendment was rejected. On motion of Mr. LEIGH, the blank was filled with six hundred and fifty thousand acres. On the question, Shall the bill be engrossed and read a third time? Mr. HILL asked the yeas and nays; which, being ordered, were as follows: YEAS.-Messrs. Benton, Bibb, Black, Calhoun, Clay, Cuthbert, Ewing, Goldsborough, Hendricks, Kane, Kent, King of Alabama, Leigh, Linn, Mangum, Moore, Poindexter, Porter, Robbins, Robinson, Silsbee, Southard, Tomlinson, Tyler, Waggaman, White-26. NAYS.-Messrs. Hill, King of Georgia, Ruggles, Shepley, Swift, Tallmadge, Tipton, Wright-8. SATURDAY, February 28. The VICE PRESIDENT communicated the credentials of Hon. BEDFORD BROWN, elected a Senator from North Carolina, for six years from the 4th of March next. Election of Printer. Mr. PRESTON moved that the Senate proceed to the election of a printer, on the part of the Senate, for the next Congress. Mr. CLAY said he had made some opposition to this motion on a former occasion, in the expectation that the House would, by this time, have chosen their printer. As they had not done so, he now waived any further objection to the proceeding. Mr. BENTON said he intended to move, contemporaneously, for the consideration of his joint resolution to repeal the joint resolution of 1819. [SENATE. than the present. He therefore persisted in his motion. Mr. P. said that when the joint resolution of the honorable gentleman was referred to the Judiciary Committee, his attention was turned to the history of the printing of Congress; and he found that in 1819 a joint resolution was passed, regulating permanently the mode of getting the printing of the two Houses executed, so far as the prices were the subject of regulation; and the practice has been to elect by ballot ever since. Whatever doubt there may be as to the interpretation of the resolution of 1819, there can be none as to that of 1829, because it re-enacted that of 1819, and required the printing to be done by a printer who was to be elected by ballot. The practice then was of fourteen years' standing; and it was sustained by a joint resolution of the two Houses. Mr. BENTON said the plan he would propose for having the public printing done hereafter, was the one he should read. [Mr. B. then read a passage from the report of the committee of 1819, in favor of the establishment of a national printing office.] This, he said, is the way the British Parliament does its printing, and it is the best in the world. He said, when up before, that the abuses of printing in the Senate exceeded that of all the other departments of the Government, the Post Office included; anc this is to be dated from the point at which we started. In 1819, the total for the Senate was $8,000, and for the House $15,000. What is it now? He did not know, nor did he believe any body else knew. For here, in the general appropriation bill, are some $20,000 for arrearages. What is the increase of $120,000 beyond $8,000. It is not quite 20 to 1, but it is 16 or 17 to 1. Now, in what other department of the Government will you find an increase of 16 or 17 fold? The Senate proceeded to an election; and Messrs. Gales and Seaton were elected. MONDAY, March 2. National Printing Office and Book Bindery. On motion by Mr. BENTON, to report a plan with an estimate of the expense, at Resolved, That the Secretary of State be directed the commencement of the next Congress, for establishing a Printing Office and Book Bindery at the seat of Government, to do all the printing for the two Houses of Congress, and for all the departments of the Government, Post Office included. EVENING SESSION. Mr. POINDEXTER hoped the Senate would not go into the consideration of the joint resolution; Case of R. Lawrence Attempted Assassination he was fearful of three hours' speeches. Mr. PRESTON expressed his disposition to accommodate the gentleman from Missouri, but the resolution for electing a printer was offered two weeks ago, and if the law was to be complied with, there was no fitter occasion for it of the President. Mr. SMITH, from the select committee appointed upon the letter of the Hon. GEORGE POINDEXTER, made a report at length, concluding with a resolution that not a shade of suspicion SENATE.] Expunging Resolution. exists that Mr. POINDEXTER was in any way concerned, directly or indirectly, in the late attempted assassination of the President. The report was read, and the question being on its adoption, Mr. WEBSTER asked the yeas and nays; which were ordered, and are as follows: [MARCH, 1835. The members of the Legislature were servants and representatives of the people; he (Mr. M.) was likewise one. That they were disposed to guard with jealousy the honor of the State it was not his province to discuss or to question. He likewise felt it his duty to guard the honor of the State, and not less to guard YEAS.—Messrs. Bell, Bibb, Black, Buchanan, Cal- tion, imperiously required him to disregard the his own personal honor; both, in his concephoun, Clay, Clayton, Cuthbert, Ewing, Frelinghuy-resolutions; and, that point being settled in his sen, Goldsborough, Grundy, Hendricks, Hill, Kane, Kent, King of Alabama, King of Georgia, Knight, Leigh, Linn, Mangum, Moore, Morris, Naudain, Por ter, Preston, Robbins, Robinson, Ruggles, Shepley, Silsbee, Smith, Southard, Swift, Tallmadge, Tipton, Tomlinson, Tyler, Webster, White, Wright-42. NAYS.-None. YEAS.-Messrs. Benton, Brown, Buchanan, Calhoun, Clay, Clayton, Cuthbert, Hill, Kane, King of Alabama, King of Georgia, McKean, Mangum, Moore, Preston, Robinson, Ruggles, Shepley, Tallmadge, White, Wright-21. NAYS.-Messrs. Bibb, Black, Ewing, Goldsborough, Grundy, Hendricks, Kent, Knight, Leigh, Linn, Naudain, Poindexter, Porter, Prentiss, Robbins, Smith, Southard, Swift, Tipton, Tomlinson, Waggaman, Webster-22. TUESDAY, March 3. Expunging Resolutions-North Carolina's In structions to her Senators. mind, he trusted no one who knew him could entertain a doubt as to his course on the subject. Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN said he stood in the same predicament as his friend from North Carolina, (Mr. MANGUM.) He had constitutional objections to complying. He believed the Senate had no power over the journal. It was a record of the acts of the Senate, guaranteed by the constitution, for the benefit of the minority. He would warn the majority who should be in those seats next session, to leave to him untouched the sacred privilege provided by the constitution for showing his successors how he had acted. Mr. CALHOUN expressed his regret that the subject had been deferred to so late a period of the session. He believed it the most important subject that had been brought before Congress; and a subject on which he had wished right to express their disapprobation as to to be heard. He thought they had the same flatter the Executive. When they had arrived to such a period as either they must flatter or be silent, they should equal the most degenerate days of the Roman Republic, when the horse of the Emperor was declared Consul. Mr. KING, of Alabama, said he was surprised at the language of the Senator from South Carolia, (Mr. CALHOUN.) The gentleman spoke of an opportunity of discussing the subject. Did he not remember the presentation of the instructions from Alabama? It was great injustice to insinuate the discussion had been put Mr. MANGUM asked leave to send to the off by the friends of the administration, when Clerk's table certain resolutions adopted by the he (Mr. C.) had occupied the Senate most of Legislature of North Carolina; and asked that the time with his report and bills, since the the Senate would indulge him in having them resolution was introduced. The honorable Senread. He said it was not his purpose to detain ator had spoken of flattering the Executive. the Senate by comment upon them. This was Had not that Senator heaped upon the Presinot the arena upon which to discuss and adjust dent with the utmost license his censures and any difficulties that had arisen, or that might invectives; and been listened to with far more arise, betwen his constituents and himself. He attention than he had listened to those who would not detain the Senate longer than to ex-spoke in his defence, believing he had acted press the hope that the expunging resolutions honestly and with good intentions? Yet the would be taken up in the course of the day, and Senator compared them to the degenerate that he would be allowed to record his vote times of the Roman Senate! upon them. Mr. K. said he, for one, was not disposed to In reference to the instructions, he would be branded as the supple tool of executive avail himself of the occasion barely to say that power. If the Senator makes such charges, he he should not conform to them. He should vote must except him from the number. Mr. K. against the expunging resolution. The Legisla- said he would not endure it. There were certure had no right to require him to become the tain disappointed aspirants to power who alinstrument of his own personal degradation. ways viewed things through a gloomy medium, He repelled the exercise of so vindictive a pow-who were ever croaking over the imaginary er; and when applied to himself, he repelled it ruins of our free institutions. with scorn and indignation. |