THURSDAY, February 27, 1794.

The Senate resumed the consideration of the motion, made the 22d instant, on the report of the committee on the petition of Conrad Laub and others, respecting the election of Mr. Gallatin to be a Senator of the United States; and,

After progress,

Ordered, That the further consideration thereof be postponed until to-morrow.

FRIDAY, February 28, 1794.

The Senate resumed the consideration of the 22d instant, on the report of the committee on the petition of Conrad Laub and others, respecting the election of Mr. Gallatin to be a Senator of the United States, and,

On the question to agree to the motion, as follows:

Resolved, That Albert Gallatin, returned to this House as a member for the State of Pennsylvania, is duly qualified for, and elected to, a seat in the Senate of the United States,"

It passed in the negative-yeas 12, nays 14; as follows:

YEAS-Messrs. Bradley, Brown, Burr, Butler, Edwards, Gunn, Jackson, Langdon, Martin, Monroe, Robinson, and Taylor.

NAYS-Messrs. Bradford, Cabot, Ellsworth, Foster, Frelinghuysen, Hawkins, Izard, King, Livermore, Mitchell, Morris, Potts, Strong, and Vining.

On motion that it be

Resolved, That the election of Albert Gallatin to be a Senator of the United States was void, he not having been a citizen of the United States the term of years required as a qualification to be a Senator of the United States,

A motion was made to divide the question at the word "void;" and

On motion to agree to the first paragraph of the motion so divided, it passed in the affirmative-yeas 14, nays 12; as follows:

YEAS-Messrs. Bradford, Cabot, Ellsworth, Foster, Frelinghuysen, Hawkins, Izard, King, Livermore, Mitchell, Morris, Potts, Strong, and Vining.

NAYS-Messrs. Bradley, Brown, Burr, Butler, Edwards, Gunn, Jackson, Langdon, Martin, Monroe, Robinson, and Taylor.

On motion to adopt the resolution, as follows:

Resolved, That the election of Albert Gallatin to be a Senator of the United States was void, he not having been a citizen of the United States the term of years required as a qualification to be a Senator of the United States,"

It passed in the affirmative-yeas 14, nays 12; as follows:

YEAS-Messrs. Bradford, Cabot, Ellsworth, Foster, Frelinghuysen, Hawkins, Izard, King, Livermore, Mitchell, Morris, Potts, Strong, and Vining.

NAYS-Messrs. Bradley, Brown, Burr, Butler, Edwards, Gunn, Jackson, Langdon, Martin, Monroe, Robinson, and Taylor.

Resolved, That an attested copy of the resolution of the Senate, declaring the election of Albert Gallatin to be void, be transmitted by the President of the Senate to the executive of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.

REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS.

[This committee consisted of Messrs. Bradley, Ellsworth, Mitchell, Rutherford, Brown, Livermore, and Taylor.]

The report of the committee on the petition of Conrad Laub and others, above referred to, and made on the 10th instant, is as follows:

The Committee of Elections, to whom was referred the petition of Conrad Laub and others, against the election of the Hon. Albert Gallatin as a Senator of the United States for the State of Pennsylvania, report:

That they have had the same under consideration, and, having given due notice, as well the petitioners, by their agent, Michael Schmyser, as the said Mr. Gallatin appeared before them, and, on the part of the petitioners, the following evidence was produced, to wit:

Robert Morris, esq., being duly sworn, deposeth: "That during the war two of his sons went to Geneva for their education, and that at that place they became acquainted with some of the friends of Mr. Albert Gallatin, who had gone for America, and they being solicitous to hear of his safety, desired Mr. Morris's sons to write to their father to make inquiry and give the information he should obtain. That frequently afterwards he received letters for Mr. Gallatin from Europe, which he always supposed to come from the friends of Mr. Gallatin in Geneva. He supplied Mr. Gallatin with money for a bill upon London, and there supposed the funds to pay the same were remitted from Geneva. Mr. Morris paid Mr. Gallatin about one thousand guineas, by order of Messrs.

& Co., bankers in Paris, believing always that they were reimbursed from Geneva. Mr.

Morris does not recollect dates, not having for a long while seen any of the letters that passed on the subject; he does not know the place of Mr. Gallatin's nativity, but from the general course of the circumstances which came under his observation he always did suppose he was born in Geneva.

"Sworn to and subscribed, January 22, 1794."

Nathaniel Cabot Higginson, esq., being duly sworn, deposeth: "That he does not know directly anything of Mr. Gallatin's being a foreigner or native; that he recollects knowing him by reputation and sight at Boston, in one of the years 1781, 1782, or 1783, and that he was generally reputed to be a foreigner. This deponent believes that Mr. Gallatin then taught the French language, and did not speak the English with facility; and further recollects that Mr. Gallatin was resident there or thereabouts a considerable time. This deponent further says that he never had any conversation with Mr. Gallatin, but founds his belief with respect to Mr. Gallatin's not speaking the English with facility on the information received from others.

"Sworn to and subscribed, January 22, 1794."

Mr. John Breakbill, being duly sworn, testifies: "That last winter, being a member of the legislature of Pennsylvania, previous to the election of Senator for the State of Pennsylvania, I heard Mr. Gallatin say his citizenship would not admit his being a Senator; what were his reasons for making the declaration I cannot say; I took it he did not wish to be elected. This declaration by Mr. Gallatin was made at a meeting of a number of members of the Pennsylvania legislature, held for the purpose of agreeing who should be set up as a candidate. The deponent further says he does not recollect Mr. Gallatin's assigning any other reason for his backwardness to serve as a Senator than the want of citizenship.

"Sworn to and subscribed, January 22, 1794."

Henry Kammerer, esq., being duly sworn, testifies: "That last winter, being a member of the legislature of Pennsylvania, and previous to the election of Senator for the said State, at a meeting of a number of the members of the State legislature to agree upon a candidate to fill said office, I heard Mr. Gallatin say when his name was proposed, ‘As for my name, it is out of the question; I have not been a citizen long enough to entitle me to serve in that station.' That at a second meeting for the same purpose Mr. Gallatin was again proposed as a proper person for a candidate, and then the deponent understood (not from Mr. Gallatin, but from some of the members of assembly then present) that the doubt about his citizenship was then put to rights; and then it was almost unanimously agreed to put up Mr. Gallatin's name. That on the morning succeeding Mr. Gallatin's election the deponent heard it observed that notwithstanding Mr. Gallatin's election he could not take his seat, in consequence of his declaration that he had not been long enough a citizen. That he the same day mentioned this to Mr. Gallatin, who said that he had made this declaration under a mistaken idea that it was necessary for him to have been nine years a citizen of Pennsylvania, but that upon examining the Constitution he had found that to have been nine years a citizen of the United States was sufficient, and that he had been above nine years a citizen of the United States, or words to that effect.

"Sworn to and subscribed, January 22, 1794."

Pelatiah Webster, being duly qualified, testifies: "That eleven years ago last summer I let my house in Philadelphia to Mary Linn, who proposed to take lodgers; I reserved apartments for myself and boarded with her. Soon after Mr. Savery and Mr. Gallatin took lodgings of her and continued a number of months there. Mr. Savery spoke no English; Mr. Gallatin spoke good English and served as interpreter for him. They appeared to be well-bred gentlemen, and their conduct was agreeable and conciliating, and they soon gained the esteem and respect of the family. I do not know that they ever declared their country, but we all supposed they were French, and of course the people, customs, and country of France often made the topic of fireside chat. In one of these transient conversations Mr. Gallatin took occasion to say that his knowledge of French affairs was not very perfect, for he was not a native of France, nor had ever resided long in that country, but was from Geneva. No one interesting circumstance made any further inquiry necessary, nor do I recollect that he made any more explication of the subject.

"N. B. Mr. Gallatin once said that his original name was not Gallatin, but I think he said it was Sidney, but this conversation was in drollery, and not in earnest, as I conceived at the time of speaking from the manner and air of his speaking thereon. "Sworn to and subscribed, January 28, 1794."

Mr. John Smilie, member of the House of Representatives of the United States, being sworn, saith: "That at a meeting of sundry members of the legislature of Pennsylvania, previous to Mr. Gallatin's election as a Senator of the United States, that gentleman was mentioned as a proper person to fill the said office; at which time Mr. Gallatin started

79908°-S. Doc. 1036, 62-3-13

some doubt respecting his being qualified, but in what words the deponent does not recollect.

"That the deponent did not understand upon what the doubt was founded, though he thinks from something said by Mr. Gallatin that it related to Mr. Gallatin's citizenship, for, as the deponent conceived, the conversation proceeded from that kind of modesty which gentlemen usually feel upon having their names proposed upon such occasions, he did not pay much attention to it, and that his reason for forming this opinion was his having frequently observed gentlemen to make excuses in similar situations, and from his knowledge of Mr. Gallatin's modesty of disposition. When being asked whether he ever heard Mr. Gallatin say that he had not been a citizen of the United States nine years previous to his election, the deponent replies he never did. Upon being asked by Mr. Lewis, counsel for the petitioners, what he had ever heard Mr. Gallatin say touching his citizenship, the deponent replies that a considerable time subsequent to Mr. Gallatin's election Mr. Gallatin, in conversations with the deponent, expressed an opinion that he was qualified with respect to citizenship. What else did you ever hear Mr. Gallatin say with respect to his citizenship? The deponent answers that he recollects having heard him say something with respect to the laws of Massachusetts not requiring an oath of allegiance at the time of his giving his opinion as aforesaid. Did you ever hear Mr. Gallatin say he was born in Europe? The deponent replies that he does not recollect Mr. Gallatin's saying that he was born in Europe, but that he has heard Mr. Gallatin speak of himself as a Genevan, mention his family in Geneva, and in conversations with him hath always understood him to be of Geneva. Did you ever hear Mr. Gallatin mention the time of his coming into America? He replies that he thinks Mr. Gallatin, about a year past, mentions that he had been then thirteen years in this country, and that he was nineteen years old when he came. Did you ever hear Mr. Gallatin say when or where he took the oath of allegiance? He replies he heard Mr. Gallatin say that he took the oath of allegiance in Virginia, but as to the time the deponent cannot be precise, but he thinks, if he can recollect, that Mr. Gallatin did mention to him, though he cannot be certain; but it was not nine years before he was elected. That the deponent thinks Mr. Gallatin's doubts respecting his citizenship were founded on this ground, the witness referring in this part of his testimony to the meeting before mentioned, when these doubts were expressed; but he cannot specify the time of Mr. Gallatin's having mentioned to him the circumstance of his having taken the oath of allegiance.

"Sworn to and subscribed, January 28, 1794."

Mr. Thomas Stokely, being sworn, deposeth and saith: "That some few days before a Senator was chosen for the State of Pennsylvania a meeting was had to fix on a proper person to represent the State in that office; sundry persons were started as candidates, among whom was Mr. Gallatin, who, upon his being named, observed that there were many other persons more proper to fill that office; and also observed that there might be doubts as to his citizenship, though the deponent, from the length of time, and not expecting to have been called upon, retains too slight an impression of what then passed to be able to recollect the words with precision. That at a subsequent meeting for the same purpose Mr. Gallatin was finally agreed to be nominated, and the deponent heard no objection stated thereto, either by Mr. Gallatin (who was present) or any other person. "Sworn to and subscribed, February 1, 1794."

The before-recited evidence being introduced and closed on the part of the petitioners, Mr. Gallatin was asked whether he had any testimony to produce on his part, to which he gave the following answer in writing, to wit:

"The committee to whom the petition of Conrad Laub, &c., was referred, having informed me that the petitioners had closed their evidence, and asked me whether I had any testimony to produce on my side,' I answer that it appears to me that there is not sufficient matter charged in the petition and proved by the testimony to vacate my seat; that by the resolution appointing the committee the petition is referred to them to state the facts, without prejudice as to any questions which may, upon the hearing, be raised by the sitting member as to the sufficiency of the parties and the matter charged in the petition;' that upon the hearing, and in the present stage of the same, the question as to the sufficiency of matter, as above stated, is raised by me; that I conceive from the evident construction of the resolution I have a right to have that question decided by the Senate; that until the same shall have been decided I do not wish to be at the trouble and expense of collecting evidence at a great distance; and therefore that at present I do not mean to produce any testimony, reserving, however, to myself the right which I conceive I have to produce any testimony in my favor after the said question shall have been decided by the Senate, in case it is decided against me.

66 ALBERT GALLATIN.”

Which being duly read and considered, the committee came to the following resolution, to wit:

"Whereas the evidence on the part of the petitioners having been closed, and it appearing that Mr. Gallatin was an alien in the year 1780, and his answer in writing as

signing reasons why he should not adduce evidence on his part in the present stage of the inquiry not being, in the opinion of the committee, sufficient,

"Resolved, That in the opinion of the committee it is now incumbent on Mr. Gallatin to show that he has become a citizen of the United States, and when."

Which resolution being read to Mr. Gallatin, he informed the committee he should rely on the answer he had before given.

All which is respectfully submitted to the honorable Senate by the committee. And subjoined is the statement of facts exhibited by Mr. Gallatin and agreed to between him and the counsel for the petitioners, as mentioned the 20th instant: "Albert Gallatin was born at Geneva on the 29th day of January, 1761. He left that place for the United States in April or May, 1780; arrived in Boston, Mass., on the 14th or 15th of July of the same year, and has ever since resided within the United States. In October, 1780, he removed from Boston to Machias, in the Province of Maine, in which place and its neighborhood he resided one year, and commenced a settlement on a tract of vacant land. During that time he furnished out of his own funds supplies amounting in value to more than sixty pounds Massachusetts currency to Col. John Allen, who was the commanding officer stationed there, and also superintendent of Indian affairs for the Eastern department, for the use of the American troops, and on several occasions acted as a volunteer under the same officer's command. For the said supplies he received one year after a warrant on the treasury of the State of Massachusetts, which he sold at a considerable depreciation. In October, 1781, he returned to Boston, and in the spring of 1782 was, by a vote of the corporation of the University of Cambridge, otherwise called Harvard College, chosen instructor of the French language of the said university. By the same vote he was allowed a room in the college, the privilege of the commons at the tutor's table, the use of the library, and also the right of having his pay, which depended on the voluntary subscription and attendance of the students, collected by the steward of the institution, together with the other charges against the students for board and education. Those terms he accepted and remained in that station for the term of one year. In July, 1783, he removed to Pennsylvania, and in November of the same year proceeded to Virginia, in which State he had purchased more than one thousand acres of land, and amounting to more than one hundred pounds Virginia currency in value, some time between July and November, 1783. Between this last-mentioned period and the month of October, 1785, he purchased other lands in the said State to a very large amount, and in the said last-mentioned month he took an oath of allegiance to the said State. In December, 1785, he purchased the plantation in Fayette County, in Pennsylvania, on which he has lived ever since. In October, 1789, he was elected member of the convention to amend the constitution of Pennsylvania, and in October, 1790, 1791, and 1792, he was elected member of the legislature of the same State. On the 28th of February, 1793, he was chosen Senator to represent the said State in the Senate of the United States, and took his seat in December following."

[Fourth Congress-First session.]

HUMPHREY MARSHALL,

Senator from Kentucky from March 4, 1795, to March 4, 1801.

In February, 1796, the Vice-President laid before the Senate a letter from the governor of Ken tucky and a memorial from the Representatives of said State, which memorial stated that in February, 1795, a pamphlet was published by George Muter and Benjamin Sebastian (two judges of the court of appeals), in which they said that Humphrey Marshall had had a suit in chancery in said court of appeals, in which, it appearing manifest from the records and documents that he had committed a gross fraud, the court had given a decree against him; and that in the course of the investigation he had been publicly charged with perjury. The memorial further stated that the said representatives did not mean to give an opinion on the justice of the said charge, but requested that an investigation relative thereto might take place. Mr. Marshall was also solicitous that an investigation of the subject should take place in the Senate. It was determined that the memorial could not be sustained; also that as the Constitution does not give jurisdiction to the Senate the consent of the party cannot give it, and that therefore the said memorial ought to be dismissed. The history of the case here given consists of a transcript of the proceedings of the Senate relating to it from the Annals of Congress, 4th Cong., 1st sess., 1795-'96, within pages 47-59.

FRIDAY, February 26, 1796.

The Vice-President laid before the Senate a letter from the governor of the State of Kentucky, with divers papers accompanying the same.

The letter and papers therein referred to were read, and ordered to lie on the table.

On motion by Mr. Marshall,

MONDAY, February 29, 1796.

"That the letter from the governor of the State of Kentucky, with divers papers acompanying the same, communicated to the Senate on the 26th instant, be referred to a ommittee."

It was agreed to postpone the consideration of the motion until to-morrow.

WEDNESDAY, March 2, 1796. The Senate resumed the consideration of the motion made on the 29th of February respecting the letter and papers from the governor of the State of Kentucky; and Ordered, That they be referred to Messrs. Livermore, Ross, King, Rutherfurd, and Strong to consider and report thereon to the Senate.

FRIDAY, March 11, 1796.

Mr. Livermore reported from the committee to whom was referred the letter of the governor and the memorial of the representatives of the State of Kentucky, with the papers accompanying them; and the report was read, and ordered to lie on the table.

TUESDAY, March 15, 1796. The Senate resumed the consideration of the report of the committee to whom was referred the letter of the governor and the memorial of the representatives of the State of Kentucky, with the papers accompanying them; and, After debate, the Senate adjourned.

WEDNESDAY, March 16, 1796.

Ordered, That the consideration of the report of the committee to whom was referred the letter of the governor and the memorial of the representatives of the State of Kentucky, with the papers accompanying them, be further postponed.

THURSDAY, March 17, 1796.

The Senate resumed the consideration of the report of the committee to whom was referred the letter from the governor and the memorial of the Representatives of the State of Kentucky, with the papers accompanying them, which is as follows:

REPORT OF COMMITTEE.

[The committee consisted of Messrs. Livermore, Ross, King, Rutherford, and Strong.]

That the representatives of the freemen of Kentucky state in their memorial that in February, 1795, a pamphlet was published by George Muter and Benjamin Sebastian (who were two judges of the court of appeals), in which they say that Humphrey Marshall had a suit in chancery in the said court of appeals, in which it appearing manifest