H. OF. R.] Address to the President. [DECEMBER, 1796 situation, and behold the ruined state of public and private credit, less now than perhaps at any former period however, he never could recollect it so deranged. If we survey this city, what a shameful scene it alone exhibits, owing, as he supposed, to the immense quantity of paper issued. Surely this could afford no ground for admiration of the Administration that caused it. of this nature, an Answer to the PRESIDENT, which the vote of the House would have been unanimous, can as well be done now as a month hence. but the proposal of such adulation could never exMr. W. SMITH Opposed striking out any para-pect success. If we take a view into our internal graph. It was, he said, the last occasion we should have to address that great man, who had done so much service to his country. The warmth of expression in the Answer was only an evidence of the gratitude of this House for his character. When we reflect on the glowing language used at the time when he accepted of the office of PRESIDENT, and at his re-election to that office, why, asked he, ought not the language of this House to be as full of respect and gratitude now as then? particularly when we consider the addresses now flowing in from all parts of the country. I object to the manner of gentlemen's amendments as proposed, to strike out all in a mass. If the sentiments were agreeable to the minds of the House, why waste our time to alter mere expressions while the sentiment is preserved? No doubt every gentleman's manner of expression differed, while their general ideas might be the same. He hoped mere form of expression would not cause its recommit ment. I must acknowledge, said Mr. GILES, that I am one of those who do not think so much of the PRESIDENT as some others do. When the PRESIDENT retires from his present station, I wish him to enjoy all possible happiness. I wish him to retire, and that this was the moment of his retirement. He thought the Government of the United States could go on very well without him; and he thought he would enjoy more happiness in his retirement than he possibly could in his present situation. What calamities would attend the United States, and how short the duration of its Independence, if one man alone can be found to fill that capacity! He thought there were thousands of citizens in the United States able to fill that high office, and he doubted not that many may be found whose talents would enable them to fill it with credit and advantage. Although much had been said, and that by many people, about his intended retirement, yet he must acknowledge he felt no uncomfortable sensations about it; he must express his own feelings. he was perfectly easy in prospect of the event. He wished the PRESIDENT as much happiness as any man. He declared he Mr. GILES did not object to a respectful and complimentary Address being sent to the PRESIDENT, yet he thought we ought not to carry our expressions out of the bounds of moderation; he hoped we should adhere to truth. He objected to some of the expressions in those paragraphs, for which reason he moved to have the paragraphs struck out, in order to be amended by the committee. He wished to act as respectful to the PRESIDENT as any gentleman, but he observed many parts of the Address which were objectionable. It is unnatural and unbecoming in us to ex-did not regret his retreat; he wished him quietly ult in our superior happiness, light, or wisdom. at his seat at Mount Vernon; he thought he would It is not at all necessary that we should exult in enjoy more happiness there than in public life. our advantages, and thus reflect on the unhappy It will be very extraordinary if gentlemen, whose situation of nations in their troubles; it is insult- names in the yeas and nays are found in opposition ing to them. If we are thus happy it is well for to certain prominent measures of the Administraus; it is necessary that we should enjoy our hap- tion, should come forward and approve those meapiness, but not boast of it to all the world, and in-sures: this we could not expect. He retained an sult their unhappy situations. opinion he had always seen reason to support, and no influence under Heaven should prevent him expressing his established sentiments; and he thought the same opinions would soon meet general conHe hoped gentlemen would compliment the PRESIDENT privately, as individuals; at the same time, he hoped such adulation would never pervade that House. As to those parts of the Address which speak of the wisdom and firmness of the PRESIDENT he must object to them. On reflection, he could see a want of wisdom and firmness in the Ad-currence. ministration for the last six years. I may be singular in my ideas, said he, but I believe our Administration has been neither wise nor firm. I believe, sir, a want of wisdom and firmness has brought this country into the present alarming situation. If after such a view of the Administration, I was to come into this House and show the contrary by a quiet acquiescence, gentlemen would think me a very inconsistent character. If we take a view of our foreign relations, we shall see no reason to exult in the wisdom or firmness of our Administration. He thought nothing so much as a want of that wisdom and firmness had brought us to the critical situation in which we now stand. If it had been the will of gentlemen to have been satisfied with placing the PRESIDENT in the highest possible point of respect amongst men, I must make some observation, said Mr. G., on the last paragraph but one, where we call ourselves "the freest and most enlightened nation in the world:" indeed, the whole of that paragraph is objectionable; I disapprove the whole of it. If I am free, if I am happy, if I am enlightened more than others, I wish not to proclaim it on the house top; if we are free, it is not prudent to declare it; if enlightened, it is not our duty in this House to trumpet it to the world: it is no Legislative concern. If gentlemen will examine the paragraph, (referring to that contained in the parenthesis,) it seems to prove that the gentleman who drew it up was going into the field of adulation; which would tarnish a private character. I do think this kind of affection the PRESIDENT gains nothing from. The many long Addresses we hear of, add nothing to the lustre of his character. In the honor we may attempt to give to others we may hurt ourselves. This may prove a self-destroyer; by relying too much on administration, we may rely too little on our own strength. Another expression I would notice is in the last paragraph, wherein it says, "that your example may be the guide of your successors." I think it time enough to speak of the successor of the PRESIDENT when he arrives; whoever he may be, there is no doubt but he will do his duty to the best of his ability. These sentiments seemed to be so mixed, that I could not separate them. I submit them to the Committee, and declare my desire that the whole of the report may be recommitted. Mr. HARPER thought it would be strictly in order to move a division of the question on this motion. The paragraph which he had the honor of moving to this House, instead of the seventh paragraph, was wholly personal to the PRESIDENT; the other, immediately preceding this, which the gentleman last up included, related wholly to the country; it contained objects of great importance, and as the two so materially differ from each other, many gentlemen might wish to retain one, and strike the other out. The first question would naturally be on the first of the two. "When we advert," &c. He hoped this paragraph would not be struck out; this related altogether to the situation, to the happiness of the country, and its prosperity, and relates to the influence out happy Constitution has had towards producing and preserving that state of enjoyment. Could this be denied? Is there any man here, he would ask, who can deny that we are in a prosperous state, and that it is heightened by our present Constitution? I must assert that our prosperity is produced through the instrumentality of the wise system adopted. There may be degrees of prosperity, and different opinions on the subject. Some might think that the trifling derangements which have of late taken place in the commercial world are evidences of our want of prosperity. I think not. Some think such things are no proofs of a country's decline. Though the gentleman from Virginia has attributed the late failures in this city to the too great emission of paper money by Government, he must beg leave to differ from him; he thought it no proof of the want of prosperity. Will any man pretend to say that we are not free? That we are not happy? That our trade is less flourishing than formerly? That our agriculture was not increasing, or that our laws were less obeyed than usual? No; he thought none could deny this. And will any, can any say, that our present form of Government has not had an influence in producing this flourishing state of our affairs? Will any say, that had not such a form of Government been established, or a similar one, we should have been so free, so happy? He thought not. When we take a view of our situation before the existence of the present form of Government with respect to agriculture, trade, and commerce, and brought the com [H. or R. parison up to the present time, then he was persuaded gentlemen would acknowledge that we enjoyed a state of prosperity, and if we enjoyed it, wherein was the harm to declare it? We are in a very great degree prosperous, and that is in a very great degree owing to the present established Government. The measures which this gentleman would wish to adopt might produce a system more happy: however, he did not think it would. That already adopted has been productive of great national happiness. We feel freedom exists; whence do we suppose it proceeds, but from the measures of Government? If this be the case, gentlemen must allow that in the words of the paragraph proposed to be struck out, there is not that impropriety imagined. If they concur with me in all those sentiments, (and which of them will say he does not concur in them,) where is the propriety to refuse the clause in the Address? I hope, said Mr. H., they will say with me, that the clause should stand, as containing an acknowledment of our superior situation to the Government where it is due. He hoped the question would be divided. Mr. NICHOLAS said it could not be divided. The gentleman last up must be mistaken to suppose so. The member may vote against the proposition of Mr. GILES, but either all must go, or none, according to the motion. Some conversation here ensued between Mr. W. SMITH, Mr. GILES, and the Chairman, about a point of order in striking it out. Mr. GILES then said, gentlemen might refuse to strike out the whole, and then move to strike out a part; and so attain their object. But, said he, admitting the paragraph to be founded on truth, were they, as legislators, to speak it in the face of the world? It is a matter of doubt; but suppose it true, what have we to do with it here? Suppose an individual were to go into his neighbor's house, and say to him, I am very rich, and you are poor; I am very happy, and you are miserable, would not his neighbor think it meant to insult him? Would it not degrade the poor man's misery? This conduct would surely be indelicate; and if indelicate and inconsistent in an individual, let us take every means to avoid this conduct as a nation. Mr. SITGREAVES said, that whatever division of the question gentlemen would propose, was indifferent to him; the words of the answer were perfectly congenial with his wishes, and he was prepared to give his opposition to any of the amendments proposed. On mature deliberation, there was not a sentiment in the report but he highly approved. He could not see any thing unnatural or unbecoming in drawing just comparisons of our situation with that of our neighbors; this is the only way we can form a just view of our own happiness. It is a very necessary way to come to a right knowledge of our own situation by comparing it with that of other nations. He would not reproach another people because they are not so happy as we are; but he thought drawing simple comparisons in the way of the report was no reproach. He was not against bringing the com H. ORR.] Address to the President. [DECEMBER, 1796. parison down to private life, as the gentleman That gentleman has said there are many others from Virginia had done; he should think it wrong in America capable of filling the office. It may in a man to exult over his neighbor who was dis- be so; there doubtless are; I do not wish to draw tressed or ignorant, because himself was wealthy a comparison between the PRESIDENT and others. or wise. Yet he saw no impropriety in his own But does it follow thence that we should not refamily of speaking of their happiness and ad-gret losing a faithful public servant? We should vantages, compared with that of others; it would regret him on account of his attachment to our awaken in them a grateful sense of their superior Constitution-on account of the tried confidence enjoyments, while it pointed out the faults and universally placed in him. Confidence in the offollies of others, only in order that those he had ficers of Government under every form is necesthe care of may learn to avoid them: thus while sary, and most particulariy so in a Republican our happiness is pointed out, the miseries of na- form: it is the vital principle whereby it is kept tions involved in distress are delineated to serve in existence-the chief source of its energy. We as beacons for the United States to steer clear of. could not expect that so great a portion of public He did not, with the gentleman from Virginia, in confidence would be laid on his successor, although any degree, doubt of the wisdom or firmness of he may be a man of equal integrity. the Administration of America. In the language of the Address, he entertained a very high opinion of it, "a grateful conviction that the wise, firm, and patriotic Administration of the PRESIDENT had been signally conducive to the success of the present form of Government." Such language as this is the only reward which can be given by a grateful people for labors so eminently useful as those of the PRESIDENT had been. This was not his sentiment merely, it was the sentiment of the people of America. Every public body were conveying their sentiments of gratitude throughout the whole extent of the Union. Why then should this House affect a singularity, when our silence on these points would only convey reproach instead of respect. If these sentiments were true, why not express them? But if, on the contrary, what the gentleman asserted, that the Adminis tration of the PRESIDENT had been neither wise, firm, nor patriotic, then he would concur with the motion for striking out; but he was not convinced of the truth of this assertion; and while this is not proved, he should vote against the motion. Mr. SITGREAVES said, he could not agree with the motion of the gentleman from South Carolina, [Mr. HARPER,] because his motion was for substituting other words in the place of those in the report, without any reason whatever. If the gentleman, by altering the phraseology, can make the sentiment any better, by all means let it be done: but if the sentiment is not to be changed, why alter it merely to substitute other words? On the whole, Mr. S. observed, that he did not see the answer could in any degree be reproached. There are no sentiments in it but what are justifiable on the ground of truth: they are free from adulation. It is such an expression of national regret and gratitude as the circumstance calls for; a regret at the retirement of a faithful and patriotic Chief Magistrate from office. A regret and gratitude which he believed to be the sentiment of Americans. Mr. SWANWICK began by observing that there were points in the Address in which all gentlemen seemed to agree, while on other parts they cannot agree. We all agree in our desire to pay the PRESIDENT every possible mark of respect; It has been said, sir, that the disagreeable cir- but we very materially disagree wherein a comcumstances which have lately occurred between parison is drawn between this and foreign nathis country and France is owing to a want of tions. If we are happy and other nations are not so, judgment in our Administration; his opinion, he it is but well for us; but he thought it would be said, was directly the contrary. He had occasion much more prudent in us to let other nations dison a recent circumstance, at the last session, to cover it, and not make a boast of it ourselves. It express his opinion, it was the opinion of the is very likely that those nations whom we comHouse, and he thought it had not changed since miserate may think themselves as happy as we that time. He saw no reason why the state of are: they may feel offended to hear of our comprivate credit should influence the deliberations parisons. If we refer to the British Chancellor of that House. He thought it not at all imputa- of the Exchequer in his speeches, he would tell us ble to the Administration, nor should it be men- that is the happiest and most prosperous nation tioned to tarnish the lustre of our state of pros-upon earth. How then can we commiserate with perity; it is no more than a speck in the sun. It it as an unfortunate country? If, again, we look should not be mentioned to prevent our expres- to France, that country which we have pointed sions of the obligations which we owe to the PRE- out as full of wretchedness and distress, yet we SIDENT for his services. As well might the late hear them boast of their superiority of light and dreadful fires at Savannah and New York be im- freedom, and we have reason to believe not withputable to a want of wisdom in the Administra-out foundation. A gentleman had talked about tion. Why are we not told of them as well as the derangements among a few merchants? Such trivial matters were not to be spoken of in a national view. If that gentleman [Mr. GILES does not regret the PRESIDENT's retreat from office, I do; and I believe America does: and this regret is not improper nor undignified. the flourishing state of our agriculture, and asserted that our late commercial calamities were not proofs of our want of prosperity, which the gentleman compared to specks in the sun. That gentleman speaks as though he lived at a distance. Has he heard of no commercial distresses, when violations so unprecedented have of late occurred? One merchant has to look for his property at Halifax, another at Bermuda, another at Cape Francoise, another at Gonaives, &c., all agree that they have suffered, and that by the war. These are distresses gentlemen would not like to feel themselves. Mr. S. said he had felt for these occurrences. We are not exempt from troubles; probably we may have suffered as much as other nations who are involved in the war. It is a question whether France has been distressed at all by the war. She has collected gold and silver in immense quantities by her conquests, together with the most valuable stores of the productions of the arts; as statues, paintings, and manuscripts of inestimable worth; and at sea has taken far more in value than she has lost: besides, her armies are subsisting on the requisitions her victories obtain. And has England gained nothing by the war? If we hearken to Mr. Pitt, we may believe they are very great gainers. Surely the islands in the West and East Indies, Ceylon, and the Cape of Good Hope, the key to the East Indies, are advantages gained; besides the quantity of shipping taken from our merchants. Mr. S. thought if we were to compare, we should find those nations had gained by the war, while we had lost; and of course there was no reason for us to boast of our advantages. [H. or R. If we have suffered those calamities, it is through a want of power to repress it. The unprotected state of our seamen and shipping, he said, demanded attention. The providing a Navy to support our rights was recommended by the PRESIDENT in his Speech. Many parts of that Address indicated the state of our affairs were not in that prosperous situation which had been represented. Let us then, said Mr. S., improve our own situation as much as possible, but avoid reflecting on other nations. Mr. W. SMITH next rose, and observed that gentlemen wished to compliment the PRESIDENT, but took away every point on which encomium could be grounded. One denies the prosperity of the country, another the free and enlightened state of the country, and another refuses the PRESIDENT the epithet of wise and patriotic. Mr. GILES here rose to explain; if he was meant, he must think the gentleman was wrong in his application. He said he had never harbored a suspicion of the good intentions of the PRESIDENT, nor did he deny his patriotism; but the wisdom and firmness of his Administration he had doubted. He thought him a good meaning man, but often misled. Mr. SMITH again rose, and said, he must confess himself at a loss for that refinement to discover When we send a ship to sea we cannot possibly between the wisdom and patriotism of the PRESIknow at what port she will arrive; so uncertain DENT, and that of his Administration. It was is our trade; in consequence of which the rates moved to strike out this acknowledgment of wisof insurance are doubled. Our funds are rather dom and firmness. What were we to substitute on the decline. Agriculture, it is true, is in a as complimentary to him in its place? The first prosperous state. However, he thought the pre- paragraph proposed to be struck out related to sent, of all others, was not the time to draw com- our speaking of the tranquility of this country, parisons. What is the probable effect of this kind compared to nations involved in war. Could this of conduct? If we are happy, and make a boast give offence, because we feel pleasure in being at of it, it will be sure to beget envy. Nobody is peace? It was only congratulating our own conenvious of the fortune of the poor, while every stituents on the happiness we enjoy. To appreone envies the rich. Shall we invite new depreciate the value of peace it was necessary to comdations upon our commerce by such representa- pare it with a state of war. It was the wisdom tions of our prosperity? It is a kind of indirect of this country to keep from war, and other nahostility to vaunt of our happiness, comparing it tions hold it up as exemplary in us. The gentleto nations in adversity: such language ill-becomes man himself has declared his wish for the prethis Address. There is great indication of hos-servation of peace; and though he admires it, and tility; let us not add to the danger. We might nations admire it in us, yet we are not to compare express pleasure at our own situation of affairs our state with nations involved in the calamities without depreciating the prosperity of other na- of war, in order to estimate our enjoyments. The tions. The gentleman from Virginia has said, words of this Address are not a communication we are the freest and most enlightened nation to a foreign Minister; it is a congratulation to in the world. Surely this will only have an ef- our own Chief Magistrate of the blessings he, in fect to create rivals and enemies: it will do us common with us, enjoys. Mr. S. hoped the words no good. I sincerely wish it to be recommitted, would not be struck out. that it might be made more agreeable to the will of the House. He said he was sensible that all the House wished to express might be put in the Address, without drawing a comparison between this country and foreign nations: we had enough to do with them already, without taking more. Happy for us, said Mr. S., if we can keep up peace with them. We are every day suffering in our With respect to what the gentleman refers to, commerce, and in the impressing of our seamen. when he says the want of wisdom and firmness in [He here referred particularly to the cruel treat- the PRESIDENT has brought us into this situation ment of Captain Jessup, who suffered most se- with France, Mr. S. would observe, that the verely from the discipline of an English man-of-note of the French Minister does not relate to war, although Captain of an American vessel.] the Executive, but to the Legislative part of our The gentleman has said that the PRESIDENT had not been either wise or firm, as it respected our foreign relations. Will the gentleman point out one of the acts wherein the PRESIDENT has failed in this respect; let him put his finger on one place and say, here is an instance where he has failed in wisdom, in firmness. Government; there is no act of the PRESIDENT on the subject of a complaint of the French Minister, but what has been also the action of the Congress. How, then, can gentlemen cast the whole blame on him when every act was sanctioned by Congress? If there was any blame, it fell on the Congress. Mr. S. made mention of the act respecting prizes, which act he said passed with very little opposition in this House. Another was the Proclamation of Neutrality, of which we had at that time a general approbation from North to South by the addresses sent. This is what Mr. Adet called "the insidious act." It was as much the act of Congress as of the PRESIDENT. He hoped the influence of foreign Ministers would never separate the PRESIDENT from the other branches of Government, or the Government from the people. [DECEMBER, 1796. one point to a place in the Address, and say there is no truth in this? No, sir, it is not adulation; it is justice; it is gratitude; it is only a recital of facts. We never can enough express our grateful obligations to a man who has done so much for us. Let us advert to the time of the PRESIDENT's coming into office, and to his re-election; study the Address that was then presented to him. Had he deserved a forfeiture of the respect then shown to him? Were we to strike out the words in the motion, it would be said that we were not only withholding our praise, but it must be construed into a reproach. If we were to strike out these expressions of gratitude, and some cold, dry compliments be substituted in their place, it would with good reason be judged by some, that he truly did want wisdom; that he had not been conducive to the prosperity of this country, and that he had destroyed public and private credit, and caused other mischiefs which were repre If we are to please some gentlemen, we must not say we are in prosperity; we must not draw a comparison with other nations. The gentle-sented to exist. man from Pennsylvania [Mr. SwANWICK] says, When this great man was going to retire forFrance and England say they are happy and ever from public to private life, it would be exprosperous. If those nations say they are prospected that in the answer we send to his Address, perous, they surely cannot be offended at our calling ourselves so, as that gentleman supposes; at most they will only laugh at our folly for our comparison. He said, he was very much surprised, and at a loss to know how the gentleman had changed his opinion so much since the last session; when the British Treaty was before them, he spoke much on the happiness of this country; he mentioned the great increase of commerce and manufactures which had taken place; he said they had outgrown themselves as a boy outgrows his clothes; but that gentleman will not now allow the prosperity of the country to be mentioned. With respect to that part of the Address which mentions our being a free and enlightened people, that had been objected to. He wished to inquire of gentlemen, what nation was so free or enlightened as ours; he wished them to specify one. In my review of all that I have read, said he, I know of none that enjoy so much civil and religious freedom as America, or is so enlightened, especially in the affairs of Government. Is there any nation on the earth, all things considered, that any gentleman would be willing to exchange for this? He presumed not. The gentleman from Virginia [Mr. GILES] says he shall not regret the PRESIDENT's retirement from public life; observing that there are many who would fill his place with equal merit. But he would ask, where is the man who enjoys so great a portion of public confidence? Where is the man who could pilot this vessel of State through, amidst the storms and quicksands which this ship has experienced, without a wreck? We may here take a view of the insidious attempts of a foreign Minister (Genet) to involve this country in a war; and of the Western insurrection. Was it not to be regretted that such an useful man should retire from his public station? It has been said there is too much adulation in the report. Truth, sir, cannot be adulation. Let any we should express the strongest sentiments of love and gratitude to him for his eminent services to his country. Every State Legislature which has met since he signified his intention to retire, have sent their expressions of approbation and gratitude to him. Why should we alone be silent? Why send him into the shades of retirement with daggers in his heart? Such a mutilated answer as the one proposed, would disgrace him in his retirement. Gentlemen are opposed to the wish that he might be a guide to his successors; but said Mr. S., I pray God, whoever he may be, he may follow the example, and. tread in the steps of the man whose Administration I admire. I think there is nothing in the Address but what is consistent with a due respect to his character, and taking the whole no way liable to the objections made. He, therefore, hoped no alteration whatever would be made. Mr. DAYTON (the Speaker) said, that he did not rise to accept the challenge given by the gentleman who spoke last from South Carolina, and to point out a nation more free and enlightened than ours; nor did he mean to contest the fact of ours being the freest and most enlightened in the world as declared in the reported Address, but he was nevertheless of opinion that it did not become them to make that declaration, and thus to extol themselves by a comparison with, and at the expense of all others. Although those words were in his view objectionable, he was far from assenting to the motion for striking out the seven or eight last clauses of the Address. The question of order having been decided, Mr. D. said he would remind the Committee, that, if they wished to retain, or even to amend any section or sentence of all that was proposed to be struck out, they ought to give their negative to this motion, as the only means of accomplishing their purpose. It was sufficient, therefore, for those who were opposed to the question for striking out the whole, |