H. OF R.] Protection of the Frontier. [JANUARY, 1792. to the inhabitants on the frontier, we must employ of the proper description: if large pay be offered, such troops and adopt such measures as appear the temptation will equally prevail upon those best calculated to insure success. If we delay who are unfit for the service as it will upon good, our determination until the force of the enemy be effective men; besides, some of the States have ascertained, we can make no provision at all; for no militia laws; and, even in those States which the nature and circumstances of the case preclude have such laws, they are gone into disuse; no deus from the very possibility of obtaining a know-pendence can therefore be placed on militia under ledge of their strength and numbers. And are any laws now existing. There is, indeed, a genewe, meanwhile, to remain inactive and irresolute, ral militia law now before the House; but if it and make no efforts to repel their intended attacks? ever passes, it certainly cannot be passed in due No! Whatever their numbers may be, prudence season to answer the purpose of providing for the calls aloud for provision of some kind. And if ex-immediate defence of the frontier. Regular troops perience is to have any weight with us, the exam- must be raised, or nothing effectual can be done; ple of the French and of the British points out and if to avoid the expense we refuse the only aid the true mode of securing our frontier, and render- that may prove of any real service, we render ing it invulnerable to an Indian foe. Let us oc- ourselves responsible for the consequences of this cupy posts in the vicinity of the enemy, let them parsimonious policy, which may be attended with be properly garrisoned and well provided, and the the ruin and destruction of our fellow-citizens in business is done. the Western country. These will afford an opportunity of trading with the friendly tribes, and will prevent all intercourse between the whites and the Indians, except under proper regulations. Should hostilities be meditated by any tribes who are not in amity with us, early intelligence of their movements can be obtained; their marauding parties may either be beaten off on their approach, or intercepted on their return; opportunities may be taken of separately attacking the hostile tribes; their old men, their squaws, their children, will be exposed a great part of the year, whilst the others are out hunting. In short, if fear, hope, interest, can be supposed to have any influence on the Indians, this mode of defence must be allowed to be preferable to any other, as giving the fullest scope to the operation of all those motives. A different mode has long been pursued in Virginia, and adopted by the inhabitants of Kentucky, but its success has not been such as to offer any inducement to the General Governmet to follow the same plan. Rangers have there been employed for a number of years to scour the frontiers; and those rangers, too, were expert woodsmen, perfectly inured to the Indian mode of warfare; yet, notwithstanding their utmost vigilance, the savages still found means to commit all the murders and depredations already enumerated. It is true, however, that a frontier militia man, trained up in the woods, may be, in many respects, preferable to a regular soldier, who has not the same knowledge of the country, and of the mode of fighting; but with equal experience, (and proper men, possessed of that experience, may be enlisted on the establishment) regular troops will be found infinitely superior to any militia upon earth. Every man who has ever seen militia in the field, cannot but know that a very trifling disaster, or a slight cause of discontent, is sufficient to make them disband and forget all subordination, so far as even to neglect the means of self-defence; whereas regular troops, under proper discipline, and acting with greater steadiness and concert, are much more to be depended on, especially when the object of attack is distant, and great fatigue is to be undergone. The militia, in whatever mode hey may be called out, will hardly furnish men The Cornplanter's speech was again mentioned and called for; but, as it had been confidentially communicated by the President, an objection was made to having ít read without clearing the galleries. Whereupon, An honorable member arose, and mentioned his having read it in one of the public newspapers in the State of New Jersey. To this it was answered, that if any gentleman had the newspaper to produce, the speech might be publicly read from that; otherwise, although it might be very proper that the speech itself should be read, yet, as it had been confidentially received from the Executive, there would be a manifest trespass on propriety and decorum in having it read with open galleries; it was therefore wished that the galleries might be cleared. The Parliamentary etiquette requiring that this should be done by the House, and not by a committee, the committee rose for the purpose; and, The Speaker having resumed the Chair, the motion for clearing the galleries was renewed. An objection was here started by an honorable gentleman in favor of the augmentation, who said that, as some gentlemen had spoken on the popular side of the question, whilst the galleries had been open, it was unfair to preclude those of opposite sentiments from an opportunity of answering their arguments in the same public manner, and proving to the people the justice and necessity of the war. The motion, however, was persisted in, and the galleries were cleared. [The speakers in this day's debate were Messrs. WAYNE, GOODHUE, BOUDINOT, LIVERMORE, STEELE, PARKER, BOURNE, (Rhode Island,) WHITE, and MOORE. Mr. WHITE and Mr. MOORE opposed the motion; they were in favor of the augmentation proposed in the bill. The other gentlemen were in favor of striking out the clause.] FRIDAY, January 27. The Speaker laid before the House a Letter from the Treasurer of the United States, covering his account of indents of interest received and issued between the first of October, and the thirty first of December, one thousand seven hundred and ninety-one, inclusive; which were read, and ordered to lie on the table. PROTECTION OF THE FRONTIERS. The House again resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole House on the bill for making further and more effectual provision for the protection of the frontiers of the United States. [H. or R. did it authorize an extensive increase of the Sink ing Fund, which we are informed is one of the principal objects? It would be an affront to common sense to answer one of these queries in the affirmative-it authorized none of them. And yet these are all its offspring; these are the great objects it produced. It is true there are in the bill two or three little clauses that were authorized, and which relate to the submission, and which might well have escaped my attention, and would probably never attract the observation of the pubMr. Chairman: I originally opposed the refer- lic, but for the title-a bill for the protection of the ence of this subject to the Secretary of the Trea- frontiers. By these clauses five hundred and sury, on principles supported by the Constitution, twenty-three thousand dollars of the whole moby the theory of free Government, and from prac-neys to be forever raised from its perpetual revetical observation on the progress of our own, and I believe the result now before us will fully exemplify every evil predicted. Mr. MERCER rose and addressed the Chair as follows: nue, are appropriated for this year's campaign. After that sum is expended, we must, even the next year, look out for new taxes, and upon the same principles, as long as the Indian war continues (and by the enlistments it is not contemplated to be of very short duration) new taxes must be provided, for the residue of these taxes are by this bill appropriated to other purposes, for ever, after five hundred and twenty-three thousand dollars are paid. This appropriation is unalterable even by the whole Legislature, unless by a breach of public faith, or providing other equal revenue. Should every year's Indian war, and every national disaster excuse Government for laying a perpetual tax, equal to the increased annual demand, it will be selling us defeats at a very high price; and if Government are paid so well, they may be tempted to repeat the tragical representation. Let any man examine this bill, and compare it with the terms of the original reference. Let it then be asked, whether the submission to devise ways and means to provide for the defence of the Western frontier, authorized the plans proposed by the Treasury Department, that we are now giving sanction to? Did it authorize a perpetual tax, irrepealable by the whole Legislature, without a breach of faith, according to received doctrine? At least, so far placing the purse-strings in the hands of the Executive, who may refuse an assent to the repeal; in the power of the Senate also, and consequently beyond the reach of the Representatives of the people, who alone are deputized by, and may be recalled by the great mass of society, and to whom the Constitution expressly confines But what is the reflection that naturally arises the power of originating money bills. Have we, from a contemplation of this bill. That Adminisin truth, originated this money bill? Do we ever tration will not even permit us to defend the originate any money bill? If a reference, such helpless women and children of the frontier from as made to the Secretary, was proposed to the the brutal ferocity of a savage foe, but on condition Senate, who are a branch of the Legislature, near- that the Representatives surrender up forever the ly of equal importance with ourselves, would it sacred trust of the Constitution, and place in the not be held a breach of the Constitution? Were power and under the control of the Executive and they to propose such a plan as this to us, would it Senate, a perpetual tax. Unless they throw the not be received with indignation? Why so little power of regulating the labor and industry of their jealousy of the Executive Department, separated fellow-citizens into the hands of Government, and by the Constitution with so much care from us? into a mean dependence on Administration; and Of the Treasury Department, too, which is con- unless they furnish a large sum of money, under sidered in other countries as possessing and exer- the denomination of a Sinking Fund, for the purcising the means of corruption? It is in my judg-poses of speculation, in order to raise and lower the ment a direct infraction of the letter and spirit of price of stocks at pleasure, or as may suit the views the Constitution, of the principles of free Govern- and interest of the band of favorites that are in the ment, and I have heard no attempt to defend it, secret. but on the ground of pitiful evasion, more dishonorable to ourselves and dangerous to the public, than an open violation, that would rouse their resentment and insure opposition. Hard and oppressive conditions! Was this the object of the reference to the Secretary? It was not the avowed one, nor could it have been suspected, from a simple proposition to devise ways But did the submission of a provision to defend and means to defend the frontier. A mighty fabric the frontier authorize a system for the encourage- has been erected on this slight foundation, to hurry ment of manufactures? Thereby placing the occu- us into its adoption. We have been officially, I suppations and productive labor of our citizens under pose, informed that the money for the War Dethe direction of Government, and rendering the liv-partment is almost expended; that the preparations ing of the artist and subsistence of the farmer, so far for the Western expedition must stop, unless we equally dependent on and subservient to the views pass the bill immediately; and thus, with the tomof Administration? Did it authorize an entire pro- ahawk suspended over our heads, we must give up vision for the public debt, past, present, and to come? to Administration the dearest interests of the peoDid it authorize a plan for supplying former de-ple, and sacrifice the most sacred rights of the ficiencies, which it is admitted do not exist? Lastly, Constitution. H. or R.] Protection of the Frontier. [JANUARY, 1792, If anything can equal the boldness of this mea- that for Government to attempt to divert its courses, sure, it is its injustice. I have long remarked in as it can only be done by the obstructing in one this House, that the Executive, or rather the Trea-part and opening in another, is not only impolitic sury Department, was really the efficient Legislature of the country, so far as relates to the revenue, which is the vital principle of Government. The clause of the Constitution confining to the immediate Representatives of the people, in this House, the origination of money bills, is converted into a Committeeship of Sanction, that never withholds its assent; a convenient cloak to divert the blame of odious measures from the real authors. We have heard of corrupt majorities in British Par-pitals on the proffered encouragement. But we liaments. I will not suppose an improper motive in any member of this body, but I am free to say that we appear better trained than any House of Commons I have yet read of; for if a Minister, with them, was to attempt to supply all the ordinaries and extraordinaries of Government by perpetual taxes, I am persuaded he would risk his head. The Representatives of the British nation, the immediate agents of the people, dare not vote away the rights of their principals and the power of their successors. They preserve the purse-strings in their own hands, by laying taxes for the support of Government from year to year; they know no permanent taxes, except those pledged for certain debts-and even those the whole nation now exclaims against, as the mortal poison of the Constitution-and the settlement for the support of the Crown, given in exchange for the feudal and constitutional rights relinquished by the King. and imprudent, but unjustifiable and tyrannical; yet even such encouragement, if proper, should certainly not be permanent. A manufacture that will not, after a sufficient stimulus, support itself, ought not to be encouraged. When it no longer needs aid, the tax ought to be withdrawn; but as there is no limitation proposed, as the law is per|petual, a repeal at any time would be construed into a breach of faith, by those who embarked cashould recollect, that this not only operates unequally in the same States, between the farmer and mechanic-the staple States are unequally represented in this Government-that we are differently, therefore, interested with respect to manufactures; that these bounties are in fact paid from the staples of the Southern States, by producing retaliating regulations in their only markets abroad, and raising the price of what the planters must buy at home. In fine, such precipitate measures seemed calculated to sow discontent, in order to reap confusion, and out of confusion it is said order arises; that is, it gives countenance to the abuse and desertion of all free Governments, and the introduction of despotism in its stead. With respect to stability in commercial regulations as necessary to mercantile calculations-if duties have a certain limit, calculations may as well be made on that limitation as on permanency; but surely these When this tax-law made its first appearance arguments have been advanced by the advocates from the Treasury Department, petitions against of the bill with one eye shut. They have not it from the great commercial capitals of America, even squinted at that part of this same bill which convenient to us, were presented. The petitioners limits the continuation of the increased duties on represented the impositions on commerce as al-three-fourths of the articles of importation to a ready oppressive and intolerable. Their particular Representatives seemed to sympathize at first with these sentiments. I hope it was not intended to enhance this measure as a boon, in order to demand some greater sacrifice as an equivalent. But certainly when these objections were admitted to be valid, and a proposal was made to render the evils temporary, by limiting the bill to a short period, and in order that it might be commensurate with the original purpose, the Indian war-the encour-lars: surely, in such arguments, there is no regard agement of manufactures, stability in commercial to decency preserved; but, in every view, to lay arrangements, a variety of new purposes for money, permanent taxes, without appropriating them to former deficiencies, and a Sinking Fund, were then specified purposes, is unsafe and unconstitutional. vaunted forth as the objects of the measure. These As to a Sinking Fund, it is a pretext that will not were certainly never the objects of the reference, bear inspection. If it was really meant to disand show, at one view, how iniquitous and dan- charge the principal of the debt, why not early gerous it is to blend temporary objects with perma- present a plan as an independent object of delibenent regulations, and connect necessary and indis-ration? It is certainly of sufficient magnitude. Why pensable provisions with measures of doubtful, if not unjust policy. Independent of the constitutional question of the right of Congress, why should we be compelled to consider the extensive range and delicate refinement of encouraging manufactures by extensive duties operating as indirect bounties, under the pressure of providing for an Indian war? Putting out of view the general and irrefragable principle, that industry will almost always select the most beneficial channels for its streams to flow in, and short period; their hearers are to be compelled to forget all the arguments on the first part before they are allowed to consider the second. As to the other purposes and former deficiencies, they were never suggested until some excuse was to be invented; and in this case it seems also unfortunate that this very bill, in one of the latter clauses, states that there is an actual surplus of revenues of one hundred and fifty thousand dol wait until the Indian war was on the tapis? But perpetual taxes are not necessary for a Sinking Fund. Perpetual taxes were never excused upon any other principle but the providing a certain interest to give currency to a fictitious capital. That is not the case with respect to a Sinking Fund; that should be provided and increased as circumstances will permit, from year to year; our successors should be left as free in this respect as we are. Besides, a perpetual tax for a Sinking Fund is an absurdity in language. It is true, where we JANUARY 1792.] Protection of the Frontier. [H. of R. After having compelled us to part with the subject out of our hands, and refer it to a part of the Executive-after it has been cooped up out of doors, and kept back until the cravings of necessity compel the admission of part of the proposals-when we now wish to separate the necessary and useful from the pernicious parts, unjustifiably blended and introduced, we are arrested by the votes of a majority, and even insulted by an abuse of an imputed incapacity, that, if true, would, by degrading the whole Representative body of the people, involve themselves, as well as the minority, in the ignominy. But, surely no two propositions can be more readily distinguished than the increase of revenue for the Indian war, and this complicated, unauthorized, unnatural, unconstitutional mixture of manufacturing, financial, deficiency, sinking fund, and Indian war ingredients. are constantly increasing our debts, and even when substitute? we cannot increase them fast enough, assuming debts of others, a perpetual Sinking Fund may be reconciled to the fact; but that fact must also prove that there is really no serious intention of our paying the debt, but that it is considered as the great engine necessary to influence the motions of Government, and which must ever be preserved when once introduced. That this is the real policy, the use that has been made of the Sinking Fund we now have, will evidently demonstrate. I have, it is true, no official documents, but it has been published in the newspapers, and not contradicted. I have before mentioned it in this House, and it has not been denied. I must, therefore, believe it to be true that the Treasurer of the United States, and other agents for the Department of the Treasury, have gone into market, and given higher prices for stock than individuals purchased at: in this city, at 12s. for three per cents, when they sold at 10s. 6d at New York-12s. when others could buy at 10s. Is not this throwing away 3s. and 4s. in the pound of the public money, betraying the confidence of the people? Is it not worseis it not deviating so much to sinister purposes? It is said, that it raises the price on foreigners; the fact is directly the reverse. It raises the price of foreign property on ourselves, for they hold perhaps the greater part of this paper. But, on this principle, we should go on until we stimulate the six per cents. to 30s. in the pound, to make it equal to money at 4 per cent., at which rate it is said foreigners now lend to us. We certainly, on their own principles, lose more by the difference between 20s., the ultimatum to which we now go, and 30s., to which we ought to go to raise our stocks to the price of foreign loans. Then we should lose between 20s. and 15s. or 16s., which is the lowest that stocks could probably descend, whilst we pay the interest quarterly. When Mr. MERCER had concluded, the Committee rose, and the House adjourned. MONDAY, January 30. The Speaker laid before the House a Letter from the Secretary of War, transmitting, pursuant to the directions of the President of the United States, copies of the official communications which have passed between the Executive of the United States and the Governor of Pennsylvania, upon the subject of the temporary defensive protection of the frontiers of the said State; which were read, and ordered to lie on the table. A message from the Senate informed the House that they have passed the bill to establish the Post Office and Post Roads within the United States, with several amendments; to which they desire the concurrence of the House. after some time spent therein, the Chairman reported that the Committee had again had the said bill under consideration, and made several amendments thereto; when the same being read, some were agreed to, and others disagreed to. And then the said bill being before the House, a motion was made, and the question being put to amend the same, by striking out the second section thereof, in the words following: PROTECTION OF THE FRONTIERS. The House again resolved itself into a CommitBut it is asked, Would Government wish to give tee of the Whole House on the bill making farless than 20s.? The answer is, the money of the ther and more effectual provision for the protecpeople ought to be laid out so as to sink the great-tion of the frontiers of the United States; and, est quantity of the debt. But, again: Government had no such scruples when the debt was principally in the hands of the original holders. They bought up then at 12s., 13s., and 14s., or less, and so on. Why did they not fix then the price at 20s.? Why are mere speculators (I mean not to include those who purchase to hold, for it is their interest to purchase cheap) dearer to Government than those who have gained these debts in exchange for their blood or their property? Why protect those who have purchased 20s. for 2s. 6d. from the soldier and farmer from losing perhaps a tenth of their profits? Why should Government make use of the contributions of these very injured people, as well as others, to increase the advantages of those who have injured them? Why select this particular species of property to raise its value? Why not raise the price of tobacco, rice, and other articles, now so low? Have they not been as honestly earned? In fine, we have opened a small door, and let us only observe what a host of evils have entered; and then we are asked, Why do we not prepare a "And be it further enacted, That there shall be raised three additional regiments of infantry, each of which, exclusively of the commissioned officers, shall consist of nine hundred and twelve non-commissioned officers, privates, and musicians:" It passed in the negative-yeas 18, nays 34, as follows: YEAS.-John Baptist Ashe, Elias Boudinot, Shearjashub Bourne, Benjamin Bourne, Nicholas Gilman, Benjamin Goodhue, William Barry Grove, Samuel Livermore, Nathaniel Macon, Nathaniel Niles, Josiah Parker, Israel Smith, John Steele, Thomas Sumpter, George Thatcher, Artemas Ward, Hugh Williamson, and Francis Willis. H. OF R.] Protection of the Frontier-Post Office Bill. NAYS.-Fisher Ames, Abraham Baldwin, Robert Barnwell, Egbert Benson, John Brown, Jonathan Dayton, William Findley, Thomas Fitizsimons, William B. Giles, Andrew Gregg, Thomas Hartley, Daniel Huger, Philip Key, Aaron Kitchell, John W. Kittera, John Laurance, Amasa Learned, James Madison, Andrew Moore, Frederick Augustus Muhlenberg, Williams Vans Murray, John Page, Cornelius C. Schoonmaker, Joshua Seney, William Smith, Samuel Sterrett, Jonathan Sturges, Peter Sylvester, Thomas Tredwell, Thomas Tudor Tucker, Abraham Venable, Jeremiah Wadsworth, Anthony Wayne, and Alexander White. The farther consideration of the said bill was then postponed until to-morrow. TUESDAY, January 31. [FEBRUARY, 1792. The amendments of the Senate to the bill for establishing the Post Office and Post Roads within the United States, were taken into consideration by the House, and all of them agreed to, except one or two which respect a variation in the cross The Speaker laid before the House a Letter from the Secretary of War, covering his report on the petitions of James Swaine, Abraham Spring-posts. er, Timothy Mountford, sundry seamen, Samuel Wail, for himself and servant, John Carnaghan, James Shields, Henry Skinner, and William Loring; which were read, and ordered to lie on the table. PROTECTION OF THE FRONTIERS. The House resumed the consideration of the bill for making farther and more effectual provision for the protection of the frontiers of the United States; and the same being further amended, was Ordered To be engrossed, and read the third time to-morrow. WEDNESDAY, February 1. Mr. PAGE, from the committee to whom was referred the petition of John Churchman, made a report; which was read, and ordered to lie on the table. PROTECTION OF THE FRONTIERS. One of the amendments, proposed by the Senate and agreed to by the House, is in favor of the newspapers; inasmuch as it permits any person whatever, without authority from the Postmaster General, to "take up, receive, order, despatch, convey, carry, and deliver" newspapers, for hire, on the established post roads, without being subject to any fine, penalty, or forfeiture, for so doing. By another amendment, it is enacted, that if any person employed in any department of the Post Office, shall unlawfully detaín, delay, embezzle, of destroy any newspaper, with which he shall have been intrusted, such offender shall, for every such offence, forfeit a sum not exceeding fifty dollars; and the Postmaster, in any contract he may enter into for the conveyance of the mail, may authorize the person with whom such contract is made to carry newspapers, other than those conveyed in the mail. One of the amendments was to strike out Exeter from the general route of the post. Mr. GILMAN rose in opposition to this amend ment. to. An engrossed bill for making farther and more effectual provision for the protection of the fronI hope, said he, the alteration will not be agreed tiers of the United States, was read the third time, informed it was committed to a committee conWhen this bill went up to the Senate, I am and the blanks therein filled up; and, on the ques-sisting of a member from each State; that the tion that the said bill do pass, It was resolved in the affirmative-yeas 29, nays 19, as follows: alterations were made in that committee, and afterwards agreed to in Senate without much debate. In that committee, this subject was very unfairly YEAS.-Fisher Ames, Abraham Baldwin, Bobert represented, and gentlemen who were then in Barnwell, Egbert Benson, John Brown, Abraham Clark, favor of the amendment, are now, on further inJonathan Dayton, William Findley, Thomas Fitzsimons, quiry, decidedly against it. This, I think, a good William B. Giles, Thomas Hartley, Daniel Huger, Aa- reason why the House ought not to concur. But, ron Kitchell, John W. Kittera, Amasa Learned, James sir, I beg leave to offer some reasons why an office Madison, Andrew Moore, Frederick Augustus Muhlen- should be established in Exeter. It is a compact berg, William Vans Murray, John Page, Joshua Seney, town, of considerable trade, and some navigation; William Smith, Samuel Sterrett, Peter Sylvester, Tho-it has a direct trade with Boston, and vends conmas Tredwell, Thomas Tudor Tucker, Jeremiah Wads- siderable quantities of dry goods. This trade worth, Anthony Wayne, and Alexander White. NAYS.-John Baptist Ashe, Shearjashub Bourne, would be greatly facilitated by having the stage Benjamin Bourne, Nicholas Gilman, Benjamin Good- pass through the town; but what is of more imhue, James Gordon, William Barry Grove, James Hill-portance, and more extensive in its operation, house, Israel Jacobs, Nathaniel Macon, Nathaniel Niles, arises from the necessary communication which Josiah Parker, Jeremiah Smith, Israel Smith, John is kept up between that town and other parts of Steele, Thomas Sumpter, George Thatcher, Artemas the State. This will be perfectly understood, when Ward, and Francis Willis. gentlemen are informed that the records of the |