with her owners' adventure, by Captain Evelith to the United States, was proper and discreet; because the ship was to be totally diverted from her destined course, in violation of express orders, and to the damage of her owners; to which violation no other consideration could have induced Captain Evelith to agree, but that of the extreme necessity of the case, to save the Consul General and his family, together with

a number of American citizens, from the horrors of

Algerine slavery, and to rescue property of the United

States, to a considerable amount, from certain loss. That, from the statement of Colonel Lear himself, as well as from that of Captain Evelith, there was substantially a perfect understanding between them, that the ship and adventure were abandoned by Captain Evelith to the United States, at the time that he submitted himself to the direction of Colonel Lear; and the destination of the Allegany to Gibraltar, under the direction of Colonel Lear, was exclusively for objects of great national interest.

1. Gibraltar was considered the best place to dispose of the cargo of the United States to most ad

vantage.

2. Gibraltar was supposed by the Consul General to be the best station from which to give the earliest and most effective intelligence of the recent rupture with Algiers, for the protection of American commerce on those seas; and,

3. It was highly necessary for Colonel Lear to go

to Gibraltar, as United States' cargo on board was his only dependence to meet the bills he had drawn on Gibraltar from the money he had obtained from Jacob Coen Bacii of Algiers, to pay off the balance of the annuities claimed by the Dey.

It appears to the committee, that the equity of the claim is strengthened by the consideration, that from the date of the charter-party, (20th January, 1812,) it is evident that the owners had no reason at that time to apprehend a war; in consequence of which, the freight contracted for was at a peace value. But before the Allegany sailed, an embargo had been laid, on the 4th of April, in contemplation of war; and on the 27th following, a special act was passed to permit the departure of vessels chartered by the United States. With this prospect of war, the owners were bound by their contract; in consequence of which, express orders were given, in case of war, to sell the ship Allegany at all events, rather than incur the risk of returning. The intended destination of the Allegany was such as to have enabled the captain to have availed himself of these orders, but the change made in his route by the events at Algiers, and the commands of the agent of the United States, prevented it, and threw the ship into the immediate power of the enemy, by going into an enemy's port.

Under this view of the subject, the committee do not hesitate to recommend the claim of the memorialists to the prompt indemnity of Congress, as they consider it clearly and unequivocally founded upon the soundest principles of justice and propriety.

They therefore beg leave to present a bill for their

relief.

REPEAL OF THE EMBARGO,

When the bill from the House of Representatives to repeal the embargo, non-importation, &c. had been read a first time, a motion was made by Mr. ANDERSON, that the usual rules of proceeding be dispensed with by general consent, and the bill be read a second time this day.

APRIL, 1814.

[This course requires, by a rule of the Senate, an unanimous consent.]

Objection was made to this course by Mr. SMITH, and afterwards by others.

Mr. KING suggested to the gentleman the expediency of withdrawing his opposition to the course proposed. If the bill should pass, was it not desirable, he suggested, that it should pass as speedily as possible.

Mr. SMITH declined withdrawing his opposition.

Mr. HORSEY Conceived that if the bill did pass, as no doubt it would, it would be of the highest advantage to the mercantile interest that it should pass speedily. He therefore moved, though with much regret, to dispense with that rule of the Senate which requires that bills shall receive their three several readings on different days.

Mr. DAGGETT said he hoped that rule would not be suspended. It had been dispensed with when the embargo law passed, much against his consent; and he could not consent to suspend it now, even when a repeal of that measure was in contemplation.

Mr. FROMENTIN said he could not see so urgent a necessity for the prompt passage of this bill as to require the suspension of the rule. It was now

well known everywhere that this measure was in agitation; and, whether the bill should pass to-dav or to-morrow, he did not believe a single sail would depart for a foreign port sooner than if it received its three readings in the usual form. Persons interested were now getting ready to take advantage, as soon as possible after its passage, of the provisions of the bill; but none could be ready before it passed in the usual form. He would not dispense with the rule in question, unless substantial benefits were to arise from so doing; and as he could not see the benefits which would arise, he hoped the rule would not now be suspended.

Mr. HORSEY said he did not see any possible inconvenience which could result from a suspension of the rule. He did not wish to precipitate this bill through the Senate in a day, but merely to refer it to-day to the Committee of Foreign Relations, that the House might act on it definitively to-morrow, which is the last day of the week. If this course were not pursued, the House could not act on the bill till Monday. Meanwhile, a painful state of suspense would prevail in the community in relation to its fate; and great speculation would go on during the pendency of the question, because many might be incredulous enough to believe that the bill would not pass this body, though no gentleman on the floor could entertain a doubt of it.

Mr. DANA said that, for himself, he had no idea of that sort of legislation which resembled a race. The rules of the House had been often enough suspended; it was time a stop should be put to the procedure. Be it that there are speculations, said he; be it that merchants are enduring unpleasant suspense; are we to forget the principles on which we ought to make laws, merely because men are impatient in the coffee-houses? It was time this rapidity of legislation should be arrested,

and that this House should not suffer its proceedings to be regulated by a regard to speculations among the merchants. It was in cases of importance like the present, that this rule ought to be most adhered to, &c.

Mr. BIBB of Georgia, said if this question to suspend the rule turned on the point whether the bill which was before the Senate should or should not pass without consideration, the remarks of the honorable gentleman from Connecticut would certainly be entitled to very great weight. But the object of the motion was, if he understood it, to enable the Senate to deliberate on the measure without delay, by referring it to a select committee for the very purpose of deliberation, which would be delayed under the ordinary rule of proceeding for one day.

Mr. GILES was opposed to a suspension of the rule in question. If that rule meant anything, it was intended as a check against the excitement of particular occasions, like the present. Dispense with the rule, said he, and you yield to that excitement against the effects of which the rule was intended to guard. He had no objection to this bill's going to a committee in the usual form, though there were peculiar and strong reasons, growing out of the nature of the bill, against its going to a standing committee, as well as against dispensing with the usual rule of proceeding. There were three distinct, separate, and independent principles contained in this one bill, in regard to which it might be a subject of very serious deliberation whether they ought all to be included in one bill. The first of these was the repeal of the embargo, a principle important enough of itself to form one bill; the second was a repeal of the whole non-importation system, a very important measure; and the third was a prohibition to our seamen from going out of the United States, which would also operate as a prohibition on their coming in. Every one of these subjects required a separate and distinct consideration. Mr. G. said he had always observed that legislation was most correct, when the bill before the Legislature embraced distinct principles, and least so when it contained a combination of principles frequently at war with each other. The principal reason of the objection to read this bill a second time to-day, he presumed was, that the bill contained so many distinct principles. And, if there was any one bill which ought to lie on the table one day for consideration, it was such a bill as this, presenting such a complexity of principles and provisions. He therefore objected to the suspension of the rule, first, because it would be treating the rules of the House with unnecessary levity; and, secondly, because of the generality of the reference it was proposed to give to this bill, embracing several distinct provisions. There was, he said. a great difference between a repeal of the embargo and a repeal of the non-intercourse; and, though he might favor both, he inclined to think that they ought to be separated into distinct bills.

Mr. TAYLOR spoke in favor of a suspension of the rule. The ordinary business of legislation, he said, required such a rule as a remedy against

SENATE,

surprise. On all great subjects, the reason of the rule ceased, and there might be a propriety in dispensing with the rule. The speech of the gentleman last up, of itself showed that the reason had in this case ceased; that the minds of gentlemen had been drawn to the subject and of course that his theory in relation to this rule did not apply. The provisions of this bill had been a subject of conversation ever since the reception of the President's Message of yesterday week; and, even if the bill contained as many more principles as had been enumerated, gentlemen had made up their minds on it. At this stage of the business, Mr. T. appeared to think that the only question to exercise the judgment of the Senate was, whether the bill should or should not be committed, and if committed, to what committee it should go. As to sending with the bill a codicil of instructions to the committee, as had been hinted at, the course was unprecedented on the first reference of a bill to a committee. Even the opposition this morning to the progress of the bill might give a false coloring to the views of this House in relation to it, and tend to deceive and injure, not the coffeehouse politicians, but the honest citizens throughout the country who are not generally as well informed as the merchants on public matters.

Mr. DAGGETT rose to defend his objection to the suspension of the rule, in support of which he quoted Jefferson's Manual of Parliamentary Practice. He held the principle of adherence to the rule to be important; because the rule that might be suspended because of the magnitude of a bill, was no reason at all. Though he should probably be in favor of the bill, he found himself bound to oppose the suspension of this rule in relation to it. Mr. GILES rose to ask the gentleman from South Carolina, who had observed that it was not usual to accompany the first reference of a bill with instructions to the committee, whether he had ever before known an instance in which two important substantive acts were proposed to be repealed in one bill containing also another very distinct principle ? It was certainly a very novel proceeding. Mr. DANA said, that he wished time to reflect on this bill-a bill containing more in a small space than any bill ever before presented to the House, some of the provisions of which were in his opinion very objectionable. As to the idea of referring the bill to a committee for the purpose of deliberation, he did not for his part wish to deliberate by delegation. He wished time to deliberate; for, although he was perfectly fixed in the principle of repealing our commercial prohibitions, he wished time to deliberate on the other provisions-and especially since the President had referred the decision of the question to the discretion of Congress, &c.

Mr. HORSEY said, as it appeared, from the remarks of gentlemen that they were not prepared, as he had supposed all were, to act on the bill today, he would withdraw his motion.

The motion to suspend the rule having been withdrawn, the bill passed to a second reading. And on motion, the Senate adjourned until tomorrow.

SENATE.

SATURDAY, April 9.

Mr. GAILLARD, from the committee appointed on the state of the public buildings. reported, in part, a bill making an appropriation for repairing the President's House; and the bill was read, and passed to the second reading.

The bill to repeal an act, entitled "An act laying an embargo on all ships and vessels in the ports and harbors of the United States," and so much of any act or acts as prohibit the importation of goods, wares, and merchandise, of the growth, produce, or manufacture of Great Britain or Ireland, or of any of the colonies or dependencies thereof, or of any place or country in the actual possession of Great Britain, and for other purposes," was read the second time, and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations, to consider and report thereon.

Mr. FROMENTIN asked and obtained leave to bring in a bill to grant donation rights to certain claimants of land in the State of Louisiana; and the bill was read, and passed to the second reading. The bill, entitled "An act to provide for the collection and preservation of such flags, standards, and colors, as shall have been, or may hereafter be, taken by the land and naval forces of the United States from their enemies," was read the second time, and referred to the Committee on Military Affairs, to consider and report thereon.

Mr. SMITH, from the Committee on Military Affairs, reported a bill, in further addition to an act, entitled "An act more effectually to provide for the national defence, by establishing an uniform militia throughout the United States;" and the bill was read, and passed to the second reading. The bill, entitled "An act for the relief of John P. Williamson and Thomas Rice," was read the second time.

The bill, entitled "An act fixing the time for the next meeting of Congress," was read a second time.

The bill, entitled "An act for the relief of Jarvis Cutler," was read the second time, and referred to the Committee on Military Affairs, to consider and report thereon.

The bill for the relief of Bowie and Kurtz, and others, was read the second time.

The bill fixing the salary of the Paymaster of the Army, and allowing a sum for the employment of additional clerks in his office for the year 1814, having been reported by the committee correctly engrossed, was read a third time, and the blanks were filled with the words "two thousand four hundred dollars," the Paymaster's salary, and "five thousand five hundred and forty-seven dollars," for additional clerk hire.

Resolved, That this bill pass, and that the title thereof be, "An act fixing the salary of the Paymaster of the Army, and allowing a sum for the employment of additional clerks in his office for

APRIL, 1814.

the year 1814, and providing for the appointment of assistant district paymasters."

The bill, entitled "An act for ascertaining the titles and claims to lands in that part of Louisiana which lies east of the river Mississippi and island of New Orleans," was read the second time, and referred to the committee appointed the 4th February, on the memorial of Thomas Cooper, and others, to consider and report thereon.

The bill, entitled "An act for the relief of Benjamin W. Crowninshield," was read the second

time.

The bill, entitled "An act supplementary to the act, entitled 'An act to provide for the widows and orphans of militia slain, and for militia disabled in the service of the United States," was read the second time, and referred to the Committee on Military Affairs, to consider and report thereon. A message from the House of Representatives informed the Senate that they do not concur in the amendments of the Senate to the bill, entitled "An act declaring the assent of Congress to an act of the General Assembly of ths State of Tennessee, therein mentioned." They have passed a bill, entitled "An act to authorize the subdivision of the quarter sections of the land of the United States;" also, a bill, entitled "An act extending relief to certain purchasers of public lands in the Mississippi Territory;" in which bills they request the concurrence of the Senate.

The two bills last mentioned were read, and passed to the second reading.

The Senate proceeded to consider the amendments disagreed to by the House of Representatives to the bill, entitled "An act declaring the assent of Congress to an act of the General Assembly of the State of Tennessee, therein mentioned."

On motion, by Mr. ANDERSON, Resolved, That they insist on their amendments, and ask a conference on the disagreeing

votes of the two Houses.

Ordered, That Messrs. ANDERSON, WHARTON, and BIBB, of Georgia, be the managers at the said conference on the part of the Senate.

Mr. SMITH presented the petition of John Hillen, and others, manufacturers, of the city and neighborhood of Baltimore, praying a revision of the law imposing duties on the importation of foreign articles; and, also, the prohibition of the importation of cotton goods, the manufacture of countries beyond the Cape of Good Hope, for reasons stated at large in the petition; which was read, and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations, to consider and report thereon.

The Senate resumed, as in Committee of the Whole, the consideration of the resolution fixing the time for an adjournment of the present session of Congress.

On motion, it was amended, by striking out "eleventh," and inserting "eighteenth," and by striking out "next," and inserting "one thousand eight hundred and fourteen."

On the question, Shall the amendments be engrossed, and the resolution read a a third time, as amended? it was determined in the affirmative;