A NATIONAL PAPER, PUBLISHED WEDNESDAYS AND SATURDAYS BY JOHN FENNO, No. 34, NOPTH FIFTH-STREET, PHILADtLPH!A [No. 85 of Vol. IV.] CONGRESS. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. FRIDAY, March l. In committee of the whole, Mr. Muhlenberg in the chair, on the 3d, 4th, sth, 6th, 7th, and Btb resolutions, refpefting the official conduct of the Secretary of the Treasury, tor which fee Gazette of the 6th ir.lt. MR. MERGER. None of the communi cations from filte Secretary of the Tie a fury, he said, had removed his fnfplcions re lative to the tranfa£lionsefthat department; Xvrhat had fallen ill the course of the diffcuffion tiad not removed his doubts. He> confefied liimfelf niore at a loss than ever to account for the conciuft of that officer. To judge of the propriety of his conduct, it was neceifary ta conftder what his duties are, and inyefti gate-whether a necessity exiflc-d tojuftify the drawing complained of. Gentlemen In their arguments had alluded to (bine obleryations (hat had fallen from him 00 other occaficms expressive ol'liis opinion—that tbere had been •corruption ip that department. This opinion he ftiil entertained—He fuggafej that fbtne irregularities had, he belifcved, taken place as to the money appropriated to the linking fund. This might l>e tlie fact, a-nd his sus picions were Sufficiently urgent to warrant him in suggesting, that it might be possible. At the close of ninety-two he slated there was a balance of calh in the treasury of 2,331,182 dollar ; and the bonds due in the course of the prelent year would produce a sum of a bout 2,269,000 dollars—Yet a proposition was made 111 the House, predicated on a total want of money in the treaftiry, to borrow 800,000 dollars in addition to the 400,000 al re'Jfly borrowed of the bank. Here Mr. Boudinot interrupted the mem ber, as beiiuT out of order. Trie Chairman, conceiving Mr. Mercer's remarks to We mtroduftory to, and connected with t:ie observations he intended to make on the rrfoiution, declared him iu order. Mr. Mercer proceeded to shew, by sundry ftarements and calculations, that there was no ncceflity for this loan of 800,000 dollars. The House, he laid, to discharge their duty, Ihould be bow the supftey appropri ated was applied, before they contented to re peated additional appropriations. When calls for information had been made by the House, with a view to comply with this their indif- P+nlible duty, the Secretary had thought it Sufficient to balance money actually received, by calculations of fuins that would probably be wanted agreeably to appropriations—>— Were dollars, he asked, to be balanced by ob solete appropriations ? can things certain be balanced by things Uncertain ?«—Aftual ex penditure would alone balance actual receipt. -Appropriations founded only on uncertain calculations could not shew the money actu ally laid out. He adverted to foine calcula tions made to ascertain the probable expen ses of the war department. Here the member was again called to or der, and was declared out of order by the Chairman. Mr. Mercer confined his obrervations more immediately to the resolution before the committee. It had been said that the inter est paid was paid out of monies that were to be drawn to this country, and were replaced Here by funds from the domestic refourccs originally appropriated for that object, and that the dead letter of the law, if any part of it, had alone been violated. He conteud cd there had been an elfential violation. The sums drawn for and appropriated to. reduce the public debt, were not applied to that purpose ; the domestic resources appro priated to that obje&} never were exhaufied. if this is the cafe, conclusions surely unfa vorable to that officer must naturally follow. He proceeded to make some remarks on the question, whether the Secretary had act ed under inftrudtions from the President. It was disagreeable, he premised, to criminate Ihe character of any officer. He bore a great re pest for the President, for his virtues* ta lents, and services, but however grating to ins feelings it might be to find fault with any part erf his conduct in this business, he was unable to discharge his duty Under his present lrnpreUions, unless he avowed that he con ceived that officer had violated the law, though he allowed, without intention, by not ciiquiiing into the business, while tranfafting, was his duty to do. He imift declare »at he saw no proof that the Secretary Had •«ed under the President's mftißttions ; on tne contrary he saw the reverse, there was •veil no preemptive proof of the atf.—'The House bad called for information as to the Extent of the authority delegated in the bufi tvefs by the President to the Secretary. Ei ther the Secretary has produced the proof of this authority, or he has not complied with he order of the House j—it does appear that ne has gone beyond it in making the drafts complained of. The President dire&ed that t e proceeds of the loan be immediately ap ¥ 'ed to pay the French; yet a £reat portion Saturday, March 16, 1793. of that money was brought over here, It was said, that he might have brought the. whole here, it" he chose, and paid it to the French here. This argument goes o» the preemption, he observed, that the Prcfident might do wrong without incurring blame. But the Preftdent expressly dire&ed. it to be paid immediately to France ; and tile Houfeii had np right toprefume that he did direct the!/ money to be drawn here, when proof to the' contrary appears. Upon the whole, he con-, eluded that the law had been broken in letter and substance, and that the Secretary had,< acted without proper infti uftimis from the President. Mr. Liverfnore dWerved, that the charges againfl the tieafury department were at firll well calculated to beget feripus alarm. When misapplications of the public money arefouud ed in the public ear, atl feel interested, know ing, that what *ffe<fts the public purse, mv)ft In a degree atfeft the purses of each private individual. In the prelent stage of tbe bufj nefs, he was happy in being able to felicitate himfelf and his fellow-citiaens, that even should the whole of til? charges contained in the reCblutions be proved, it would qot ap pear that they had loft a farthing by the bu siness Co loudly complained of. What is the charge? That the Secretary has paid an in terest that was juflly due ; why then, he pre sumed, we should not have it again to pay. If the Secretary has paid what was due, what then U the complaint ? It was Purely not in tended, that it Ihould not have been paid. This was not the intention of Congress j for they palfed an ast providing funds for its pay ment ; the Secretary was then rignt to pay it. But it is said, he paid it With the wrong money; he law no harm in not paying it with the very dollars appropriated, and approved of the operation, which, saved drawing with the one hand and remitting witn the other j in this there was no crime committed, no loss incurred. It appears, on the contrary, that Something was gained by it: So Far then, he was clear, no law had been violated, nor was any rule of propriety departed from— He then touched upon the Secretary's dis puted right to draw. He contended, that he had that right. The loans were obtained under the joint authority of the two acts. It vu fakl that more than two millions, tlie amount appropriated for the finking fund, were drawn over ; but, he infilled, he might have drawn the other twelve millions, if it had been for the public interest so to do. The French wished to be paid here, and it be ing no loss, rather a profit to comply with their wifb, where was the harm io So doing i If any public loss had been incurred owing to these drafts, then blame would lie. He con cluded, by expreffiug his hearty approbation of the conduct of the officer who is crimina ted by the refolu'ions, and declared it as his firm intention to give them Iris negative. Mr. Smith regretted that so important an enquiry had been instituted at the very clo e of the fefHbn, when the members were throng ed with business of an indispensable nature, and it was scarcely poilible for them to beftovr that attention and deliberation, which the na ture of the business called for. But, while he expressed this regret, he aflured the commit tee that it was mingled with mu£h fatisfafti on in finding that the vague charges of mis management, with which the public had long been alarmed, were at length cast into a shape, susceptible of investigation and decifiom Previous to an examination of the fpeclfic charge then under «onfideration, he clainicd the indulgence of the committee, in ottering a few preliminary remarks, which, though they did not bear precisely iijoii the charge itfelf, yet were intimately connected with the fubjea-matter of the enquiry, and were juftified by thegeueral remarks of gentlemen, who had preceded liirn. In recurring bsck to the origin and progress of this examination, be said, it must appear somewhat surprising, that that, which, in the commencement of the felfion, was founded forth as gross speculation, now turnec 1 out to be nothing more than a mere substitution of funds, and that that which was announced as abominable corruption, was dwindled away into a mere drawing of money from Europe into this country, to be applied here accord ing to law. Whatever credit might be due to the mo* tives which had originated this enquiry,every member would concur in the sentiment, that in a government constituted like that of the United Stater., wfiich had nothing but the pub lic confidence for its basis, premature alarms and groundless iufoicions refpe&'ng the con due* of public officers, were pregnant with the most injurious con frequences. This opinion was more peculiarly applica ble to the important flation of the Secretary of the Treafuvy. En tr lifted with the ma nagement of a large revenue, and necefTarily cloathed with some latitude of difipretion, it was to be expe&ed that he would excite the jealousy of the public vigilance ; but as long as he kept in view the injunctions of law, and the public good, his reputation was entitled to that'fecurity which is due to every citizen. 329 inoficer, entrusted with the tare and dif tribtirion of public monies, is generally looked aewitb a Watchful eye; mankind are too p« one to fufpe<ft the purity of his conduct J flight insinuations are but too- often fuflicient to injure him in the public eftiination. Such being the natural propensity of things it doubt ess behoved thole who wi'flied for tran quility In the country, to withhold not clearly warranted by proof—to suspend animadversions which were not likely to ter minate in convi&ion. A contrary proceed ing had an inevitable tendency nnnecelfarily to alarm the public mind-, to inlt 1 into it i\i(- picions agkirtft the integrity of men in high stations—to weaken their public confidence in the government, and to enervate its opera tions. There wan something remarkable in the nature of the present allegations against the Secretary; taking them all into view, they presented nothing which involved leli-inter efted pecuniary considerations ; and in this, they essentially differed from accusations a gainst financiers in other countries, to whom motives of interell were generally ascribed tb*fource of their peculations. T<> s he Secretary no such motive was imputed ; not withstanding former inlinnations againlt his integrity, the Jum of all the chargcs now a moimted to nothing more than arrogance, or an aflumptioii of power, or an exercile of un authorised discretion. With refpeft to discretion, Mr. Smith ob served, that though in the present enquiry it was not neceflary to fay much on that topic, being firmly persuaded the Secretary had ftri&ly pursued the injunctions of law, yet, while on the fubjedf, he took occasion to in sist that in all governments a latitude was implied in executive officers, where that diP» creation resulted from the nature of the office, or was in purltiance of general authority de legated by law. This principle was so obvi ous that it required no illustration ; were it contraditted, he tvould appeal to the conduct of the Secretary of State, who, though direct ed to report to the Houfb on the commercial intercoutte with foreign nations, had, in the exercise of a Warrantable discretion judicious ly withheld his report : lie would appeal to the report of the committee on the failure of St. Cifiir's expedition, tv herein that failure was in pare attributed to the commanding ge neral's not being inverted with a discretion to ast according to circumstances. There was one more observation which he thought proper to preijiife before he entered into a difcufiion of the charges ; and that was the diladvantageous lituation in which the financier of this country was placed,when compared with that of fimiiar officers in other nations. TheminiHerof finance in Great- Britain being always a member of the !egifla ture and on a footing with other members, was prepared to defend himfelf when attack ed » no charge could be made his ad ministration, which he had not an immediate opportunity of and the charge and the refutation went out to the A?orld toge ther. The Secretary of the Treasury was on the contrary not even permitted to come to the and to vindicate himlelf* Through the imperfedt medium of written reports he was compelled, when called upon for informa tf6n, to anfwerj as it were, by anticipation, charges whif:h were not fpecific, without JcHowfng pretifely agaiuft what part of his ad ministration fubfeqnent fpecilic clmfges would be Wought to bear. If in his reports he Wastdtjcife* he was cen sured for fuppreffirig information Jif he en tered into a vindication of the motives which influenced his qonduft, he Vas then criminat ed for fluffing his reports With metaphyseal reafb:rings. A gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Findley) had said that the Secretary's repots were so voluminous that he Was quite bewildered by them, and that instead of their throwing any light on the fubjett, he was more in the dark than ever. It is truej the repdtts were voluminous, but not more so than the imputations on the Secretary's con duct, and the ciders of the House juftifieck He did not think that any member who had attentively perused thein, could juftlV com plain of want of information, or of being more in the dark than before i he on the contrary believed, that so much light had been thrown on the whole of the Secretary's si cal operati ons, that if any member Could not fee it piuit be owing to the glare of light being too itrong for Ins eyes, Harirg made tbst obfbrvations,Mr. Smith said he ffiould proceed to examine tlie fii ft charge, which, after much reßeftion bellowed upon it, afrpearcd to him to contain nothing that was not autborifid by tl»e ltridt krtter oi the law. Mr. Smith, in his examination of the charge inder conlideration, observed that it collid ed* of two items : the firfl, ihe application of a certain portion of the p'. incipalfum bor rowed in Europe, to the payment of the in terest falling due upon that principal, which it was contended was nor authorifeJ by any law} Hialecoud, The draw«g ;art of the [Whole No. 40 5.] fame monies into the United States* without the inftradHoiis of the Pieiident. Th«f drit item of i hi* luppofed violation of law appeared ot so frivrffout a nature* that it did oot merit much difmfiioo ; at any rate, it was more an objeßi6ii ot form than ot f'ubttance. It he comprehended well the purpott Ot the charge, it was nothing more thin this—that the fccietafy, having tnmiiei at his disposal in tu rope applicable to the purchase of Hock in tin* country, and having at the lame wine monies in this coUntry applitable to the payment of the mteteit abroad, had fubflituted the one tor the Other; he had paid the tortrigri inteieft out of the foreign funds, and he had purchased (lock with the domeftie funds.— ThiJ was iht heinous crime with which he waa charged* and which was thought tufHcient to re move him from office ! If the money in V Europe might have beeu drawn to this country by biHs, for the purchase of the debt, it injght hpvb equally been here, by ordering the application,of a lunj. there (in Europe) fi?i a purpose which would be represented by an equal fori* here, to be applied to the purchase. The substance, not the form, i»to decide whe ther this mode of negociating the bufincts Wast proper. Suppose bills had been or dered to be drawn on the comroiflioners, and remitted to them, on account of the foreign interelt, would not this hav.e l)e<fi> as regular as to draw them for sale? Did the execution of the law require, that tl>e secretary, having funds in Europe, with which the foreign interest might be disc charged, should neverthelefe remit monies abroad for that put pose, and then, having funds in this country, with which the pur chases of the debt might be made, should draw bills to bring the foreign funds here/ Was there any necessity foj this complex operation, for the expence of remittance the probable loss on the sale of bills, the loss of interelt while the money was in tranfitu, when the whole business could be negociated by limple and (Economical tnode puvfued ? So fat from this arrange ment beir.g a ground of cenfufe, Mr. Smith alerted that, had the fecretaty pursued the other mode, he would have been animadverted Upon with great seve rity, for such an absurd and eXpeufivc operation ; (re would have been accused us ignorance of his dqty, and every loss in cidental to the tranfa&ion would have been charged to his account. The fecoild divilion of the charge, btf ing of more magnitude, requited a mofe lengthy difcuffiom This instance of vio* lation confided in a supposed deviation from the inductions of the Prefitjent, of a supposed aftiag without any inftru&iotf whatever. It was, however, begging thi queition j it was taking for granted that which did not appear, and which ought not to be presumed, And here Mr. Smith observed, the gentlemen on the other fide had entitely reversed one of the funda mental maxims of criminal jurisprudence, which declared that innocenct should be presumed, and guilt proved ; wherta> they had presumed guilt, and called uport the accused to piove hi* innocence. And what Was the slender bafts on which the presumption was built ? fay the gentlemen, the inftrudlions from the Prtfident to the Becietary, which have been laid before the houie, relate only to the payment of the French dibt« and convey no authority to draw any of the foreign loan into this country for the purchase of (lock, and hence they infer, he had no authority for this latter pur pose. To comprehend the fallacy of the in ference, it was only neceflary to recur to the laws, and to the Prtfidei.t'scommilfi on to thrf fecrttary to negociate the loanFj Two aAsof Congress had palled j one the 4th of Abgutl, the other the 12th Augufl, 1790. The fitit authorised a loan of 12 millions of dollars, applicable to the payment of the French debt; the other a loan of 2 millions, applicable to the purchase of the domeftie debt. The Piefident's commiflion to the secretary embraced both acts and both objtdis, and under that commiliion one loan was nego ciated applicable to both objedts. True it is thai the Prelident's firit inftru&iona
Significant historical Pennsylvania newspapers