Assailants Asphalt Alibis Camper Criminals Cozy

Mystery 8 Tonya Kappes download

https://ebookbell.com/product/assailants-asphalt-alibis-camper-
criminals-cozy-mystery-8-tonya-kappes-53527522

Explore and download more ebooks at ebookbell.com

Here are some recommended products that we believe you will be
interested in. You can click the link to download.

Practical Karate Volume 4 Defense Against Armed Assailants Donn F

Draeger

https://ebookbell.com/product/practical-karate-volume-4-defense-
against-armed-assailants-donn-f-draeger-43753834

Practical Karate Volume 3 Defense Against Multiple Unarmed Assailants

Donn F Draeger

https://ebookbell.com/product/practical-karate-volume-3-defense-
against-multiple-unarmed-assailants-donn-f-draeger-43753832

Unknown Assailant Jl Doucette

https://ebookbell.com/product/unknown-assailant-jl-doucette-49088854

Unknown Assailant Jl Doucette

https://ebookbell.com/product/unknown-assailant-jl-doucette-36401708
Unknown Assailant Dr Pepper Hunt 3 Jl Doucette

https://ebookbell.com/product/unknown-assailant-dr-pepper-hunt-3-jl-
doucette-36666088

Splatterism The Disquieting Recollections Of A Minotaur Assailant An

Upbuilding Edifying Discourse Hand C S Winter Christian

https://ebookbell.com/product/splatterism-the-disquieting-
recollections-of-a-minotaur-assailant-an-upbuilding-edifying-
discourse-hand-c-s-winter-christian-9460434

Practical Karate Volume 2 Defense Against The Unarmed Assailant Donn F

Draeger

https://ebookbell.com/product/practical-karate-volume-2-defense-
against-the-unarmed-assailant-donn-f-draeger-43753830

Correspondence 19191973 Martin Heidegger Karl Lwith J Goesser

Assaiante

https://ebookbell.com/product/correspondence-19191973-martin-
heidegger-karl-lwith-j-goesser-assaiante-37598018
 Another Random Document on
Scribd Without Any Related Topics
eligible to found it on a donation of lands, they have it now in their
power to endow it with those which will be among the earliest to
produce the necessary income. This foundation would have the
advantage of being independent on war, which may suspend other
improvements, by requiring for its own purposes the resources
destined for them.
TH. JEFFERSON.
December 2, 1806.

The Message and documents therein referred to were read, and

ordered to lie for consideration, and three hundred copies thereof
printed for the use of the Senate.

Wednesday, December 3.
Daniel Smith, from the State of Tennessee, attended.

Thursday, December 4.
James Hillhouse, from the State of Connecticut, attended.

Friday, December 5.
James Turner, from the State of North Carolina, attended.

Tuesday, December 9.
Andrew Moore, from the State of Virginia, attended.

Thursday, December 11.

 John Milledge, appointed a Senator by the Legislature of the State
of Georgia, in the place of James Jackson, deceased, took his seat,
and his credentials were read, and the President administered the
oath to him as the law prescribes.

Friday, December 19.

The credentials of Stephen R. Bradley, appointed a Senator by the
Legislature of the State of Vermont, for the term of six years, from
and after the third day of March next, were presented and read;
also, the credentials of John Milledge, appointed a Senator by the
Legislature of the State of Georgia, for the term of six years, from
and after the third day of March next.
Ordered, That they lie on file.

Monday, December 29.

The President communicated a letter from Robert Wright, stating
that he had resigned his seat in the Senate.
Philip Reed, appointed a Senator by the Legislature of the State of
Maryland, in place of Robert Wright, resigned, produced his
credentials, and took his seat in the Senate.
Henry Clay, appointed a Senator by the Legislature of the State of
Kentucky, in place of John Adair, resigned, produced his credentials,
and took his seat in the Senate.[42]
The credentials of Mr. Clay and Mr. Reed were severally read, and
the oath was administered to them as the law prescribes.
Mr. Reed also produced the credentials of his appointment to be a
Senator of the United States, from the State of Maryland, from the
third day of March next, until the fourth day of March, 1813, and
they were read, and ordered to lie on file.
James Fenner, from the State of Rhode Island, attended.
 Monday, January 12, 1807.
James A. Bayard, from the State of Delaware, attended.

Tuesday, January 20.

The credentials of Andrew Gregg, appointed a Senator of the
United States by the Legislature of the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania, for six years, commencing on the 4th March next,
were presented and read, and ordered to lie on file.

Thursday, January 22.

Burr’s Conspiracy.

The following Message was received from the President of the

United States:—

To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States:

Agreeably to the request of the House of Representatives,
communicated in their resolution of the 16th instant, I proceed to
state under the reserve therein expressed, information received
touching an illegal combination of private individuals against the
peace and safety of the Union, and a military expedition planned by
them against the territories of a power in amity with the United
States, with the measures I have pursued for suppressing the same.
I had for some time been in the constant expectation of receiving
such further information as would have enabled me to lay before the
Legislature the termination as well as the beginning and progress of
this scene of depravity, so far as it has been acted on the Ohio and
its waters. From this, the state of safety of the lower country might
have been estimated on probable grounds; and the delay was
indulged the rather, because no circumstance had yet made it
necessary to call in the aid of the legislative functions. Information,
now recently communicated, has brought us nearly to the period
contemplated. The mass of what I have received in the course of
these transactions, is voluminous; but little has been given under the
sanction of an oath, so as to constitute formal and legal evidence. It
is chiefly in the form of letters, often containing such a mixture of
rumors, conjectures, and suspicions, as renders it difficult to sift out
the real facts, and unadvisable to hazard more than general outlines,
strengthened by current information, on the particular credibility of
the relator. In this state of the evidence, delivered sometimes, too,
under the restriction of private confidence, neither safety nor justice
will permit the exposing names, except that of the principal actor,
whose guilt is placed beyond question.
Some time in the latter part of September, I received intimations
that designs were in agitation in the western country unlawful and
unfriendly to the peace of the Union; and that the prime mover in
these was Aaron Burr, heretofore distinguished by the favor of his
country. The grounds of these intimations being inconclusive, the
objects uncertain, and the fidelity of that country known to be firm,
the only measure taken was to urge the informants to use their best
endeavors to get further insight into the designs and proceedings of
the suspected persons, and to communicate them to me.
It was not till the latter part of October, that the objects of the
conspiracy began to be perceived; but still so blended and involved
in mystery, that nothing distinct could be singled out for pursuit. In
this state of uncertainty as to the crime contemplated, the acts
done, and the legal course to be pursued, I thought it best to send
to the scene, where these things were principally in transaction, a
person in whose integrity, understanding, and discretion, entire
confidence could be reposed, with instructions to investigate the
plots going on, to enter into conference (for which he had sufficient
credentials) with the Governors and all other officers, civil and
military, and, with their aid, to do on the spot whatever should be
necessary to discover the designs of the conspirators, arrest their
means, bring their persons to punishment, and to call out the force
of the country to suppress any unlawful enterprise in which it should
be found they were engaged. By this time it was known that many
boats were under preparation, stores of provisions collecting, and an
unusual number of suspicious characters in motion on the Ohio and
its waters. Besides despatching the confidential agent to that
quarter, orders were at the same time sent to the Governors of the
Orleans and Mississippi Territories, and to the commanders of the
land and naval forces there, to be on their guard against surprise,
and in constant readiness to resist any enterprise which might be
attempted on the vessels, posts, or other objects under their care;
and on the 8th of November instructions were forwarded to General
Wilkinson, to hasten an accommodation with the Spanish
commandant on the Sabine, and as soon as that was effected, to fall
back with his principal force to the hither bank of the Mississippi, for
the defence of the interesting points on that river. By a letter
received from that officer on the 25th of November, but dated
October 21st, we learnt that a confidential agent of Aaron Burr had
been deputed to him with communications, partly written in cipher
and partly oral, explaining his designs, exaggerating his resources,
and making such offers of emolument and command, to engage him
and the army in his unlawful enterprise, as he had flattered himself
would be successful. The General, with the honor of a soldier and
fidelity of a good citizen, immediately despatched a trusty officer to
me, with information of what had passed, proceeding to establish
such an understanding with the Spanish commandant on the Sabine,
as permitted him to withdraw his force across the Mississippi, and to
enter on measures for opposing the projected enterprise.
The General’s letter, which came to hand on the 25th of
November, as has been mentioned, and some other information
received a few days earlier, when brought together, developed Burr’s
general designs, different parts of which only had been revealed to
different informants. It appeared that he contemplated two distinct
objects, which might be carried on either jointly or separately, and
either the one or the other first, as circumstances should direct. One
of these was the severance of the Union of these States by the
Alleghany mountains; the other, an attack on Mexico. A third object
was provided, merely ostensible, to wit, the settlement of a
pretended purchase of a tract of country on the Washita, claimed by
a Baron Bastrop. This was to serve as the pretext for all his
preparations, an allurement for such followers as really wished to
acquire settlements in that country, and a cover under which to
retreat in the event of a final discomfiture of both branches of his
real design.
He found at once that the attachment of the western country to
the present Union was not to be shaken; that its dissolution could
not be effected with the consent of its inhabitants, and that his
resources were inadequate, as yet, to effect it by force. He took his
course then at once, determined to seize on New Orleans, plunder
the bank there, possess himself of the military and naval stores, and
proceed on his expedition to Mexico, and to this object all his means
and preparations were now directed. He collected from all the
quarters where himself or his agents possessed influence, all the
ardent, restless, desperate, and disaffected persons, who were ready
for any enterprise analogous to their characters. He seduced good
and well-meaning citizens, some by assurances that he possessed
the confidence of the Government, and was acting under its secret
patronage, a pretence which procured some credit from the state of
our differences with Spain; and others by offers of land in Bastrop’s
claim on the Washita.
This was the state of my information of his proceedings about the
last of November, at which time, therefore, it was first possible to
take specific measures to meet them. The proclamation of November
27th, two days after the receipt of General Wilkinson’s information,
was now issued. Orders were despatched to every interesting point
on the Ohio and Mississippi, from Pittsburg to New Orleans, for the
employment of such force, either of the regulars or of the militia,
and of such proceedings also of the civil authorities, as might enable
them to seize on all the boats and stores provided for the enterprise,
to arrest the persons concerned, and to suppress, effectually, the
further progress of enterprise. A little before the receipt of these
orders in the State of Ohio, our confidential agent, who had been
diligently employed in investigating the conspiracy, had acquired
sufficient information to open himself to the Governor of that State,
and apply for the immediate exertion of the authority and power of
the State to crush the combination. Governor Tiffin and the
Legislature, with a promptitude, an energy, and patriotic zeal, which
entitle them to a distinguished place in the affection of their sister
States, effected the seizure of all the boats, provisions, and other
preparations within their reach, and thus gave a first blow, materially
disabling the enterprise in its outset.
In Kentucky a premature attempt to bring Burr to justice, without
a sufficient evidence for his conviction, had produced a popular
impression in his favor, and a general disbelief of his guilt. This gave
him an unfortunate opportunity of hastening his equipments. The
arrival of the proclamation and orders, and the application and
information of our confidential agent, at length awakened the
authorities of that State to the truth, and then produced the same
promptitude and energy of which the neighboring State had set the
example. Under an act of their Legislature, of December 23d, militia
was instantly ordered to different important points, and measures
taken for doing whatever could yet be done. Some boats (accounts
vary from five to double or treble that number) and persons
(differently estimated from one to three hundred) had in the mean
time passed the Falls of Ohio, to rendezvous at the mouth of
Cumberland, with others expected down that river.
Not apprised, till very late, that boats were building on
Cumberland, the effect of the proclamation had been trusted to for
some time in the State of Tennessee. But, on the 19th of December,
similar communications and instructions, with those to the
neighboring States, were despatched by express to the Governor,
and a general officer of the western division of the State; and, on
the 23d of December, our confidential agent left Frankfort for
Nashville, to put into activity the means of that State also. But by
information received yesterday, I learn that on the 23d of December,
Mr. Burr descended the Cumberland with two boats merely of
accommodation, carrying with him from that State no quota towards
his unlawful enterprise. Whether after the arrival of the
proclamation, of the orders, or of our agent, any exertion which
could be made by that State, or the orders of the Governor of
Kentucky for calling out the militia at the mouth of Cumberland,
would be in time to arrest these boats, and those from the Falls of
Ohio, is still doubtful.
On the whole, the fugitives from the Ohio, with their associates
from Cumberland, or any other place in that quarter, cannot threaten
serious danger to the city of New Orleans.
By the same express of December 19th, orders were sent to the
Governors of Orleans and Mississippi, supplementary to those which
had been given on the 25th of November, to hold the militia of their
Territories in readiness to co-operate, for their defence, with the
regular troops and armed vessels then under command of General
Wilkinson. Great alarm, indeed, was excited at New Orleans by the
exaggerated accounts of Mr. Burr, disseminated through his
emissaries, of the armies and navies he was to assemble there.
General Wilkinson had arrived there himself on the 24th of
November, and had immediately put into activity the resources of the
place, for the purpose of its defence; and, on the 10th of December,
he was joined by his troops from the Sabine. Great zeal was shown
by the inhabitants generally; the merchants of the place readily
agreeing to the most laudable exertions and sacrifices for manning
the armed vessels with their seamen; and the other citizens
manifesting unequivocal fidelity to the Union, and a spirit of
determined resistance to their expected assailants.
Surmises have been hazarded that this enterprise is to receive aid
from certain foreign powers. But these surmises are without proof or
probability. The wisdom of the measures sanctioned by Congress at
its last session, has placed us in the paths of peace and justice with
the only powers with whom we had any differences; and nothing has
happened since which makes it either their interest or ours to pursue
another course. No change of measures has taken place on our part:
none ought to take place at this time. With the one, friendly
arrangement was then proposed, and the law, deemed necessary on
the failure of that, was suspended to give time for a fair trial of the
issue. With the same power friendly arrangement is now proceeding,
under good expectations, and the same law deemed necessary on
failure of that, is still suspended, to give time for a fair trial of the
issue. With the other, negotiation was in like manner then preferred,
and provisional measures only taken to meet the event of rupture.
With the same power negotiation is still preferred, and provisional
measures only are necessary to meet the event of rupture. While,
therefore, we do not deflect in the slightest degree from the course
we then assumed, and are still pursuing, with mutual consent, to
restore a good understanding, we are not to impute to them
practices as irreconcilable to interest as to good faith, and changing
necessarily the relations of peace and justice between us to those of
war. These surmises are, therefore, to be imputed to the vauntings
of the author of this enterprise, to multiply his partisans by
magnifying the belief of his prospects and support.
By letters from General Wilkinson, of the 14th and 18th of
December, which came to hand two days after the date of the
resolution of the House of Representatives, that is to say, on the
morning of the 18th instant, I received the important affidavit, a
copy of which I now communicate, with extracts of so much of the
letters as comes within the scope of the resolution. By these it will
be seen that of three of the principal emissaries of Mr. Burr, whom
the General had caused to be apprehended, one had been liberated
by habeas corpus, and two others, being those particularly employed
in the endeavor to corrupt the General and Army of the United
States, have been embarked by him for ports in the Atlantic States,
probably on the consideration that an impartial trial could not be
expected during the present agitation of New Orleans, and that that
city was not as yet a safe place of confinement. As soon as these
persons shall arrive, they will be delivered to the custody of the law,
and left to such course of trial, both as to place and progress, as its
functionaries may direct. The presence of the highest judicial
authorities, to be assembled at this place within a few days, the
means of pursuing a sounder course of proceedings here than
elsewhere, and the aid of the Executive means, should the judges
have occasion to use them, render it equally desirable for the
criminals as for the public, that, being already removed from the
place where they were first apprehended, the first regular arrest
should take place here, and the course of proceedings receive here
their proper direction.
TH. JEFFERSON.
January 22, 1807.

Ordered, That the Message, and documents therein referred to, lie
for consideration; and that five hundred copies thereof be printed for
the use of the Senate.

Friday, January 23.

Suspension of the Writ of Habeas Corpus.

On the motion of Mr. Giles,

Ordered, That Messrs. Giles, Adams, and Smith of Maryland, be a
committee to inquire whether it is expedient, in the present state of
public affairs, to suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus,
and that they have leave to report by bill or otherwise.
Ordered, That the Message of the President of the United States,
of the 22d instant, together with the documents therein mentioned,
be referred to the same committee.
Whereupon, Mr. Giles, from the committee, reported a bill to
suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus for a limited time,
in certain cases; and the rule was, by unanimous consent, dispensed
with, and the bill had three readings, and was amended.
 Resolved, That this bill pass as amended, that it be engrossed,
and that the title thereof be “An act to suspend the privilege of the
writ of habeas corpus for a limited time in certain cases.”
The committee also reported the following message to the House
of Representatives; which was read and agreed to, to wit:
Gentlemen of the House of Representatives:
The Senate have passed a bill suspending for three months the
privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, in certain cases, which they
think expedient to communicate to you in confidence, and to request
your concurrence therein, as speedily as the emergency of the case
shall, in your judgment, require.

Ordered, That Mr. Smith of Maryland be the committee to deliver

the message to the House of Representatives.

Monday, January 26.

Burr’s Conspiracy.

A Message was received from the President of the United States, as

follows:

To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States:

I received from General Wilkinson, on the 23d instant, his
affidavit, charging Samuel Swartwout, Peter V. Ogden, and James
Alexander, with the crimes described in the affidavit; a copy of which
is now communicated to both Houses of Congress.
It was announced to me at the same time, that Swartwout and
Bollman, two of the persons apprehended by him, were arrived in
this city, in custody, each, of a military officer. I immediately
delivered to the Attorney of the United States, in this district, the
evidence received against them, with instructions to lay the same
before the Judges, and apply for their process to bring the accused
to justice; and put into his hands orders to the officers having them
in custody to deliver them to the Marshal, on his application.
TH. JEFFERSON.
 January 26, 1807.

The Message and papers therein mentioned were read and

referred to Messrs. Giles, Bayard, and Adams, together with the
Message and papers heretofore communicated to the Senate on the
same subject, to consider and report thereon; and five hundred
copies of the Message of the President of the United States and
documents communicated this day, were ordered to be printed for
the use of the Senate.

Tuesday, January 27.

John Smith, from the State of Ohio, attended.

Wednesday, January 28.

Sundry written Messages were received from the President of the
United States, by Mr. Coles, his Secretary.
The bill to prevent settlements being made on lands ceded to the
United States, until authorized by law, was read the second time,
and made the order of the day for Friday next.
The Senate resumed the second reading of the bill, entitled “An
act authorizing the erection of a bridge over the river Potomac,
within the District of Columbia,” and the motion that it be postponed
to the next session of Congress; and, after debate, the Senate
adjourned.

Thursday, January 29.

Burr’s Conspiracy.

The Message yesterday received from the President of the United

States was read, as follows:
To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States:
By the letter of Captain Bissel, who commands at Fort Massac, and
of Mr. Murrell to General Jackson, of Tennessee, copies of which are
now communicated to Congress, it will be seen that Aaron Burr
passed Fort Massac on the 31st December, with about ten boats,
navigated by about six hands each, without any military appearance;
and that three boats with ammunition were said to have been
arrested by the militia at Louisville.
As the guard of militia posted on various points of the Ohio will be
able to prevent any further aids passing through that channel,
should any be attempted, we may now estimate with tolerable
certainty the means derived from the Ohio and its waters, towards
the accomplishment of the purposes of Mr. Burr.
TH. JEFFERSON.
January 28, 1807.

The Message and papers were read, and ordered to lie for
consideration.[43]

Monday, February 2.

Death of the Representative Levi Casey, Esq.

A message from the House of Representatives informed the

Senate of the death of General Levi Casey, late a member of the
House of Representatives, and that his funeral will take place this
day at one o’clock.
Whereupon, Resolved, That the Senate will attend the funeral of
General Casey.

Tuesday, February 17.

 Virginia Military Land Warrants.

A message from the House of Representatives informed the

Senate that the House have passed a bill, entitled “An act to extend
the time for locating Virginia military warrants, and for returning the
surveys thereon to the office of the Secretary for the Department of
War.”

Wednesday, February 18.

The credentials of the Honorable John Smith, appointed a Senator
of the United States for the State of New York, for the term of six
years, commencing on the 4th day of March next, were presented
and read.

Thursday, February 19.

Tennessee Lands.

The Senate resumed the consideration of the report of the

committee, appointed on the 17th of December last, “to inquire
what further proceeding is necessary to carry into effect the
provisions of an act, entitled ‘An act to authorize the State of
Tennessee to issue grants and perfect titles to certain lands therein
described, and to settle the claims to the vacant and unappropriated
lands within the same.’”
And the report was agreed to.

Wednesday, February 25.

Salt Duty.
 The Senate resumed the third reading of the bill, from the House
of Representatives, entitled “An act repealing the acts laying duties
on salt, and continuing in force for a further time the first section of
the act, entitled ‘An act further to protect the commerce and seamen
of the United States against the Barbary Powers;’” and on the
question, Shall this bill pass as amended? it was determined in the
affirmative—yeas 15, nays 12, as follows:

Yeas.—Messrs. Bradley, Condit, Giles, Howland, Kitchel, Logan,

Maclay, Milledge, Moore, Reed, Smith of Maryland, Smith of
Tennessee, Smith of Vermont, Thruston, and Worthington.
Nays.—Messrs. Adams, Bayard, Gilman, Hillhouse, Mitchill,
Pickering, Plumer, Smith of New York, Sumter, Tracy, Turner, and
White.

Tuesday, March 3.

Adjournment.

Mr. Mitchill reported, from the joint committee, that they had
waited on the President of the United States, who informed them
that he had no further communications to make to the two Houses
of Congress.
The Senate took into consideration the resolution of the House of
Representatives for the appointment of a joint committee to wait on
the President of the United States to acquaint him with the intended
recess of the two Houses of Congress, and agreed thereto; and
Messrs. Mitchill and Adams were appointed the committee on the
part of Senate.
A message from the House of Representatives informed the
Senate that the House, having finished the business before them,
are about to adjourn. The Secretary was then directed to inform the
House of Representatives that the Senate, having finished the
business before them, are about to adjourn, whereupon the Senate
adjourned without day.
 NINTH CONGRESS.—SECOND
SESSION.
PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES IN
THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

Monday, December 1, 1806.

This being the day appointed by the constitution for the annual
meeting of Congress, the following members of the House of
Representatives appeared, and took their seats, to wit:

From New Hampshire—Silas Betton, Caleb Ellis, David Hough,

Samuel Tenney, and Thomas W. Thompson.
From Massachusetts—Joseph Barker, Barnabas Bidwell, John
Chandler, Orchard Cook, Jacob Crowninshield, Richard Cutts, William
Ely, Isaiah L. Green, Seth Hastings, Jeremiah Nelson, Josiah Quincy,
Ebenezer Seaver, William Stedman, Samuel Taggart, and Joseph B.
Varnum.
From Vermont—Martin Chittenden, James Elliot, James Fisk, and
Gideon Olin.
From Rhode Island—Nehemiah Knight, and Joseph Stanton.
From Connecticut—Samuel W. Dana, John Davenport, jr., Jonathan
O. Mosely, Timothy Pitkin, jr., Lewis B. Sturges, and Benjamin
Tallmadge.
From New York—John Blake, jr., Silas Halsey, John Russell, Peter
Sailly, Thomas Sammons, Martin G. Schuneman, Philip Van
Cortlandt, and Killian K. Van Rensselaer.
 From New Jersey—Ezra Darby, Ebenezer Elmer, John Lambert,
James Sloan, and Henry Southard.
From Pennsylvania—Isaac Anderson, David Bard, Robert Brown,
Joseph Clay, Frederick Conrad, William Findlay, John Hamilton,
James Kelly, John Pugh, John Rea, Jacob Richards, John Smilie,
Samuel Smith, John Whitehill, and Robert Whitehill.
From Delaware—James M. Broom.
From Maryland—Charles Goldsborough, Patrick Magruder, William
McCreery, Nicholas R. Moore, and Roger Nelson.
From Virginia—Burwell Bassett, John Claiborne, John Clopton,
John Dawson, John W. Eppes, James M. Garnett, Peterson Goodwyn,
David Holmes, Walter Jones, Joseph Lewis, jr., Thomas Newton, jr.,
and John Randolph.
From North Carolina—Willis Alston, jr., Thomas Kenan, Duncan
MacFarland, Nathaniel Macon, Speaker, Richard Stanford, Joseph
Winston, and Thomas Wynns.
From South Carolina—William Butler, Robert Marion, Thomas
Moore, and David R. Williams.
From Georgia—Peter Early, and David Meriwether.
From Ohio—Jeremiah Morrow.
From Kentucky—George M. Bedinger, John Boyle, and Thomas
Sanford.
From Tennessee—George W. Campbell, and John Rhea.
Delegate from the Mississippi Territory—William Lattimore.

Two new members, to wit: from Connecticut Theodore Dwight,

returned to serve in this House, as a member for the said State, in
the room of John Cotton Smith, who has resigned his seat; and,
from Virginia, William A. Burwell, returned to serve in this House, as
a member for the said State, in the room of Christopher Clark, who
has resigned his seat, appeared, produced their credentials, were
qualified, and took their seats in the House.
Daniel Clark, returned to serve as a delegate from the Orleans
Territory of the United States, appeared, produced his credentials,
was qualified, and took his seat in the House.
And a quorum, consisting of a majority of the whole number,
being present, a message was sent to the Senate to inform them
that a quorum of the House is assembled, and ready to proceed to
business.
A message from the Senate informed the House, that a quorum of
the Senate is assembled, and ready to proceed to business.
Mr. Dawson and Mr. George W. Campbell were appointed a
committee, on the part of the House, jointly with such committee as
may be appointed on the part of the Senate, to wait on the
President of the United States, and inform him that a quorum of the
two Houses is assembled, and ready to receive any communications
he may be pleased to make to them.
A message from the Senate informed the House that the Senate
have appointed a committee on their part for the same purpose.

Tuesday, December 2.
Several other members, to wit: from New York, Henry W.
Livingston, and Uri Tracy; from Maryland, John Campbell; from Virginia,
John Morrow, Thomas M. Randolph, John Smith, Philip R. Thompson, and
Alexander Wilson; from North Carolina, James Holland; and from South
Carolina, Elias Earle, appeared, and took their seats in the House.
A Message was received from the President of the United States.
[For which, see Senate proceedings of this date, ante, page 485.]

Wednesday, December 3.
 Several other members, to wit: from New York, Josiah Masters and
David Thomas; from Maryland, Leonard Covington; and from South
Carolina, Levi Casey, appeared and took their seats in the House.
Another new member, to wit, Edward Lloyd, from Maryland,
returned to serve in this House as a member for the said State, in
the room of Joseph H. Nicholson, who has resigned his seat,
appeared, produced his credentials, was qualified, and took his seat
in the House.

Monday, December 15.

Two other members, to wit: George Clinton, junior, from New York,
and William Dickson, from Tennessee, appeared, and took their seats
in the House.

Coast Survey.

Mr. Dana, of Connecticut.—In 1802, an act was passed, authorizing

a survey of Long Island Sound. In pursuance of that act, the
Secretary of the Treasury caused a survey to be taken by two men,
who appear to have been, what the act intended, intelligent and
proper persons. And there has since been published a chart of the
Sound, handsomely executed, on a large scale, which must, I
presume, be regarded as convenient and valuable by those
concerned in that branch of navigation.
At the last session of Congress, an act was passed for another
survey. It made provision for surveying the coast of North Carolina
between Cape Hatteras and Cape Fear, with the shoals lying off or
between those capes. I understand that measures have been taken
for executing this act, but that the vessel employed in the service,
and all the papers respecting the survey which had been made, had
been lost near Ocracoke Inlet, in one of the desolating storms
experienced on the coast in the course of the present year.
 The surveys, which have thus been authorized, were perhaps of
the most urgent necessity; but other surveys of the coast are
desirable. What has already been done may be regarded as
introductory to a general survey of the coasts of the United States
under authority of the Government. With a correct chart of every
part of the coast, our seamen would no longer be under the
necessity of relying on the imperfect or erroneous accounts given of
our coasts by foreign navigators. I hope the lives of our seamen, the
interest of our merchants, and the benefits to the revenue, will be
regarded as affording ample compensation for making a complete
survey of the coasts of the United States at the public expense.
The information which may be obtained will also be useful in
designating portions of territorial sea to be regarded as the maritime
precincts of the United States, within which, of course, the
navigation ought to be free from the belligerent searches and
seizures.
It is proposed to extend the survey to the distance of twenty
leagues from the shore. This distance is mentioned with a view to
the second article of the treaty with Great Britain in 1783, which
describes our boundaries as “comprehending all islands within
twenty leagues of any part of the shores of the United States.”
The resolution, which I propose for the consideration of the
House, is expressed in these words:

Resolved, That the Committee of Commerce and Manufactures be

instructed to inquire into the expediency of making provision for a
survey of the coasts of the United States, designating the several
islands, with the shoals and roads or places of anchorage within
twenty leagues of any part of the shores of the United States.

Wednesday, December 17.

 Two other members, to wit: Peleg Wadsworth, from Massachusetts,
and Daniel C. Verplanck, from New York, appeared, and took their
seats in the House.

Thursday, December 18.

Another member, to wit, Andrew Gregg, from Pennsylvania,
appeared, and took his seat in the House.

Importation of Slaves.

The House again resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole, on

the bill prohibiting the importation of slaves.
Mr. Bidwell observed, that there were strong objections against the
forfeiture of persons of color imported into the United States. As the
bill stood, the forfeiture was to be followed by a sale of these
persons, as property, as slaves. On this point there was a great
diversity in the laws and habits of the respective States; to avoid an
interference with which, it appeared to him most advisable to do
away the forfeiture, leaving their disposition to the provisions of the
laws of the several States. If this part of the section should be struck
out, those laws would operate on this point.
There would, he said, be a serious difficulty in adopting the
principle of forfeiture accompanied with a sale. In some of the
States, the idea of such a species of property was excluded by their
constitutions; in those States there could be no such thing as a
slave. It was true, that the constitutions and laws of such States did
not go the length of interfering with the laws of other States, where
slavery was permitted. If fugitives from them sought an asylum in
the State of Massachusetts, for instance, they were faithfully
restored, under the provisions of the Constitution of the United
States. Neither did the laws of Massachusetts interfere with
travellers passing through it with slaves; but so far as it respected
persons coming to reside in the State, they were manumitted, as a
matter of course.[44] He believed that no contract for their sale
within the State would be of any validity; nor did he believe any
power had been given to the United States to render such sale valid.
If there were such a power, its tendency would be to introduce into
that State persons contrary to its laws. If such a sale were valid, it
would interfere with those laws; and if not valid, it would be a
perfect nullity, and the provision be thus altogether inoperative. It
was admitted that there was no probability of such an importation
into States where slavery was not allowed; yet such a thing might
take place, and Congress ought not to legislate under the idea that it
would not take place.
Mr. Early observed, that this motion could only be viewed as an old
thing offered in a new shape, intended to have the same effect as
the motion offered the preceding day declaring persons of color
imported into the United States free. He thought it betrayed great
inconsistency. Those who advocated it had yesterday supported an
amendment which, by declaring all such persons free, went directly
to interfere with the laws of States where slavery was permitted; to-
day they gravely maintained the inexpediency of any such
interference whatever. The great difficulty insisted upon was, that
the operation of this law in States where slavery was not permitted,
would contravene the existing laws by forfeiting the imported slaves.
But this difficulty had no solidity in it—it was altogether ideal, as
from the nature of things the case of an importation in such States
could not occur; at all events, it was among the most improbable
events in nature.
Mr. Bidwell moved to strike out all that part of the fourth section
which related to the forfeiture of negroes.
Mr. Early asked, what substitute was intended.
Mr. Bidwell replied, that he should move that the committee rise,
and that the bill be recommitted.
Mr. Quincy, of Massachusetts.—I am opposed to the motion of my
colleague, (Mr. Bidwell,) to strike out the forfeiture. The United
States ought to retain the control of them. What is to be done with
them, is another question. But for the United States to divest the old
owners of their right, and provide no means for their protection
afterwards, appears to me cruel and dangerous. They are helpless,
ignorant of our laws, and of our language and manners. How are
they to be supported? If imported into the South, they will be slaves;
if into the North, vagabonds. My colleague ought to show what is to
be done with them. I am not prepared with a plan, but I should
suppose that they might be disposed of in service, in such States as
would admit them, at the discretion of the Secretary of the Treasury.
If forfeited to the United States, we can, by a general provision, do
what we please with them. And I have no doubt that what we do
will be both prudent and humane.
Mr. D. R. Williams.—I agree with the gentleman from
Massachusetts, who spoke last, that the amendment ought not to be
adopted. It is incumbent on the gentleman who introduced it, (Mr.
Bidwell,) to tell us what is to be done with these negroes, if they are
not to be forfeited. I say, it is his duty to inform us how they are to
be disposed of. Give up the idea of forfeiture, and I challenge the
gentleman to invent fines, penalties, or punishments of any sort,
sufficient to restrain the slave trade. The same identical persons will
break this law who have broken the act of 1794. And who are these
persons? They are the gentleman’s own countrymen; they are the
people of Rhode Island, who are concerned in this business. You
cannot stop the trade by penalties. I have myself seen a ship of
more than three hundred tons, the George Washington, sold for five
dollars. Nobody would bid. The gentleman over the way shakes his
head; he acknowledges the truth of my remarks on his countrymen.
Mr. Bidwell knew nothing of the New England men being
concerned in this trade. He lived in the interior of the country, and
had little acquaintance with mercantile men. If they were concerned,
he was willing that they should be punished by fine and penalties,
and to any extent; but he was still opposed to a forfeiture of the
negroes generally by a law of Congress. The States may determine,
perhaps, whether it shall be done.
 Mr. Quincy, of Massachusetts.—I think I now understand the plan
of my colleague, (Mr. Bidwell,) and I like it less than before. It is “to
leave them to the operation of the laws of the respective States.”
This is only another form of expression of leaving them to be slaves.
It is leaving the title of these persons according to the laws of the
State into which they are imported. Is the gentleman sure this will
not be an encouragement? It certainly will be, if the importer can
find means to evade the penalty of the act; for there he has all the
advantage of a market enhanced by our ineffectual attempt to
prohibit. If he relies upon the penalty, I have no doubt it will be
evaded. Persons without responsibility will be made captains of
these ships, or other means devised to escape the penalty, and as
his property is, by this amendment, secured to the owner, great
profits will result from the traffic.
Mr. Early.—I did suppose that the United States would pass a law
themselves, as soon as they had the power, to prohibit the slave
trade effectually. But the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr.
Bidwell) proposes that Congress shall relinquish all the credit of this
measure, and resign it up to the States. This, I hope and trust,
Congress will never agree to.
If the amendment prevails, I tell you that slaves will continue to
be imported as heretofore. I tell the gentleman from Massachusetts,
what every man in the Southern States knows already, that slaves
will continue to be imported, unless you forfeit them. You cannot get
hold of the ships employed in this traffic. Besides, slaves will be
brought into Georgia from East Florida. They will be brought into the
Mississippi Territory from the bay of Mobile. You cannot inflict any
other penalty, or devise any other adequate means of prevention,
than a forfeiture of the Africans in whose possession they may be
found after importation. I tell you this is the only effectual method. I
implore Congress to look seriously on this subject. I implore them, if
they do any thing, to pass a law which will not disgrace themselves.
Mr. Pitkin, of Connecticut.—Mr. Chairman, I rise, sir, for the
purpose of making a motion, which, I trust, will supersede the one
now before the committee. It is, that the committee should rise, and
that the bill before them be referred to a select committee. Under
this motion, I presume it will be in order to state my reasons,
generally, without being confined to the question of amending the
fourth section of the bill, which is now before the committee.
As the persons thus brought into the country contrary to law, are
to be “forfeited,” they are to be proceeded with, as appears by a
subsequent section of the bill, “in the manner prescribed by the act,
entitled, ‘An act to regulate the collection of duties on imposts and
tonnage.’”
What, sir, is this process? They are to be seized by the revenue
officers as goods, wares, and merchandise, imported contrary to law.
They are to be libelled in the federal courts, are to be condemned,
and then sold to the highest bidder by an officer of the court at
public auction, and one-half of the avails, at least, is to be paid into
the Treasury of the United States. This, sir, is a proposition, this is a
mode of proceeding against those persons, to which I cannot bring
my mind to consent, unless absolute necessity should require it.
What, sir, shall we, in a law made for the express purpose of
preventing the slave trade, declare that these unfortunate blacks,
brought into this country, not only against their own will, but against
the express provisions of the law itself, shall be sold as slaves for the
benefit of the United States, and the price of their slavery be lodged
in the public coffers? I trust not, sir; I believe some other mode may
be devised to prevent the slave trade. While I am unwilling to give
my assent to this mode of disposing of them, I am free to confess
that I feel the force of the remarks made by the Southern
gentleman, that, unless some care should be taken of them after
they are landed, the property, and perhaps the lives of those who
live in States where slavery is permitted, would be insecure. And
here, sir, I would suggest, whether, instead of selling those
unfortunate beings as slaves, provision might not be made, that they
should be disposed of for a term of years; say seven, eight, or ten
years, until they should be able to support themselves, and at the
end of the term they should be free. If Congress have power to
prohibit their importation, they certainly have power to say, that the
imported shall have no right or claim whatever in them; and also to
declare what shall be their state and condition when imported.
Indeed, sir, Congress have already determined this principle in May,
1800. They passed an act, in addition to an act, entitled “An act to
prohibit the carrying on the slave trade from the United States, with
any foreign place or country.”
Mr. Early.—In answer to the gentleman from Connecticut, I will
acknowledge that there is an inconsistency in this bill. But it seems
very wonderful that the gentleman has at last found it out. I offered
an amendment, a short time since, in order to obviate this
inconsistency; but, unless I am much mistaken, that very gentleman
voted against it.
In the name of all the friends of this bill, I offer my most grateful
acknowledgments to the gentleman for proving, in the most
incontestable manner, the absolute necessity of that very provision
in the bill which he opposes. He has shown, most undeniably, that
you must forfeit the negroes, that you cannot possibly get at the
vessel or the captain, to operate on them. In the name of common
sense, I ask you, then, what can you find to operate on, but the
negroes imported? and yet, with these truths staring them in the
face, gentlemen are opposed to the measure. I wish the gentleman
from Connecticut, from the immensity of the resources which he has
displayed on this subject, would tell us what, beside the negroes,
can be found for the law to operate upon.
I am willing that the committee rise, but not for the purpose
mentioned. The gentleman moves you to rise, and refer the bill to a
select committee; and for what? To determine the principle of the
bill; not to specify the detail. What can the select committee report?
Unless instructions are given them, they must report the same bill,
and then you will be just where you are now.
The question being taken on the committee’s rising, it was carried
—ayes 72.
 Mr. Pitkin hoped they would not have leave to sit again.
Mr. Sloan.—Notwithstanding the very high respect I entertain for
the gentleman who reported this bill, I think it is easier to make an
entire new one, than to undertake to amend this, so that it will
answer.
The question being taken on the committee having leave to sit
again, it was lost—ayes 45, noes 57.
The bill was then recommitted to a committee of seven, consisting
of Messrs. Early, T. M. Randolph, Kelly, J. Campbell, Kenan, Cocke, and
Van Rensselaer.

Friday, December 19.

Another member, to wit, Abram Trigg, from Virginia, appeared, and
took his seat in the House.

Monday, December 22.

Manhattan Company.

Mr. Clinton presented a petition from the President and Directors

of the Manhattan Company in New York. The petition states that the
law which directs that custom-house bonds shall be exclusively
deposited in the United States Bank, affects their interests very
injuriously; that the monthly deposits at New York amount, on an
average, to $250,000. That the merchants dealing at the Manhattan
Bank, make in Manhattan notes large payments on account of
custom-house bonds into the United States Bank, which, by means
of their notes; draws largely on the Manhattan Bank for specie; that,
by these and similar means, the United States Bank regulates the
discount, and contracts the business of all the other banking
institutions in the city. That the reasons which once existed for
giving the United States Bank a preference, have since ceased, by
the sale of the public stock. But the stockholders in the United States
Bank are now almost entirely foreigners, which circumstance is
favorable to the erection of foreign influence in this country, and
ought to excite alarm.
Mr. Quincy was personally indifferent whether the petition was
referred to the Committee of Ways and Means, but, as the subject
manifestly affected the revenue, it was proper to refer it to that
committee. It was a question very material to the revenue, whether
the custom-house bonds should be deposited in the United States
Bank. The contrary supposition implies that all banks are solid and
secure.
Mr. Crowninshield conceived that the subject of the petition had no
more relation to the Committee of Ways and Means than to that of
Commerce and Manufactures, or any other standing committee of
the House. Its object was, to procure relief against an injurious
monopoly, possessed by a particular banking company. It neither
proposed to give or take away one shilling of the public money. The
Committee of Ways and Means were already pressed with a great
deal of matter. Mr. C. did not wish to trouble the House with the
United States Bank, but more than sixteen years they had enjoyed
an exclusive monopoly, which has been very injurious to all other
banking institutions, as has been very properly detailed in the
petition. He meant to propose a plan for equalizing the benefits of
the deposits. This is a subject which deeply interested the
constituents of his colleague, (Mr. Quincy.) The merchants of Boston
cannot procure any large sums except from the United States Bank,
which controls all the other banks in that town.
The Speaker informed Mr. Crowninshield that it was improper to
speak of any gentleman’s district.
Mr. Quincy observed, that all subjects relating to the revenue
properly belonged to the Committee of Ways and Means. The
present subject deeply implicates the revenue, because it all
depends upon being safely deposited. His colleagues seemed to
have a great fellow-feeling for the Committee of Ways and Means,
and appeared to be anxious lest they should be pressed with too
much business; but that committee had sufficient time to consider
all the business referred to them.
The question being taken on referring the petition to the
Committee of Ways and Means, it was lost—ayes 32. It was then
referred to a select committee of nine.

Tuesday, December 23.

Another member, to wit, Edwin Gray, from Virginia, appeared, and
took his seat in the House.

Friday, December 26.

Another member, to wit, Matthew Clay, from Virginia, appeared and
took his seat in the House; and another new member, to wit, Dennis
Smelt, from Georgia, returned to serve in this House, as a member
for the said State, in the room of Joseph Bryan, who has resigned
his seat, appeared, produced his credentials, was qualified, and took
his seat in the House.

Monday, December 29.

Several other members, to wit, from Massachusetts, Phanuel
Bishop; from New York, Gurdon S. Mumford and Nathan Williams, from
New Jersey, William Helms; from Kentucky, John Fowler; and the
Delegate from the Indiana Territory, Benjamin Parke, appeared, and
took their seats in the House.

Importation of Slaves.

On motion of Mr. Early, the House resolved itself into a Committee

of the Whole on the bill for the prohibition of the slave trade.
 Mr. Bidwell.—It appears to me that all the objections which have
been urged against the amendment under consideration, may be
reduced to two. 1. That a forfeiture is necessary to deprive the
importers of every motive to introduce any slaves into the country,
and thus render the prohibition completely effectual. 2. That if the
slaves are emancipated and turned loose in the Southern States,
they will be a destructive nuisance to the people of those States.
Neither of these objections is, in my apprehension, well founded. If
the motion to strike out prevails, another amendment may be made,
declaring that the importer has no right to the slaves, which he
introduces. This will be a declaration conformable to the state of
things, and in exact accordance with the laws of nature and of
nations. It is not in order to offer an amendment now, but if the
present motion prevails, I design to propose an amendment to this
effect. This will answer the purpose completely, and remove from
the importer every temptation to engage in this traffic. The idea of
forfeiture proceeds wholly on a false principle. It implies that the
importer has a right to the slaves. But an amendment like that which
I have suggested will declare the fact as it is; it will be conformable
to truth. But if the section passes as it now is, with the clause of
forfeiture retained, we recognize in our statute book a false
principle, which neither the constitution nor the laws of the United
States have ever authorized, to wit: that a property may be had in
human beings. The constitution and laws have always left the
disposition of slaves to the States, and hitherto have never
recognized the principle of slavery.
But if we do not forfeit the negroes, the question is asked again
and again, with an air of triumph, what is to be done with them? For
my part I had rather strike out the section, and do nothing at all,
than retain the forfeiture. If we do nothing we shall not increase the
evil. They will then be left to the States to dispose of according to
the State laws. This will not increase the evil. I am, however, willing
to agree to any practicable mode of disposing of them. But at any
rate, I am for striking out the forfeiture, and opposed to disgracing
our statute book with a recognition of the principle of slavery.
 Mr. Quincy.—Since there is so general an agreement as to the end,
I wish it were possible we could unite more perfectly as to the
means. Those in favor of forfeiture are anxious for nothing so much
as to prohibit totally the importation of slaves. Indeed, it is for this
very reason they are in favor of it, because they assert, and to my
mind on unquestionable ground, that this is your only effectual
means of prohibition. They are also anxious that if they are brought
they should not be made slaves in their part of the country. As to
their being made free in the Southern States, that is out of the
question. The policy of those States, the first duty of self-
preservation, forbid it.
The argument of my colleague is, “forfeiture implies a right,
vested in importers. Now it is disgraceful to the United States to
admit such an implication. The importer has no right. He could
acquire none. These persons are free by the law of nature—as free
as any of us. The African prince who sold them was a usurper. The
purchasers in Africa were trespassers against the law of nature.
They cannot acquire any right of property in these persons, and it is
shameful for the United States, by forfeiture, to admit it.” Sir, the
conclusions of the gentleman are perfectly correct—his principles are
solid. No man in this House denies either. Refer this question
between the African prince and his subjects, and between the
African and his importer, to five hundred juries in New England, and
five hundred times a verdict would coincide with the principles and
reasonings of my colleague. But the misfortune is, that,
notwithstanding all these true and unquestionable principles, the
African prince, at this day, does, and, after our law passes, will sell
his subjects. To all practical purposes, a title is acquired in them, and
they are passed, like other property, from one to another, in their
native country. But this is not the worst. A title in this description of
persons is not only allowed in Africa, but is, and must be, after your
law passes, in a large section of your own country. The gentlemen
from that part of the United States tell you that they cannot be
allowed to be free among them. The first law, self-preservation,
forbids it.
 Now this is that real, practical state of things to which I invite
gentlemen to look, and on which they ought to legislate.
I ask concerning it, how ought we to reason? What is our duty?
First. Do all you can to prohibit. Next, if you fail in this—if, in spite
of your laws and their penalties, this description of persons be
brought into the United States, then place yourselves in such a
situation as may enable you best to meliorate the condition of this
unhappy class of men, consistent with self-preservation, and with
the deep stake which an important section of the country has in the
policy which you adopt.
On both accounts forfeit. First, because it is the best means of
prohibition. The gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Early) declares it is the
only means by which you can do it effectually. The argument he
used on this point, on a former day, is to my mind conclusive. From
the situation of the Southern States, particularly Georgia, you can
only prevent the traffic by taking away the inducement to purchase.
And this can only be done by making the right of every purchaser be
forfeited as a penalty. Next, if contrary to your laws they be
imported, they are thrown on the humanity of the United States.
They are brought here by our citizens, and it is the duty of the
National Government to reserve the control of them, so as to be
certain that the best is done for the amelioration of their condition
that our own safety permits. On this account, forfeit. It is only as a
commercial regulation that the National Government can get this
control. If we do not take that title in these persons into the United
States, which the laws of some States recognize, in those States
they are slaves—they must be slaves. Those States can never permit
them to be any thing else. This can only be done by forfeiture. The
character of your policy will depend upon what you do with them
after the forfeiture. Gentlemen reason as if those persons were
inevitably to be sold under the hammer. Certainly this is not the
necessary consequence. Are they not after forfeiture at your control?
May you not do with them what is best for human beings in that
condition in which these miserable creatures are, when they first
arrive in this country, naked, helpless, ignorant of our language, our
climate, our laws, our character, and our manners? Are you afraid to
trust the National Government, and yet, by refusing to forfeit, will
you throw them under the control of the States, all of whom may,
and some of them will, and must, make them slaves?
But the great objection to forfeiture is, “it admits a title.” I answer,
first, this does not necessarily follow. All the effect of forfeiture is,
that whatever title can be acquired in the cargo shall be vested in
the United States. If the argument of the gentleman be correct, and
the species of cargo be such as that, from the nature of the thing,
no title can be acquired in it, then nothing can vest in the United
States; and the only operation of forfeiture is to divest the importer’s
color of title by the appropriate commercial term—perhaps the only
term we can use effectual to this purpose, and which does not
interfere with the rights of the States. Grant that these persons have
all the rights of man; will not these rights be as valid against the
United States as against the importer; and by taking all color of title
out of the importer, do we not place the United States in the best
possible situation to give efficiency to the rights of man, in respect
to the persons so imported?
But, next, let us agree that forfeiture does admit a species of title,
lost on one side and acquired on the other; such as we cannot
prevent being recognized in those States where these importations
will most frequently take place; I ask, which is best, and which most
humane? Admit a title, gain it for the United States, and then make
these miserable creatures free, under such circumstances, and in
such time, as their condition into which they are forced permits, or
deny the possibility of acquiring a title, and leave them to be slaves?
But my colleague (Mr. Bidwell) has a sovereign specific for this. He
says, “We do not make them slaves, we only leave them to the laws
of the respective States.” But I ask, if the laws of all the States may,
and those of some of the States do, and necessarily will make them
slaves, “by leaving them to the operation of the laws of these
States,” do we not as absolutely make them slaves as though we
voted them to be such in this House? To my mind, when we have
Welcome to our website – the perfect destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. We believe that every book holds a new world,
offering opportunities for learning, discovery, and personal growth.
That’s why we are dedicated to bringing you a diverse collection of
books, ranging from classic literature and specialized publications to
self-development guides and children's books.

More than just a book-buying platform, we strive to be a bridge

connecting you with timeless cultural and intellectual values. With an
elegant, user-friendly interface and a smart search system, you can
quickly find the books that best suit your interests. Additionally,
our special promotions and home delivery services help you save time
and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Join us on a journey of knowledge exploration, passion nurturing, and

personal growth every day!

ebookbell.com