The question was then taken on Mr. FORSYTH'S amendment to the amendment of Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN, and agreed to—21 to 20.
The question on the amendment to the resolution as amended, was then put, and decided in the affirmative; and the resolution, as amended, was agreed to.
Tuesday, March 9, 1830.
On motion of Mr. LIVINGSTON, the Senate resumed the consideration of the resolution heretofore offered by Mr. FOOT, and Mr. L. addressed the Senate till 3 o'clock, when he gave way for a motion to adjourn.
Wednesday, March 10, 1830.
The Senate were this day principally occupied in the consideration of Executive business.
TnrmDAT, Mabch 11, 1830.
HEIRS OF ROBERT FULTON. The bill to recompense the heirs of Robert Fulton, deceased, was read the third time. The question being on the passage of this bill, which proposed the grant of a township of land to the heirs of Robert Fulton, in consideration of benefits rendered by him to the country, the yeas and nays thereon were required by Mr. FORSYTH, with the view that the decision, involving a question of much importance on constitutional grounds, should be a solemn one. Whereupon arose a debate of much interest, and, in a constitutional view, of much importance. The gentlemen who engaged in the debate, were, Mr. FORSYTH, Mr. LIVINGSTON, Mr. BROWN, Mr. BARTON, Mr. TAZEWELL, Mr. SMITH, of Md. Mr. JOHNSTON, of Lou. Mr. HAYNE, Mr. SMITH, of S. C. Mr. SANFORD, and Mr. NOBLE. The question being finally taken on ordering the bill to be engrossed for a third reading, it was decided as follows: YEAS—Messrs. Barton, Chambers, Dudley, Johnston, Knight, Livingston, Bobbins, Sanford, Willey—9. NAYS—Messrs. Adams, Barnard, Bell, Benton, Brown, Burnet, Chase, Dickerson, Ellis, Foot, Forsyth, Frelinghuysen, Grundy Hayne, Hendricks, Holmes, Iredell, Kane, King, McKinley, McLean, Marks, Naudain, Noble, Buggies, Seymour, Smith, of S. C. Sprague, Tazewell, Troup, Tyler, White, Woodbury—33. So the bill was rejected. Fbidat, Mabch 12, 1830. LOUISVILLE AND PORTLAND CANAL. The bill to authorise a subscription of stock on the part of the United States, in the Louisville and Portland Canal Company, was token up, and, after considerable debate, in which the bill was advocated by Messrs. HENDRICKS, JOHNSTON, and ROWAN, and was opposed by Messrs. TAZEWELL and HAYNE, it was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading by the following vote: YEAS—Messrs. Barnard, Barton, Benton, Burnet, Chambers, Chase, Dudley, Foot, Grundy, Hendricks, Johnston, Kane, Livingston, McLean, Marks, Naudain, Bobbins, Rowan, Buggies, Seymour, Silsbce, Smith, of Md. Willey—33. NAYS.—Messrs. Adams, Bell, Brown, Dickerson, Ellis, Forsyth, Frelinghuysen, Hayne, Holmes, Iredell, Knight, Smith, of S. C. 8prag»e, Tazewell, Troup, Tyler, White; Woodbury—18. IThe bill directed an additional subscription, on the part of the United States, to the stock <rf the company, for one thousand shares, at one hundred dollars each.] Adjourned to Monday.
Mosdat, Mabch 15, 1830.
MB. FOOT'S RESOLUTION. The Senate resumed the consideration of the resolution offered by Mr. FOOT; when Mr. LIVINGSTON concluded his speech, commenced on the 9th instant.
[The following is a foil report of it]
The important topics that have been presented to our consideration, f said Mr. I . ] «i»d the ability with which the questions arising out of them have been hitherto discussed, cannot but have excited a very considerable interest; ' which I regret exceedingly that I shall be obliged to interrupt, and greatly disappoint those who look for a continuance of "the popular harangue, the tart reply, the logic, and the wisdom, and the wit," with which we have been entertain*^. For, sir, you can expect nothing from me but » rery plain, and, I fear, a very dull exposition of my views on some of the subjects comprised in this excursive debate, unembellished by eloquence, unseasoned by the pungency of personal allusions. For I have no accusations to make of sectional hostility to the State I represent, and, of consequence, no recriminations to urge in its behalf, no personal animosity to indulge, and but one—yes, sir, I have one personal defence to make; a necessary defence against a grave accusation; but that will be as moderate as I know it will be complete, satisfactory, and, I had almost said, triumphant.
The multiplicity and nature of the subjects that have been considered in debating a resolution with which none of them seem to have the slightest connexion, and the addition of new subjects, with which every speaker has thought it proper to increase the former stock, has given me, 1 confess, some uneasiness. I feared an irruption of the Cherokces, and was not without apprehensions that we should be called on to terminate the question of Sunday mails, or, if the Anti-Masonic Convention should take offence at the secrecy of our executive session, or insist on the expulsion of all the initiate^ from our councils, that we should be obliged to conten« with them for our seats. Indeed, I badmyselfseriouf'houghtsofintroducing the reformation of our nations' code, and a plan for the gradual increase of the navy, ^nd am not yet quite decided whether, before I sit dov«» 1 shall not urge the abolition of capital punishments In truth, the whole brought forcibly to my recollecti"' Bn anecdote told in one of the numerous memoirs written during the reign of Louis (XIY. too trivial, perhaps, to be introduced into this grave debate, but which, perhaps, may be excused. A young lady had been educated in all the learning of the times, and her progress had been so much to the satisfaction of the princess who had directed her studies, that, on her first introduction, her patroness used to address her thus: "Come, Miss, discourse with these ladies and gentlemen on the subject of theology. So, that will do. Now talk of geography; after that, you will converse on the subjects of astronomy and metaphysics, and then give your ideas on logic and the belle lettres." And thus the poor girl, to her great annoyance, and the greater of her auditors, was put.through the whole circle of the sciences in which she had been instructed. Sir, might not a hearer of out debates, for some days past, have concluded that we, too, had been directed in a similar way, and that you had said to each of the speakers, "Sir, please to rise and speak on the disposition of the public lands; after that you may talk of the tariff; let us know all you think on the subject of internal improvement; and before yon sit down, discuss the powers of the Senate in relation to appointments, and the right of a State to recede from the Union; and finish by letting us know whether you approve or oppose the measures of the present or the six preceding administrations." The approximation, sir.of so many heterogeneous materials for discuasion, must provoke a smile; and most of those who have addressed you, while they lamented that subjects un
