University of South Carolina Libraries
tion should be socotstitntcd, as to't fully andifi seot h people and not tha .f jiolitical uianagep: or office holders atd office seekers; and for that purpose, H ol-d it intdipensible, that the Delegates should beapnointed-directly by the people, or to. use the language of Gen. Jackson, should be " fresh from.tho ..people.". I also holdtbat the only possi ble mode to effect this, is- for the people to choose the Delegatesby Districts, and that they should; voteper capita. Every other mode oftappointing would be controlled by political iiachinery,fanl-place the ap pointments in'the hands of the few, who work it. I object, then, to the: roposed Conven tion, because it will not be constituted in conformity with this fundamental article of the Republican"creed. The Delegates to it willbe appointed from some of the States, not by the people in Districts, but as has been stated, by S'ate Conventious en masse, composed -of Delegates, ap pointed in all cases, as fat as I am in formed, by County or District Conven tions, and in some cases, if not misinform ed, these again composed of Delegates appointed by still smaller divisions, or a few interested individuals. Instead then of being directly, or fresh from the people, the Delegates to the Baltimore Convention will be the Delegates of Delegates; and of course removed, in all cases, at least three, if not four degrees from the people. At each successive remove, the votes of the people will become. less full and distinct, until, at last, it will be 30 faint and im perfect, as not to be audible. To drop metaphor, I hold it impossible to form a scheme more perfectly calculated to anni hilate the control of the people over the Presidential election, and vest it in those, who makes politics a trade, and who live' or expect to live on the Government. In this connection, I object not the less strongly to the mode in which Virginia has resolved the Delegates shall vote. With all duerespect, I must say, I can imagine nothing more directly.it conflict with the printiplesof our federal system of govern meat, ab..to use a broader expression, the principles on which all confederated com munities have been united. I hazard noth ing in saying, that there is not an instance in our political history, from the meeting. of the first Revolutionary Congress to be present day, of the Delegates of any State, voting by majority and counting per capita: nor do I believe- an instance of the kind can be found in the history of any confed erated community. There is indeed some thing monstrous in the idea of giving the majori.y.the right of impressing the vote ofythe minority into-its service, and count pg them as its own.' The plain t ule that which .has ever prevailed, and which conforms to the dictates of common sense, is, that where a State votes as a State, by a majority of its Delegates, the votes count one, be they few or many, or the State large or small. On the contrary, where the votes of all the Delegates are counted, the vote individually and inde pendeftly, each for himself counting one. -And it is to be noted, that wherever this latter:mode of voting exists among confed erated States, it is in all cases founded on compact, to which the consent of each State is required. In the absence of com pact,-the invariab1 mode of voting in ;"such States, is, in 'a l cases, by the ma jority, their vote counting one. The course which Virginia has resolved to take, is in violation of this plain and fun damental rule, and if it should become a settled practice, would be destructive of the foundation on wvhich the whole struc ture ofrthe State Right doctrine is reared. I hold, in the next place, to be an indis pensable principle, that the Convention should he so constituted, as to give to each State, in the nomninaftioti of a candidate, the same relative weight, which the Con stitution secure to it in the electipn of the Preident,making due allowance for its relative party strength. By the election, I mean the whole-the eventual choice when it goes into the Hlouse of Represen .tatives, as well as the primary vote in the eletoral college. The one is as .much a part of theelection as the other. The two *make the whole. The adoption of the one, in the Convention, which framed the "Constitutioni, depended on the adoption of the other. Neither could possibly be adopt eil lone. The two were the result of comipromise between the larger and smnaI ler Statesfifter a long and donbr ful strug gle,ulich threatened the logs of the Cotn stttton 'itself. The object of giving the-eventuat choice by the H~ouse, wvas to couanterpoise the prepnderance of the lar ger in the electoral college. Without this, the smaller would have voted againtst the wvhole provision, and its rejection wotild have been the consequence. Even as it stands, Delaware voted against it. In confirmation of.what I state, I refer to Mr. Madison's report on the proceedings of the Convention '. Having stated what I mean by the elec tion, it wtill require hut a few words to ex plain my reasons for the principles I have laddown. They are are few and simple, und .rest on the ground, that the nomina * tion is in reality the election, if concurred in, .as far as the, party is concerned. It is so intended to be. The leading reason assigned for making it, is to prevent a di vision of the party;, and thereby prevent the election from goinig into the House, where the smaller States would have the advantage ititended-to be secured to them .by the Conistitution, by being placed on an equality withithe larger. - *Such being the intended object. and ef fect,-I now submit to every candid mintd, * whether the.Convention ought not to be so * constituted, as to compensate in the nomi . nation for the important advantage in the election, w hieci the smaller States surrena der by'goin~g into a Convention. Would it not be unfair-a palpable wdht of good . fatith and-subversive of the compromise of the Constitution to withhold. it? Or, if - demanded, tNould it be short of an insult to refjise..it? Can it be thought, that-the s'mallerStates are so debased and absor oftli ihe party politics of the day, as to * . pernu 'hemsolves to be thus indirectly a.ppeiofight,which their high min * ier p6inafriotic..ancestors sold so dear, .as~evekto prefer tliik less of the Constiru ~on itilfrather than su~trendegit. Ibjectz, then,.to tiie popsK Conven tiocin this connaection, beatina.it makes . no' eomessiitioo to. kpis itekrates for the sifrre r tistigesii'nable and important constitutional right. Instead of =that, its advocates peisemptorily and' in dignantly refuse any, and treat with scorn every attempt'to secure - it. 'Some have even gone so far, as to'deny, that the even tual choice of thd House conatitute any porlion of--the election, and to manifesl open hostility against the provision of the Constitution, which contains it. If there was no other objection, the one under consideration would be insuperable with me. I differ utterly from the advo cates of the proposed Convention, in refer ence to this provision. I regard it as one of the first importance, not because I de sire the election to go into the House, bul because I believe it to be an indispensable means, in the hands of the smaller States of pteserving their just- and constitutional weigist in the Presidential election, and through that, in the Executive Department and the Government itself, which I believe to be essential to the preservation of oui sublime federal system. I regard the-ad jusiment of the relative weight of the States in the Government to he the fun damental compromise of the Constitution, and that on which our whole political sys tem depends. Its adjustment constituted the great difficulty in forming the Consti tution. The principle on which it was finally effected ,wai, that,, a provision should be also made, in some form, te preserve the originul equality of the States in every department of the Government, The principle we easily carried out in constituting the legislative department, by preserving the equality of the States in one branch, (the Senate) and conceding ti population its full preponderance in the other. But the great and difficult task of reducing it to practice was, in the Execu tive Department, at the head of which there is but a single officer. So great was it, that it occupied the attention of the Convention, from time to time, duritrg the whole session, and was very near causing a failure at last. It would have been an easy task to constitute that department, either on the principle of the equality of the States in the government, or that. of population. To combine the two, in the election of a single officer, was quite a different affair; but however difficult, it had to be performed, at the hazard of losing the Constitution. It was finally accomplishe.d, by giving to the larger States nearly the same pre ponderance in the electoral college,- as they have in the House, and to the smal ler, in the event of a choice by the House, the same equality- they possess in the Senate; thus following closely the analogy of the Legislative Department. To -nake it as close as possible, it was at first pro posed to give the eventual choice, to the Senate, instead of the House, but it was altered, and the present provision adopted. for reasons which did not affect the princi ple. It was believed by the framers, the prac tical operation of the provision would he, that the electoral college, in which the in fluence of the larger States preponderates, would nominate, and that the House vo ting by States, where their equality is pre served, would elect who should he Presi dent. To give it that operation- in prac tice, the provision, as it originally stood in the Constitution, was that each elector should vote for two individuals, without discriminating which should be Presid nt, or Vice President, and if no one had a ma jority of the whole votes, then out of the five highest, the [louse voting by States, should elect one, and the person not elect ed, having the highest number of votes, should be the Vice President. It has been sitce altered, ao that the electors should designate which should be President, and which Vice President, and the 'selection of the llouse was limited to the three highest. It is manifest, that if this provisiont of the Constitution had beeni left to operate by itself, without the intervention of caucus ses, or party conventions between the peo plo anid the election, that the practical op eration would have been such,.as I have stated, and such as was clearly intended by the framers of the Constitutioni. The object intentded is important. The preservation of the relative weight of the States, as est ablished by the Constitution in all the Departmnents,. is necessary to the sccess and dluration of otnr system of Go vernment ; but it may he doubted, whether the provision adopted to effect it in the Executive Departmenit. is not too refined for the-strong, and I nay add, corrupt pasn sons, which the Presidential electioA will ever excite. Certain it is, that if the prac tice of nominating Candidates for the Presidency, by Conventions, constituted as they ptoposed, shall become the estab. lished usage, it will utterly defeat the in tention of the framers of the Constitution, and would be followed by a radical and dangerous change, tnt only ini the Execu tive Department, but in the Government itself. Trhis danger was -early foreseen, apdi to avoid it, some of the wisest and most ex perienced statesmen of former days sr strogly objected to Cong:ressional caucus se to nomitnate candidates for the Presi deny, that they never cpuld be induced t attend them, among these it will be sufficient to name Mr. Macon and Mr. Lowtdes. Others, believing that this proposition of the -Constitution was toe refined for practice, were 'solicitous to amend it, but without impairing the influ ence of the' smaller States in the election, Among these, I rank myself. With that object, resolutions wvere introduced, iii 128, in the Setnato by Col. Beaten, and in the Houjse by Mr. McDufle, providinA for districtitg the States, and for referring the election back to the people, in case there should be no choice, to elect one from the. two highest candidates. The principle which governed in the amend~ met proposed, was to give a fair comi pensation to the smaller States for the sur render of their advantage in the eventual choice of the House atnd at the same time to make the mode of electing the Presi dent more strietly in coniformity with the principles of our popular institutions and to bess liable to corruption, than the ex isting provision. They received the gene ral support of the party, but were objected to by-e (pw, as not being a full eqjuivalent to hegmaller States. The princmple em braced~ is idetitica1with that on which you proposed'to caitethe Baltimore Con vention1 but-shicbit ben so dictorially objected.to -bygiomie..$ t-hen -took se promient a pat iti~t avor. If you -have not succeeded, there is at least-some consolation in reflecting that if oihers'liave since changed, you now stand where. ybu then did,. in the purer and better days ol the party. I was in favor of then, as I am now, not because 1 consider the resolutionii as perfect, theoretically, as the existing provisions of the Constitution, but because believe it would in practice more car tainly-accomplish what the framers of the Constitution intended. But while the pro vision stands as it does, I would regard myself as littleshortof a traitor to that sa cred instrument, should I give my assent, directly or indirectly, to any practice which would have the elTect of divesting the-smaller States of the due weight which it securesto them in the Presidential elec tion, whether designed or not. And here let me add, that as ohjectionable as I think a Congressional caucus. for nominating a President, it is in my opinion, far less so, than a Convention constituted as is pro posed. The former had indeed many things to recommend it. Its members consisting of Senators and Representatives, were the immediate organs of the State Legislatures, or the people ; were respon sible to them, respectively, and were for the most part, of high character, stand ing and talents. They voted per capita, and what is very important, they repre sented fairly the relative strength of the party in their respeetive States. In all these important particulars, it was all that could be desired for a nominating body, and formed a striking contrast to the pro. posed Convention; and yet, it could not be borne by the people in the then purer days of the Republic. 1,'acting with Gen. Jackson and most of the leaders of the party at the time, contributed to put it down, because we believed it to be liable to be acted on and influenced by the pat ronage of the Government-an objection far more applicable to a Convention con stituted as the one proposed, thah a.Con gressional caucus. Far however was it then from my intention, in aiding to put that down, to substitute in its place what I regard as an hundred times more objec tionable in every point of view. Indeed, if there must be an intermediate body be tween the people and the election, un known to the Constitution, it may be well questioned whether a better than the old plan of a Congressional caucus can be de vised. In taking the ground I have, in favor of maintaining the right secured the smaller States by the compromisa of the Consti tution, 1 am actuated by no partisan feel ing or desire to conciliate their good opin ion. If the case was reversed, and the rights of the larger instead of the smaller, were invaded, I would with equal readi ness and firmness, stand op in their de fence. I am the parti.an of neither one, nor the other, but simply a supporter of the'Constitution, and what I believe to be just and fair. I regard the Constitution, as the only ark of safety for all, and I be lieve that in defending it, 1 defend the in terest and safety of each and all; the grea ter as well as the smaller--the States in vading tie right of the others,as the States whose right are invaded. I have laid down the principle, on which I rest the objection in question, with the limitation, that the relative weight of the States should be maintainei.mtakjng.due allowance for their relative party strength. The propriety of the lirmitation is so ap parent, that a few words.. in illustration, will be required. The Convention is a party Convention, and professedly inten ded to take the sense of the party, which cannot he done fairly, if States having hul little party strength, are put on an equal ity with those which have much. If that were done, the resulr might ha, -that a small portion of the party from States the least son, politically, end which could give but little soupport to Congress, mnigh select the candidate, and make the Presi dent, against a great majority of the sound est, and on which the President and hi! administration would have to rely for sup port. All this is clearly too unfair and improper to he denied. There may be u great difficulty in applying a remedy in Convention, but I do not feel myself called upon to say how it can he done, or by whet standard the relative party strength of the respective States should be deter mined ;.perhaps the best would be theii relative strength in Congress at the lime, In laying down the principle, 1 added the limitaton for the sake of accuracy, and tc show how imperferctly the party must-b' represented when it is overlooked. I see no piovision in the proposed Conventiot to meet it. But, in order to realize how the Conven tion will operate, it will be necessary tc view the combined elfectsof the objec t ions which I have. Thus viewved, tt wtll be founid, that a Convention so constitui ted, tends irresistibly to centralization centralization of the control over the Pres idential election in the hands of the few o the central, large States, at first, and final ly in political managers, office holders anc office seekers ; or to express it diflerently in that portion of thte community, whc live, or expect to live on the Government in contradistinction to the great mass, whc expect to live on their own means, or theil honest industry; and who maintain the Government, and politically speaking, em phatically the people. That such would be the case, may he inferred from the fact, that it would alor< the means 10 some six or seven States lying contiguous and not far from the een tre of the Union, to control the nomnina tion, and through that the election, by con centrating their united voice in the Con vntlion- Give them the powver of doing so, and it would not long lie dormant. What may he done by combination,' whern the temptation is so gr-eat, will be sure cri long to be done. To combine and con quer, is not less true tas a maxim, wvher poer is cotncerncd, than to "Divide anc conquer." Nothing is hatter established than that the desire for power can brinj together and unite -the most ,disordan materials But the tendency to centraization) will neo stop there. The appointment of delegates en masse by State Conventon, would tend, a the same timne and even-with greater force, ti centralize this control ins the hands of the few who mnake politics. a trade. The farther the Convetion is removed from the people, the more certainly the control over it will be plac ad in the hands of the interested few, and whet removed 'three or four degrees,.as has beet shown.,,,t will be. wvhere the appointmnent is b3 State Conventions, the power of the peopl will cease, and the seekers of Executive favo will become supreme. At that stage, an ac tive, trained and combined corps will he former in the party, whose whole time and attentiot will' be directed to politics. It will be their soli business. Into their hands the appointment of delegates in all the stages will fall, and the: will take special care that none but themselve or their humble and obedient dependants shal be appointed. The central and State Conven lions will be filled by the mostexperienced any cunning, and after nominating the President they will take good care to divide the. patroc age and offices, both of the General and Stat d'overnneints, among themselves and their de pendents. But why say will ? Is it not alread the case? Have there not been many instance of State Conventions being filled by office hold era and office seekers. who after making thi nomination, have divided the offices in the Stat among themselves and theirpartisans, and join ed in recoaimending to the candidate whon they had just nomnmatedto appoipt them to the offices to which they have been respective2 allotted. If such be the case in'the infancy o the system. it must end. if such convention should become the established usage, in ti President nominating his successor. When i comes to that, it will not be long before thi sword will take.place of the Constitution. Such are my objections to the node in whicl the proposed Convention is to be constituted and my reasons for entertaining them. Thej are such, that I cannot refuse to obey then without ronounci ttg the principles which I havi often avowed in public and private, and which have guided me through the whole course o my public life. In coming to this conclusion, I have not pas sed over, without careful examination, the rea sons assigned by its advocates for constitutini the Convention as they propose. They hav not diminished the force of my objections. propose to notice the most prominent. That which they have urged with the great estconfidence, is, that each State has a right ti appoint Delegates as she pleases. I meet it by utterly denying that there is any such right That each State has a right to act as it pleases in whatever relates to it exclusively, no onr will deny; but it is a perfect novel doctrine that any State has such a right, when she come to act in concert with others in reference ti what concerns the whole. In such cases it i, the plainest dictate of common sense, that what ever affects the whole should be regulated bj the mutual consent of all, and not by the die cretion of each. That by the appointment o Delegates to the proposed' Convention is i case of this description, I trust I have conclu aively shown. I have, I-also trust shown more that the supposed right is perfectly deceptive for while it claims for each State the right ti appoint Delegates. as it pleases, it in. realita gives the larger States the right to dictate hog the others shall appoint. If, for example, thr Empire State. as it is called, adopts the mode of appointing (as she has) which will concen trate her whole strength, what discretion woulh she leave to others, if they go into Convention but to appoint as she has appointed. or to bi ruled by her. It is thon, neither more nor lee than a claim to dictate, under the garb of i right, and such its exercise has proved in thr present case. It has left no option, but to con form to her course, or be overruled, or refusi to go idito the Convention. I regret this, because I sincerely desre ti preserve the harmony of the party. I had stron hope that the rally after the defeat in 1840 wouh be exclusively on principles. This hope we: greatly strengthened by the truly republica and noble stand, taken at the extra session an the earlier portion of the succeeding regula session. During that period of rigid adhei ence to principle, perfect harinony pervade the ranks of the party. I beheld it with joy. believed the moment highly favorable for the thorough reformation of the Government ant the restoration of the Constitution. To th Republican party, I looked for the ascomplish mont of this great work; and I accordingi felttlie deepest solicitude. that the stand taken and the-harmony which existed, should be pre served. In order that it should, I made up in] mind to waive the objection, which I have lon entertained to any intermediate body, unk nowi to the Conastitutien, between the people ant the election of the President, in the hope tha the proposed Convention would be so constita ted that I might consistently with my princi pIes give it my support. In this I have beet disapointed, and heing so, I am compelled ti decide asl have done. The same motives whuicI impelled me to separate from the adnmiistra tion of Geni. Jackson, in the plenitude of it power, and to come to the rescue of Mr. Val B urea's at its greatest depression, compels m now to withhold my name from the propose Convention. Having now assigned my reasons for refusin to permit my iiame to go before the Baltimor Conventiin, it rests with you who have place it before the people and assented to abide by Convention fairly constituted to determin what course you will pursue. Be your decision what it may I shall be coni tent. But I re'ard it as due to the occasion,t you any myselF to declare that under no ci cumtances whatever shall I support any can didate, who is opposed to free trade, and in ft vor of the protective policy, or whose prom net and influential frieds and supporters arc I hold the policy to be another name for a syt tern of monopoly and plunder, and to be tho rouglty anti repobtican and federat in its char acter. I talso hold that so long as the dutie ae so laid as to be in fact bounties to one pot tion of the community, while they operate a oppressive taxes on the other, there can be n hope that the Government can be reformed, c that its expenditures will be reduced to the pri per standard. Were I, with the evidences before me, I say otherwise of my conrse, it would be, pram ticaly, to declare that I regard the protectiv policy to be an open question, so far as th party is concerned; which I would consider a my part, a virtual abandonment of the cause< Free Trade. That can never be. I have doe pand suffered too much for it, when its friend pwere few and feeble, to abandon it now-now when the auspices every where, on this an ie other side of the Atlantic, proclaim the al proaching downfall of protection and the pe manent triumph of Free Trade. I, who "1 held it against monopoly and plunder, in tli worst of times, and braved the menaces of Am Iministration and Opposition, when backed ht Iby a single State,-will not-cannot abando the glorious cause now, when its banner wavn in proud triumph over the. metropolis of th commercial world. No, I shall maintain it moably the gronnd I have so long occupie. until I have witnessed its great and final victi ry if it shall please the Disposer of Events i spare my life, so long. It will he, indeed, vidor-the barbinger of a new and brightn Iand higher civilizeation. Much less, stIll, can I give my support to at candidate, whoe shall give his aid or countet Iance to the agitation of abolition in Congret or elsewhere; or wvhose prominent and inl, ential friends and supporters shall. I doul the sincerity of any man, who declares he is i) abolitionist, whilst at the same time, he aids a countenaces the agitation of thie question, t his pretext what it may. If we have a right our slaves, wve have the right to hold them peace and quiet. If the Constitution guarai tees the one, it guaraniteets the other ; and if forbids the one I rom being attacked, it equal forbids the other. Indeed the one stands, to ti other, as means to an end, and is so avowed t theabolitiists; and on the plinmest princ pies of morals, if the end be prohibited, it means of effecting italso are. Of the two. reg..a the. ,d.lded lianatic far lees gruilty art dagerdus than lie, who, fot political or party purposes, aids or countenances bm, in-what he kn9ws is intended to do that, whieb he ac. I knowledges to be 'forbidden-by the Constitu I tion. - It is time that an end should be put to this system of plunder and agitation. They have r been borne long enough. They are kindred measures and hostile, as far, at least, as one I portion of the Union is concerned. While the - tariff takes from us the proceeds of our labor, I abolition strikes at the labor-itself. The one robs us of our income, while'the other aims at destroying the source from which that income is derived. It is impossible for us to stand pa tiently much longer, under their double oper ation, without being impoveiished and ruined. JOHN C. C'ALHOUN. CONGRESSION AL. correspondencef the Charleston Pabiot W ASHINGTON, Jan. 24. In the Senate, aller the presentation of a host of petitions on the subjectof postage, the bill' for the improvement of the Fox and Wisconscin Rivers, was debated and again postponed. The resolution of the Finance Commit tee, relative to the Tariff bill of Mr. Mc Dufflie, was again taken up. Mr. Berrien raised a point of order, to wit, that the only question -legitimately before the Senate, was whether the bill could originate in the Senate, and that de r bate on the merits of the bill could not be in order. This was debated by. Messrs. Bagby, Sevier and others. Finally Mr. Berrien moved to lay the whole matter on the table. The motion was subsequently withdrawn to enable Mr. McDulfie to reply to Mr. Evans. The former how ever, is bound to renew the motion. The Senate spent the remainder of that day in Executive Session. in the House a report was made from the minority of the Committee on Elec tions, in the case of the non-districted members. Its takes opposite ground to the report of the majority, and contends that said members were not lawfully elec ted. Ten thousand extra copies of both report, have been ordered to be printed. 1 presume the debate on this knotty sub ject will occupy at least a month. After the disposal of several unimpor tant matters; the House resumed the con sideration of the report of the Select Com mittee on the Rules. The question was still o the motion to re-committ the Re port with instructions to re-insert the 21st Rule. Mr. Winthrop resumed and concluded his remarks against the rule. Mr. Payne followed. and intimated that all this abolition cry was raised by men who sought to create a storm in the hope that they might ride upon the whirlwind. Sie incidentally defended the institution of slavery, and argued that it is a neces sary connomitant of civilization. The morning hour having expired, the subject was again laid over. A bill was reported from the Commit tae on Claims, providing for,the payment I of the passage of Lafaye:te from this r country to France, in 1824. The House then went into Committee, and took up the resolution reporied yester day from the Committee on Foreign Af fairs. Ii puts forth that in the opiuion of the Committee, it is not expedient, at this time, to interfere with the question of Ore gon, inasmuch as the negotiations are about commencing. Mr. Owen has moved to amend by in serting "it is expedient." On tbis mo tion, lie again took the floor, and resumed his remarks from yesterday. He argued that it is the duty of this Goverument tn give immediate notice to Great Britain ojf our intention to annul that portion of the reaty of 1818, which relates to the joint occupation of Oregon. In his opimnn Great JDritain has not the shadow of a title to the Territory ; also, that it is the height of folly for us to negotiate about that which is clearly our own. Mr. TFhomasson followed in support of the resolution of the Committee. Mr. Wentworth advocated the amend ment, and made a real war speech. The subjc was then laid aside, and Sthe Committee tookt up a bill authorizing the transfer of certain appropriations, so - as to enable the Navy Department to con tinue the works recently suspended at the various Navy Yards. -A debate ensued, after which, without -taking the question, the Committee arose, -and the House adjourned. Jnay~ .In the Senate, the resolution of Mr. .Semple, calling oii the Secretary of State a for information relative to our consular sys -temn, was adopted, with an amendment re e quiring a statement of the number of Consuls in our service who are not citi rzens. The number is I believe, great. 1t is the intention of Mr. Semple to insert a Sclause in his bill, prohibiting the appoint -ment of any Consul who is not a citizen. B Should the bill pass in that shape, it will 5 he difficult for the Government to procnre a Consuls at some-of the remote stations, for the reason that the amount of fees is so trfigthat no citizen would think it worth wieto go from this country. It is on this account that the services of resident Con. - suIs of other nations have been secured. The resolution of Mr. Semple, request - ing the President t6 notify the British Go article of the treaty of 1818, which relates n to the joint occupation of Oregon, was anext taken up. e Mr. Archer desired it might be referred .- to the Committee on Foreign Aff'airs,there I, to remain until the result of the approach ' ing negotiations should be known. 0 Mr. Sample contended that the resoln r tion will in no way interfere with the ne gotiationsa. A fter some remarks from Messrs. Buch - anan and Atchison, the sabject was laid 5 over: -A bill was reported from the Military t Committee to-i-epeal the act of last Sea 0sian, dismounting the 2d Regiment of r~ Dragoons. o A fter some debate on the bill to improve n the navigation of Fox and Wiscontsin Riv eror, the Senate adjourned to Mlonday next. it In the House, the whole day was taken Sup on a motion to print a report made this *morning on the contested election case fof Mesara. Goggin aid Gilmer. Finally, ~e the motion to print prevailed. The Re I port is in favor of Mr. Gilmer. d There are se-erl cases of sickness among members,. Mr. Phoenix, oPfe1w York, lies at the point of deatliwith-ihe billious fever. This morning, just before the Speaker took the Chair. a fracas occurred bet Mu ..y Mr. Weller and the Reporter of the BaliiJ' more Patriot. * In the fight, soveral of glass were broken. Mr. Broadflelde f sired to separate the parties,but awapr& - vented by 'Mr'. Payne.' It a the affair grew out of a report paper relative-to the proceedingsbetes Messrs. Weller and-Stewart last-week. The weather to-day is at least twenty degrees colder. We 'shallIpresume, have to pay with interest for the iecint mild temperature. At the -Assemibly Roomns last evenin after the dancing, some of the ge,,dq1ue got up a fight, and amused hese bj" $i throwing decanters at each othrr/is 3j Among tbose mentioned as likelyto fr ceive the nomination of seiremtryioit Navy, is R. M. Saunders. one of the - Democratic members from N. -Carolis.a -January27. In the House this morning, Mr. Caves Johnson desired to introduce .hisproposed amendment to the rules, so that none but the Reporters of the Washington City pa pers shall have desks on the floor. It not; being in order. bowever,.at present, the matter lies over. Should thiefarieidmentr prevail, the people will know but. very little of thejeal movements of their Repre sentatives. It is well known that the City papers, depending as they do, on the pat ronage of Congress, dare not in many ca ses report the whole truth. Hence. it falls; to the lot of the reporters for .distant news papers to supply the omission, and to givoe the political doings, etc. behind theseenes. There can he no excuse for wilful misrep sentation. but I am persuaded that far greater order is now obserhed, than therd :, would be were -this wholesome. but hated'" restraint removed. - Mr. Black made an unsuccessfu? '.. to suspend the rules., for the purpose' introducing a resolution, providing for they. appointment of a Committee to consider - the expediency of appointing a corps -of sworn reporters far the service of the House; and reportes to report verbatim: This would never answer, for the reports would be so volumnious that no ten a pers could contain them. And if this diffi culty were, removed, who could be found to read such a mass of uninteresting. mat ter. The people care nothing about the dry details of Congress. They desire to have the principal points of the speeches, with the. line of argument. Al Fbeyond this is seldom read. - M d Mr. Wise from the Select Committee on the Rules made a minority report.. Among.-.', other matters, it provides for the retention ofithe 21st Rule. ' Several executive communications in answer to resolutions, were received. Among them was one from the President giving the atest information relative to'the remainin indians in Florida. In hiuidespatchof N ov. 1843, General Worth states: "As yet few have manifest ed a disposition to emigrate, and the time has not yet arrived to effect their removal by coercive measures, as they are some- - what shy and distrustful of the it bites. All have visited Tampa except a few of the very aged. but in parties of 10 to 13 only. These apprehensions under' the policy pursued will soon wear away, when if considered desirable, advantage may-be' taken of a favorable occasion to send -off the whole. Precipitancy will occasion much and vexatious difficulty. Since the pacification of A"ug. 14, 1842, these people have observed perfect good "faith, and strictly fulfilled their engagements. Not an inistance of unkindness towards 'the whites has yet occurred." The remainder of the day was spent in Commrittee of the Whole on private hills, . It is said that Mr. Shriver of the Balti-. more Patriot, who had the fight with Mr. Weller on Thursday, has demanded' sat isfaction. The bearer of the challenge was a highly' distinguished ex-member of Congress from Maryland. It appears however that Mr. Weller has declined to accept it. Mr. Shriver is of one of th6 frst families in Maryland, and was re cently a candidate for the Senate of that State. From the Charkston Mercury, Feb. 3. We had no letter from Washington yes terday, hut the proceedings of the House on Saturday ,vere without interest. The Senate was not in session. Tie Mails will lbe due from Washington to-day. The Madisonian of Saturday defineas-s position on the Presidency.. It is opposed to Van Buren on various grounds-one of which is the uniform hostility of the grea ter portion of Mr. Van B's. friends to Mr. Tyler during his term of office-and an. other is the Caucus system of nomination adhered to in Mr. Van Bnren's favor, by which as the Madisonian argues, candi dates are forced upon the people, instead of being selected by them. But that pa per also declares utter and irreconsible ho. tility to Mr. Clay and his measures, and ends by saying its position is one of armed nentrality between the parties. In the same number we find a corres pondenco that ha. interested us, between Mr. Saunders of the House, and Mr. Hen shaw, late Secretary of the Navy.. The latter reviews the various petty slanders that have been put in circulaniom against - his character as an honest man, and which have even been set up as the pretexts of his rejection by the Senate. Mr. Hlenshaw shows in a very simple and very conchs sive way that these imputations WOES slanders, nd very silly and .poorly .o -. trived ones. We trust there-is to. mueh dignity in the Senate to keep the veil ever' their proceedinigs in this case. Mr. Hen shaw has been considered ao able, faithfdi and efficient administratOr of the .Navy Departmentwe have ever considered him, amid have no doubt that the -country has suffered a loss by his rejection.s This general belief is that he was rejseeie -cause he was neither a7Clay man nor a Van Buren mao. But whatever the rea sons, wve presume the Senate will not 'shrink from avowing them. Important -Law Suit.-A Washingtoin letter says-"Two of the most important law suits ever brought so issue in this cono. try, are now being tried before the Sm preme Court. That of Mrs. Gainsaiaths fistean the cender. and Involves the