had done so-one of whom at least he knew had been a conspicuous advocate of that treaty-he hoped that gentleman (Mr. Griswold) would inform the Committee how he got over the constitutional objection to this article of the treaty of London, which he had endeavored to urge against that under discussion. How could the gentleman, with the opinion he now holds, agree to admit British bottoms into certain ports, on the same terms on which American bottoms were admitted into American ports generally? Thereby making that very difference-giving that very preference to those particular ports of certain states, which he tells us cannot constitutionally be given to the port of New Orleans,-although that port is not within any state, and, if his (Mr. Griswold's) doctrine be correct, not even within the United States!

"Another gentleman from Connecticut," continued Mr. John Randolph, "had declared that if the inhabitants of the ceded territory were now, or should hereafter be admitted into the Union, it would be a violation of that clause of the Constitution which relates to the establishment of an uniform rule of naturalization, since those people will be converted from foreigners to citizens, not in the mode prescribed by our naturalization law. I wish to know in what manner the subjects of Great Britain settled around our Western posts were admitted to the privilege of citizenship. Whether it was not done by treaty, and not in the mode prescribed by law? How did the people at Natchez become entitled to the rights of citizens? Although born out of our allegiance, the moment our government was established over them, did they not possess of right a security for their lives and property? Could they not demand trial by jury in case of criminal prosecution? When I speak of their acquiring the rights of citizens, I do not mean in the full extent

in which they are enjoyed by citizens of any one of the particular States, since they possessed not the right of self-government, but those rights of personal liberty, of personal security and of property, which are among the dearest privileges of our citizens. A stipulation to incorporate the ceded territory does not imply that we are bound ever to admit them to the non-qualified enjoyment of the privileges of citizenship. It is a covenant to incorporate them into the Union-not on the footing of the original States, or of States created under the Constitution-but to extend to them, according to the principles of the Constitution, the rights and immunities of citizens, being those rights and immunities of jury trial, liberty of conscience, &c., &c., which every citizen may challenge, whether he be a citizen of an individual state, or of a territory subordinate to and dependent on those States in their corporate capacity. In the mean time, they are to be protected in the enjoyment of their existing rights. There is no stipulation, however, that they shall ever be formed into one or more States."

The Committee now rose, the Speaker resumed the chair, and the following resolutions were reported:

1o-Resolved, That provision ought to be made for carrying into effect the treaty and conventions concluded at Paris on the 30th of April, 1803, between the United States of America and the French Republic.

2°-Resolved, That so much of the message of the President, of the 21st, as relates to the establishment of a provisional government over the territory acquired by the United States, in virtue of the treaty and conventions lately negotiated with the French Republic, be referred to a Select Committee; and that they report by bill or otherwise.

3°-Resolved, That so much of the aforesaid conventions as relates to the payment by the United States of

sixty millions of francs to the French Republic, and to the payment by the United States of debts due by France to citizens of the United States, be referred to the Committee of Ways and Means.

These resolutions were carried by a vote of 90 yeas to 25 nays. The nays were: 1 from Vermont, 9 from Massachusetts, 5 from Connecticut, 3 from New York, 2 from New Hampshire, 1 from Maryland, and 4 from Virginia.

On the 28th, the bill from the Senate entitled: "An Act to enable the President of the United States to take possession of the territories ceded by France to the United States, &c., with the amendments proposed by the House, was passed by a vote of 89 yeas to 23 nays. It read as follows:

Sect. 1.-Be it enacted, that the President of the United States be, and he is hereby, authorized to take possession of and occupy the territory ceded by France to the United States, by the treaty concluded at Paris, on the 30th of April last, between the two nations; and that he may, for that purpose, and in order to maintain in the said territory the authority of the United States, employ any part of the army and navy of the United States, and of the force authorized by an act passed the 3d day of March last, entitled: "An Act directing a detachment from the Militia of the United States, and for erecting certain arsenals," which he may deem necessary; and so much of the sum appropriated by the said act as may be neces‐ sary is hereby appropriated for the purpose of carrying this act into effect; to be applied under the direction of the President of the United States.

Sect. 2.-And be it further enacted, that, until the expiration of the present session of Congress, or unless provision be sooner made for the temporary government of the said territories, all the military, civil and judicial

powers exercised by the officers of the existing government of the same, shall be vested in such person and persons, and shall be exercised in such manner, as the President of the United States shall direct, for maintaining and protecting the inhabitants of Louisiana in the full enjoyment of their liberty, property and religion.

On the 29th, the House adopted by a vote of 85 yeas to 7 nays, "an Act authorizing the creation of a stock to the amount of eleven millions two hundred and fifty thousand dollars, for the purpose of carrying the treaty of cession into effect," &c., &c.

Such were the congressional proceedings on this memorable occasion.

CHAPTER X.

SALCEDO'S ADMINISTRATION.

1801 to 1803.

I HAVE endeavored, in the two preceding chapters, to relate with fidelity, and with as much condensation as the nature of the subject would admit, all the transactions relative to Louisiana, which, in 1802 and 1803, had occurred in the United States, France and Spain. I shall now call the attention of the reader to the events which, in the meantime, had happened in the colony itself, and those which were the result of the transactions I have recorded. Thus, on the 26th of November, 1802, the Marquis de Casa Irujo, the Minister of Spain at Washington, had written to the Intendant, Morales, and represented to him the fatal consequences of his having closed the port of New Orleans to the Americans as a place of deposit, and of his having refused them the free navigation of the Mississippi, "giving," said the Minister, "to the citizens* of the United States good cause for claiming indemnities in return for the serious damages which their commerce will inevitably suffer." On the 15th of January, 1803, Morales answered with some tartness: "That the orders alluded to by the

* Dando á los ciudadanos de los Estados Unidos lugar á reclamaciones de indemnizacion por los graves perjuicios que indispensablemente han de recibir en

su comercio.