principle. It preaches infidelity. It makes every recruiting officer in your country an apostle to perâdy. It says to every vain, thoughtless, discontented, or ambitious minor, "Come hither; here is an asylum from your bonds! Here are wages and bounty for disobedience! Only consent to go to Canada-forget what you owe to nature and your protectors-go to Canada, and you shall find freedom and glory!" Such is the morality of this law. Take a slave from his master, on any general and novel principle, and there would be an earthquake from the Potomac to the St Mary's. Bribe an apprentice from his master; seduce a son, worth all the slaves Africa ever produced, from his father, we are told it is only a common affair. It will be right when there is law for it. Such is now the law in France! Mr. Speaker, I hope what I am now about to say will not be construed into a threat. It is not uttered in that spirit; but only to evince the strength of my convictions concerning the effect of the provisions of this law on the hopes of New England, particularly of Massachusetts. But pass it, and if the Legislatures of the injured States do not come down upon your recruiting officers with the old laws against kidnapping and man-stealing, they are false to themselves, their posterity, and their country. H. o R. few miserable Frenchmen whom they could cath at sea. War was then a mere amusement. Wh that we are now at war with the nation which has been seizing our property, capturing our citizens, and carrying them into slavery-why are our means of carrying on war to be limited? As to the provision of this bill so much objected to, was it esteemed such a violation of all right and principle in the commencement of the Revolution to take children of sixteen years of age from their parents? That was a period when the youth of the country were invited to the field. I was one who accepted the invitation, and I have never regretted it. But, says the gentleman, will you take the child from the parent? Sir, which excites the most tears-a child leaving his parent to defend his country, or a parent torn from his family and his country to fight for a foreign Power? The truth is, that most of those who object to this bill would destroy all the means of carrying on the war, if they could. It was not thought immoral in the war of the Revolution to take youths of this age, nor were they the least efficient part of our army. But, the gentleman says, the property of a master is thus to be taken from him, and the Constitution guaranties that it shall not be taken. It is the first time I have heard apprentices called property, and they will scarcely thank the gentleman for comparing them to the negroes of the South. The gentleman says we imitate the example of France. He might as well say, we are all Frenchmen because we fight; or that Englishmen are all Frenchmen, for the same reason. Mr. Fisk expressed the astonishment he felt at the observations which had fallen from the gentleman last up. He certainly agreed with the gentleman in one thing: that those who are in pursuit of a favorite object frequently overleap the bounds of reason and decorum in support of The gentleman speaks of this bill as though its it. Now, it had been a favorite object with that provisions were compulsory. Sir, it contains nogentleman to shield the British Government from thing but an offer to the young men of going into blame; and it was an object which he certainly the service of their country, and defending its pursued with the greatest ardor and anxiety. In rights. Had that gentleman retained the pride the address of that gentleman's political friends, and feeling of 1776, which has carried us safely in Congress, to their constituents, subsequent to through one war, he would not have thought it the declaration of war, it had been deceptively dishonorable to go out in defence of his country. said, that a disposition existed in the British Gov. We have much more cause of war now than we ernment to make an arrangement on the subject had then. There is no choice between recolonie of impressment. Now, sir, that the ground is zation and war, nor has there been any for a long taken from under them, we hear that the object time. Those who are now disaffected in the East, of the war is an unrighteous one, and we are if they believed Great Britain insisted on the guilty of waging it. Is it indeed guilty to defend right to impress our citizens, would one and all our country? said Mr. F. The gentleman would have drawn the sword on our side. It is because overawe the Indians. Sir, the most innocent par- they have been deceived, that they have not done ty in the war against us is the savage himself. so. It is this cry of French influence which has How comes he in the ranks against us, with his blinded them. The people of the East are jealtomahawk and scalping knife? Why is he im- ous of their rights-and God send they may alpelled to shed our blood? Why has the gentle-ways remain so. These insinuations, sir, have man shielded British instigation of their outrages? been a brand of discord thrown among us. It is Again, sir-Has the gentleman no feeling for the division they have excited, and the hope of the sufferings, no ear for the groans of our suffer- still greater, which has drawn this war upon us. ing seamen ? Has he no sympathy for those re- And yet, sir, what have we been told by the genlations of life, from which the seamen is torn tleman of our guilt? The arrangement of Ersaway, and for that moral sentiment which is vio-kine, Great Britain refused to ratify; she bribed lated in that outrage-and are we guilty because we seek to shield our citizens from it? Are we guilty because we resist the British scalping Enife? Recall the year '98 to your recollection, sir, and the pompous display of energy at that day, and the armies raised-to fight whom?-al your citizens to break your laws in a clandestine trade, which is forbidden to the fair and honest. merchant. Not a word said against it by the gentleman! And even at this moment, when the sword is drawn, after your men are butchered and roasted-after years of outrage have passed away-the war on our part is called a guilty contet! These sentiments may seem proper to be tered here; but they are not American sentients, and the time is approaching when they will not be received in this nation. I tell the gentleman and the world, that such will be the case. I see nothing in the bill objectionable; it contains some provisions absolutely indispensable; and I shall vote for it with pleasure. Mr. D. R. WILLIAMS said, if it was possible for him to keep down those feelings of indignation which pressed upon his mind, in what he had now to offer, he would speak with due respect to the orders of the House, and not infringe its privileges. He wished, indeed, he had not occasion to speak; but, sir, said he, it is my misfortune to be the Chairman of the Military Committee, more, Mr. Speaker, by your partiality than by any merit of mine. I am compelled to rise. I have been stigmatized by the gentleman (Mr. QUINCY) as the introducer into this House of an atrocious principle. If such language comports with our rules of order, I must submit, seeing it is uttered where he is protected; but, sir, I must pronounce it a libel on myself, and throw it back on him who uttered it, as a foul, atrocious libel on the committee. Sir, I came here not disposed to use such language; nothing but extreme injury should extort it from me. I wish that the gentleman had kept the resolve he informed us he had formed; as he could not do so, I would that he had been good enough to spare me from the acrimony of his remarks. Atrocity! The advocate of an atrocious principle! Let the gentleman recur to those who originated this principle; let him go back to the day of the Revolution, and damn the memory of the patriots of those times, the fruit of whose labors he so ill deserves to enjoy. The provisions of those days authorized the enlistment of all over the age of sixteen years. Nor does the statement which the gentlemen from New York made alter the case, for if there be an increase of population since the Revolution, there appears to be a correspondeut deterioration of patriotism. The gentleman from Massachusetts admits that a necessity may exist to justify the course proposed by the bill. Well, sir: was there ever a crisis calling on a people for vigorous exertions more awful than that which impends over us now? Now, when a vile spirit of party has gone abroad and distracted the Union? Now, that the State which the gentleman represents is almost in arms against us? And, in such a state of things are we to be told that we are espousing an atrocious principle, because we are seeking for the means to defend our country? The will of the President is the law of the land, says the gentleman. How can he expect his arguments to be attended to, when the first word he utters after taking his seat is to insult and abuse every one opposed to him in opinion. I beg your pardon, Mr. Speaker, I ask that of the House, for the language I am compelled to use; but so long as I am a man, so help me God, when I am told I am actuated by an atrocious principle, I will throw it back in the teeth of the assertor as an atrocious NOVEMBER, 1812. the falsehood. Look back on the principle adopted by the friends of that gentleman-I wish I could say who were his friends-I do not call the honest federalist, who is willing to support his country's rights, his friend-even in England, the nation from which he talks of receiving his religion and morality, and I might add, his ideas of our rights-even in that country they do not prevent enlistment of minors-that is, they are not discharged on the ground of minority. I have said before, sir, that we had examples in our own Government, drawn not to be sure from the purest times, but which more than covered the whole case. A law was passed in 1798 which authorized the enlistment not only of minors but every description of persons whom the President of the United States thought proper to have enlisted-which authorized him to send his recruiting sergeants into every family and take those who suited him best. This was the principle of his friends. Does the gentleman say that it was atrocious in 1798 to defend ourselves against the French? But it has become so now, seeing th defence we seck is against the English. The gentleman has said we act on an absurd principle; that we have mistaken the means of carrying on the war to effect: we want the moral means. By this I presume he would be understood that the people are opposed to the war, particularly to our land operations. There seems then to be no moral objection to the war on the ocean. And, sir, if it be not im moral to support the war on the ocean, on what possible principle can it be immoral, in the same cause, to support it on the land? The war on both elements is for the same object; not, as the gentleman says, to rob and plunder in Canada, but, according to the motto of the gallant Captain Porter, for "free trade and sailors' rights." Will the gentleman take time to tell us when he next draws a comparison between the conduct of the East and the South-what are the Southern motives for urging the prosecution of the war? Will he tell me that I have brothers or friends impressed in the British service? There is scarcely a man from the whole Southern country in that situation. Where do the majority of your sailors come from? From the Southern States or from New England? And will the gentleman tell his constituents, when we are laboring to rescue their connexions, their friends, their children-when we point the bayonet towards Canada, for the protection of their sailors, our only object is robbing and plunder? Sir, we shall be to all intents and purposes colonists, or we must fight ourselves independent. Is there any one principle of colo nization which has not been brought to bear on us by the British Government with more rigot than on the island of Jamaica? Colonization has been brought home to the habitation of every man! Does not the gentleman know that the British functionaries have refused to release the friends, the children of his brethren, of his consti tuents? Is not any argument to the contrary worse than false? Sir, a recreant coward of a treacherous traitor has brought a stain on this country which nothing but physical force, a filling the ranks of your army, can wipe off. To effect this desirable object the bill has been introduced, to which all this strange and violent opposition is made. Is your recruiting officer ordered by this bill into the work shop of the artisan to seduce his apprentices? Is he ordered into the house of your farmers to steal away their sons? No, sir; its object is to prevent collusion and fraud; to prevent depredation, as it has been called, on your ranks. It is sanctioned by precedent; it is enforced by necessity. Under such circumstances individual convenience ought not to preponderate against the general good? We ask not for the sustainment of an atrocious principle, or for the adoption of an immoral law, but for the means to support a just war until we can obtain an honorable peace-as much for the convenience and real benefit of that gentleman and his friends as of any in the House. Sir, I hope the House, notwithstanding the terrible picture which has been attempted of the resentment which will be drawn down on your recruiting officers, will not suffer itself to be influenced, much less frightened, by the gentleman, from the prosecution of its true interest, as at the repeal of the embargo. If you will yield to threats from any quarter, better at once abandon your seats and return to your homes. Let Massachusetts, as the gentleman has threatened, resist the law; I thank God there is yet no point of contact between us, but if she shall, contrary to our mutual interest, array herself against the General Government, I, for one, shall not hesitate to search for the proof that she is only a component part of the Union-not its arbitress. Mr. WHEATON said, that being now satisfied that the bill would receive the sanction of a majority of the members present, he would not delain the House but for a single moment, in adding to the remarks that had already been made. He regretted extremely that the amendments that had been proposed could not have been received, as without them he could not, in good conscience. give his vote for its becoming a law. He said he had never been an advocate for commencing the war, the difficulties and calamities of which the country now felt, and that were he now to profess a friendship for its continuance, his sincerity might be doubted, at least by some'; he had, therefore, no such professions to make; but he presumed it would not be doubted when he declared, that he had no objection to any reasonable remuneration for the services of those unfortunate men who, either voluntarily or by compulsion, had entered the ranks of our armies; and that he did not think the sums, as annexed to the several grades mentioned in the first section of the bill, were, under every equitable consideration, too high. He doubted, however, whether such an increase of pay were the dictate of public policy. Pinching want may give courage and resolution to those whom a fulness would render inactive or disorderly. Besides, as this war must undoubtedly continue at least half a century before any valuable object can probably be obtained by it, 6 H. or R. it may be worth consideration whether we are not entailing too heavy a burden upon those that are to come after us. Regard is to be had. to those that are to pay, as well as to those that are to receive; and it has always been attended with more difficulty to reduce than to raise the wages of those employed in the public service. But to this additional pay, however reasonable in itself, there is another objection, and perhaps more forcible than any; that is, that it is illtimed. For, said Mr. W., if it be a fact, and that it is, as an honorable man, I am not at liberty to doubt, as it is supported by no less authority than that of the President of the United States, "that the national spirit rises according to the pressure on it, and that the late partial calamities we have experienced have been converted into a source of invigorated efforts, so as to render it necessary to limit rather than to excite the patriotic zeal of the people," would it not be a dictate of prudence to postpone this new encouragement to enlistments to those duller days, we are taught to expect, and which we fondly anticipate; when our arms in the hands of our present soldiers shall be more prosperous, and our success more complete, and when consequently the ardor and patriotism of our people "distinguished by their political stations," shall abate! And further he observed, as applicable to the provision in the bill for freeing those that might enlist from arrests in civil causes, that no justifiable reason could be assigned why one set of men should be thus privileged, and placed in a situation where they might acquire a right in the burying grounds of a foreign country, while another are thereby deprived of their honest dues. He also thought it irreconcilable to conscience in legislators, who are the guardians of the lives, as well as property of the people, when they will not suffer the conveyance of the smallest parcel of property, made by minors, to be valid, to legalize a contract made by such an one, without the solemnities required from persons of full age, in cases much less important, and perhaps entered into in a thoughtless moment, by which, if he should fail in the performance, he might become liable to be shot. On the whole, he said, that if the war were popular, as many gentlemen affirm, it might be well worth a little consideration how far it will go in support of that idea abroad, when it is found that, to carry it on, the Government find it necessary to call to their aid bankrupts without principle, and boys without discretion. Mr. WIDGERY.-Mr. Speaker: This question has been ably investigated by several gentlemen, especially the gentleman from South Carolina, who is Chairman of the Military Committee. But there are two points stated by the gentleman from Boston, which have not been answered by any one. In one he charges the Government with being under French influence. The other is, that the will of the Executive is the law of the land. And to elucidate his French influence, he gives you a caricature, showing that we acted as in France. I will answer by another-it is of a crowd standing by a shopkeeper's door in Lon H. OF R. Pay of the Army. NOVEMBER, 1812. don; the shopkeeper, missing a piece of goods, services, for the losses he has sustained. If you cries stop thief; the thief, finding himself likely take away his apprentice you deprive him of his to be discovered, rushed through the crowd cry-property-this is a loss to the master, or he must ing, louder than all the rest, stop thief! This will apply to the gentlemen who are continually crying out French influence, for no other reason but to hide the English influence in our country. This is an artifice which has no foundation. I have often heard of French influence at home, but never could discover where it was; nor have I ever heard of the French Minister of State applauding "his friends in Congress." Where is this French influence to be found? Is it in the runners, with British guineas, from one end of the Union to the other? Sir, there is an old Spanish proverb, that a cover was never big enough to hide itself. The gentlemen are seen through much plainer than they imagine. The gentleman from Massachusetts is very careful to state that he means nothing personal. But when he says the will of the Executive is the law of this nation, is it not a direct reflection on the majority of this House, charging them with a want of independence to discharge their duty as the Representatives of a free people; and whatever gentlemen may say about the people in Massachusetts resisting the officers of Government, I believe no such thing-the people of that State will not commit any overt act against the Government of the United States. recover where the services are due; that is, of the Mr. PITKIN agreed, but even when minors are Mr. PITKIN remarked, that the power given enlisted without the consent of their guardians to a recruiting officer, to enlist minors, was a new or masters, they can be released by the writ of principle. It had not been acted upon before, or habeas corpus. I believe that, in 1756, Great since the Revolution-this is a new mode of Britain passed an act which was designed to exraising an Army; were gentlemen prepared to tend to only the colonies; it allowed indented seradopt this new principle? Although by the re- vants to be enlisted into the army-but this act solves of the Congress of 1776, minors could be made provision for the master, if the compensaenlisted, yet apprentices were exempted-and if tion was claimed within so many months after any were enlisted, yet, on proper application, they enlistment, and the necessary facts were proved were discharged; unless it could be shown the before any two justices of the peace. Whether enlistment was with the consent of their mas- this act was ever carried into effect I do not ters or guardians. By the law of '98, the Presi-know-but I do know that compensation was dent certainly could direct relative to the size and age of a recruit-yet to whom did he apply ? Not to apprentices-not to wards;-and then if an officer enlisted an apprentice without the consent of his master, he could be taken away from him by the writ of habeas corpus and the officer held liable for damages. The eleventh section of the law for raising an additional military force contained a similar provision-and it was also necessary, the consent of the master or guardian should be in writing. Mr. P. did not intend to meddle at all with the policy of war he should confine himself to the consideration of the most important principle contained in the third section of the bill. The effect of this bill goes to infringe all the State laws. They all provide for the relations which exist between a master and his apprentice—a guardian and his ward; if the apprentice runs away, he can be procured and brought back, and some of the States provide, that when the apprentice comes again into the possession of his master, that he shall serve not only the time lost, but an extra time, to remunerate his master by these provided for the property taken from the master in the person of his servant. I admit the word apprentice is not directly mentioned in the bill-and I cannot say posi tively that it is designed to extend to that class of our youth-perhaps not-but as its phraseology is unqualified, and doubts exist, and incalculable trouble may be the result, why not make the law clear and explicit? Is it possible that Congress can, or would seriously contemplate injury to private property? To remove all doubts on this subject and future trouble to the States and this House, the bill should be expressed with all possible clearness and precision. I shall vote for amending the bill by striking out the third section, and on the final question, shall vote against it altogether. Mr. TROUP.-If a stranger in the gallery had listened to the member from Massachusetts, he would have supposed that the provision of the bill against which the gentleman's anathemas were most vehemently levelled, authorized the recruiting sergeant to enter the house of the citi zen, drag from it the young man, and transport NOVEMBER, 1812. Pay of the Army. H. OF R. crease of the respectability of the Army at this moment is of infinite importance. With every disposition to rely on the militia for defence and offence, we are not permitted to do so; the militia are withheld by some of the States. The gentleman and his friends have withheld the militia of Massachusetts; he would now withhold the regulars. Give character and respectability to the Army, and when in a spirit of jealousy or disaffection, or treason, the militia should be with held, you are still independent; you are still a Government for all the objects of Government. If Massachusetts and Connecticut-but I forbear! him, loaded with chains, (as is said to be the on the contrary, it is honorable, it inspires honorpractice of one nation of Europe,) to the armies. able sentiments. Ask the farmer why he does Who would have supposed that the provision not encourage his son to enlist in the service of merely authorized the recruiting sergeant to ac- his country? He answers at once, that he can cept the voluntary service of the young man, be- make ten dollars a month on the farm; that if he tween eighteen and twenty-one? The service has honesty and industry anybody will hire him due to the country, prior in point of time, para- for ten dollars. Can there be any doubt that, by mount in obligation, must yield, says the gentle-increasing the pay, you will increase the numbers man, to the service due to the master, the parent, of the Army? not only so, in the exact proporor the guardian. If, sir, in the days of Rome's tion as you increase the pay, will you increase greatness, if in the proud days of Grecian glory, the respectability. It is self-evident. Suppose, the man could have been found base and hardy instead of sixty dollars, or ninety dollars year, enough to withhold the young men from the you would agree to give them five thousand dolpublic service, to turn them from the path of lars, there is no doubt your ranks would soon be honor, or to restrain them from the field of fame, filled. You would have the silk-stocking gentry, he would have been hurled from the Tarpeian (I do not know that the Army would be much Rock or consigned to the Cave of Trophonius. better for that,) you would chance to have a few The young man is preferred here, not because he members of Congress, perhaps a Secretary of is preferred in France, but because his physical State, perhaps an ex-President; you would at least constitution and his moral temperament pecu-enlist honesty and industry. I say, sir, the inliarly qualify him for the arduous duties of the field and camp; bodily vigor and activity, ardor, enterprise, impetuosity; without family, and therefore without the cares which family involve. No wife, no helpless children. Without care, but for his country. Without fear, but for her dishonor. He is most eminently qualified for the duties of the camp and the field; all experience has proved it. But the gentleman is not content with opposing himself to the patriotism of the young men; he is not less opposed to the increase of pay. Mr. T. thought, from the conduct of the House the other day, that the provision had been universally approved. He was the more surprised Mr. MACON said, it appeared the House was at the opposition of the gentleman, because it was now in a situation in which it had frequently this provision of the bill which went to eradicate been heretofore; that is, they take up a very small that vice and immorality of the Army, which the subject and make a very great one of it. The gentleman affected so much to deplore. The in- only question for discussion appeared to him to crease of pay had two objects, the filling the be, whether or not they would enlist into the ranks, and the general respectability of the Army. Army young men between the ages of eighteen The recruiting service had suddenly stopped; it and twenty-one. He was very sorry that, at this stopped only because all the men which were to early period of the session, a discussion had been be had for sixteen dollars bounty, and five dollars introduced into the House, which had at all times and one hundred and sixty acres of land, were better be let alone, that of foreign influence. He already picked up; to get more, nothing could did not mean to discuss it; but, if gentlemen were be done but to increase the pay; the quantum of anxious for it, he was perfectly willing to set increase was the only question. The difficulty of aside a day for the consideration of the subject, enlisting men was not peculiar to us; it was felt and go about it methodically. He regretted very by every nation. Military wages bore no equita- much that the feature to which he had alluded ble proportion to the ordinary wages of the coun- had been inserted in the bill; because he had been try. In the stronger and more despotic Govern-in hopes that, on the question of raising the pay ments of Europe force was resorted to; in the of the Army, they would, one and all, have manmore mild and moderate, stratagem and fraud ifested a disposition to support the rights of the and trick. Who had not heard of the tricks of country. In the hope that they would yet come recruiting sergeants? Under our own Govern- to an agreement on the subject; that they could ment, enlistments, to be lawful, must be fair and give some vote of unanimity in relation to the free and voluntary; hence, the only remedy left war, he should move for a recommitment of the us was increase of pay. But the filling of the bill, with a view to amend it by striking out the ranks was by no means the most important ob- third section. It appeared to him that, until a ject. The increase of the general respectability man had acquired political rights, he ought not to of the Army was of infinitely more importance. be called on to defend his country. The gentleThe regular service had been brought into uni- man from South Carolina says the principle of versal disrepute in the country. The cause is this section already exists in our militia laws. I obvious; it was the five dollars per month, and admit it; and hence, I have always, when our nothing else. There was nothing ignominious militia laws have been under consideration, movor disgraceful in the nature of the employment; led to strike out "eighteen" and insert" twenty |