great, or that the charge would be very heavy. Mr. DAYTON (the Speaker) said, he was inclined to believe the attacks of the Indians, which provoked the expedition of General Sevier, were subsequent to those in the knowledge of Congress at the time the subject was under discussion. He was one of those, he said, who thought that the hostile dispositions shown by those Indians at that time called for force, and he had introduced a resolution, by means of his colleague, to that effect. It was not, therefore, that he did not think the expedition authorized, but because he had a desire to have the facts relative to the subject clearly stated, that he wished the business to be committed to a select committee. Mr. RUTHERFORD said, they were not particular about the manner of doing the business, provided it was done. He was confident the expense of the expedition ought to be paid. When the Indians were upon them, what could the Governor do? Was he to send forward to the seat of Government to be instructed what to do? No; resistance was necessary, and it was not becoming in them now to say, "You did not act perfectly regular--the thing was not exactly as it should have been." It was a critical period, he said, and if the expenses were not paid, it might have a bad effect in future. Mr. KITCHELL was in favor of the committee rising. He remembered the transactions which took place on this business, as mentioned by his colleague, (Mr. DAYTON.) He said, he was one of those who voted against the proposition of using hostile means, because he thought it possible to ward off the evil. It had been warded off; but he believed there was sufficient ground for calling out General Sevier, and he doubted not, if the business was referred to a select committee, the result would be satisfactory to those gentlemen who brought forward the business. The committee rose, and leave not being granted to sit again, on motion, the report and papers accompanying it were referred to a select committee of Messrs. A. JACKSON, J. SMITH, BLOUNT, DENT, and HARPER.[7] FRIDAY, January 20, 1797. _Direct Taxes._ The House then took up the consideration of the resolution reported yesterday by the Committee of the Whole, on the subject of further revenue. Mr. COIT wished for a division of the question, viz: that the proposition for a tax on land and that for slaves should be put separately. Mr. SWANWICK called for the yeas and nays. They were agreed to be taken. Mr. NICHOLAS thought the resolution should not be divided, but that the propositions for a tax on land and a tax on slaves should go together, as he should object to vote for the tax on land except that on slaves accompanied it. He thought the gentleman had better try the question, by moving to strike out what respected slaves.