Abridgment of the Debates of Congress, from 1789 to 1856, Vol. 2 (of 16)United States. Congress
History
Abridgment of the Debates of Congress, from 1789 to 1856, Vol. 2 (of 16)
United States. Congress
Law -- United States; United States -- Politics and government
YEAS.--Fisher Ames, Abraham Baldwin, Theophilus Bradbury,
Richard Brent, Daniel Buck, Dempsey Burges, Joshua Coit,
William Cooper, William Craik, Samuel W. Dana, James
Davenport, Henry Dearborn, George Dent, George Ege, William
Findlay, Abiel Foster, Dwight Foster, Nathaniel Freeman,
jr., Ezekiel Gilbert, Nicholas Gilman, Henry Glenn,
Chauncey Goodrich, Roger Griswold, William B. Grove, Robert
Goodloe Harper, Carter B. Harrison, Thomas Hartley, John
Heath, William Hindman, John Wilkes Kittera, Edward
Livingston, Samuel Lyman, Francis Malbone, John Milledge,
Frederick A. Muhlenberg, William Vans Murray, John
Nicholas, Alexander D. Orr, Josiah Parker, Elisha R.
Potter, John Read, Samuel Sewall, Samuel Sitgreaves,
Jeremiah Smith, Nathaniel Smith, Isaac Smith, William
Smith, Thomas Sprigg, John Swanwick, Zephaniah Swift,
George Thatcher, Richard Thomas, Mark Thompson, John A. Van
Allen, Philip Van Cortlandt, Joseph B. Varnum, Peleg
Wadsworth, and John Williams.
NAYS.--Theodorus Bailey, David Bard, Thomas Blount, Nathan
Bryan, Samuel J. Cabell, Gabriel Christie, Thomas
Claiborne, John Clopton, Isaac Coles, Jesse Franklin,
Albert Gallatin, James Gillespie, Christopher Greenup,
Andrew Gregg, Wade Hampton, John Hathorn, Jonathan N.
Havens, James Holland, Andrew Jackson, George Jackson,
Matthew Locke, William Lyman, Samuel Maclay, Nathaniel
Macon, Andrew Moore, Anthony New, John Patton, John
Richards, Israel Smith, Richard Sprigg, jr., William
Strudwick, and Abraham Venable.
The question to fill the blank with $178,000 was then put and
carried--ayes 47, noes 42, and the bill ordered for a third reading
to-morrow.
FRIDAY, March 3.
_Call for Statements._
Mr. GALLATIN said, he wished to propose to the House three resolutions,
calling for statements relative to the War Department, which he wished
to be laid before the House at the next session. They had heard it said
upon that floor, by gentlemen who were considered to be well acquainted
with the subject, that many expenses had taken place in that Department
which ought to have been checked. Conceiving a check of this kind to be
necessary, and knowing the expense of the Military Department was
increasing from year to year, beyond what the increase in the number of
troops would warrant, it was proper to lay the foundation of an inquiry
into the subject. Indeed, having just passed a pretty severe law
relative to the Receivers of Public Money, and understanding that the
Secretary of the Treasury had a long list of delinquents, he was
desirous of taking some steps in the business. From these
considerations, he offered the following resolutions for acceptance:
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account