Mr. W. SMITH next rose, and observed that gentlemen wished to compliment the PRESIDENT, but took away every point on which encomium could be grounded. One denies the prosperity of the country, another the free and enlightened state of the country, and another refuses the PRESIDENT the epithet of wise and patriotic. Mr. GILES here rose to explain. If he was meant, he must think the gentleman was wrong in his application. He said he had never harbored a suspicion of the good intentions of the PRESIDENT, nor did he deny his patriotism; but the wisdom and firmness of his Administration he had doubted. He thought him a good meaning man, but often misled. Mr. SMITH again rose, and said, he must confess himself at a loss for that refinement to discover between the wisdom and patriotism of the PRESIDENT, and that of his Administration. It was moved to strike out this acknowledgment of wisdom and firmness. What were we to substitute as complimentary to him in its place? The first paragraph proposed to be struck out related to our speaking of the tranquillity of this country, compared to nations involved in war. Could this give offence, because we feel pleasure in being at peace? It was only congratulating our own constituents on the happiness we enjoy. To appreciate the value of peace, it was necessary to compare it with a state of war. It was the wisdom of this country to keep from war, and other nations hold it up as exemplary in us. The gentleman himself has declared his wish for the preservation of peace; and though he admires it, and nations admire it in us, yet we are not to compare our state with nations involved in the calamities of war, in order to estimate our enjoyments. The words of this Address are not a communication to a foreign minister, it is a congratulation to our own Chief Magistrate of the blessings he, in common with us, enjoys. Mr. S. hoped the words would not be struck out.