Smith did not understand the uselessness of asking Serurier for information he could not give, after deciding to act on such information as though it had been given. Although every one knew privately that Serurier would say nothing on the subject, the President could not afford to give the silence official emphasis; and he probably regarded Smith’s attempt to do so as a part of his general effort to discredit the whole system of commercial restrictions. The proposed letter to Serurier could be of no use except to embarrass Congress in legislating against England. Already the first steps for this purpose had been arranged, and the next day, February 21, Eppes moved in the House to amend his bill by substituting two new sections, which revived the non-intercourse of March, 1809, against England in respect to all vessels which left a British port after Feb. 2, 1811, and forbade the courts to entertain the question whether the French edicts were or were not revoked. Nothing short of a revolution in the form of government could force such a bill through Congress at so late an hour; but the Republican party having decided on the measure, did not shrink from employing the means. February 23 the House went into committee and took up Eppes’s new bill. That it was unsatisfactory could not be denied. Robert Wright of Maryland--a new member, of the war party--moved to amend by requiring from England an arrangement about impressments as an additional condition of restoring intercourse, and had the Government intended to make war its ultimate object it would have adopted Wright’s motion; but the House had no such object. Impressment was not one of the grievances which of late had been urged against England; indeed, the subject had somewhat fallen out of sight, and so little did the House care to insist upon it, that only twenty-one votes supported Wright’s motion. On the other hand, the conduct of France was hotly discussed, but only by Federalists. The Republicans sat silent. After one day’s debate the bill was reported, and February 26 the true struggle began. The House sat eighteen hours, while the minority consumed time by long speeches and dilatory motions. During the last four hours no quorum was present, and the Speaker decided that in the absence of a quorum no compulsory process could be issued. When the House reassembled at half-past ten on the morning of February 27, long speeches were resumed. The evening session began at six o’clock, when on both sides patience was exhausted. Randolph made two successive motions to postpone. Eppes declared that Randolph’s motive was to delay and defeat the bill; Randolph retorted by the lie direct, and for a time the House fell into confusion, while Eppes wrote a challenge on the spot, and sent it by Richard M. Johnson to Randolph, who left the House to instruct his second.