The journal of the American-Irish Historical Society, Vol. IX, 1910Various
History
The journal of the American-Irish Historical Society, Vol. IX, 1910
Various
American-Irish Historical Society -- Periodicals; Ethnology -- United States -- Periodicals; Irish Americans -- Periodicals
This debate, beginning probably at the usual time for the Senate’s
meeting, namely 10 a. m., lasted until 3.30 p. m., by which time another
committee was appointed to consider a title for the President.
Concluding his record of the notable debate of this day, Maclay writes:
“This whole silly business is the work of Mr. Adams and Mr. Lee. Izard
follows Lee and the New England men ... follow Mr. Adams. Mr. [Charles]
Thompson [Secretary of the old Congress] says this used to be the case
in the old Congress. I had, to be sure, the greatest share in this
debate and must now have completely sold (no, sold is a bad word for I
have got nothing for it) every particle of court favor, for a court our
House seems determined on, and to run into all the fooleries, fopperies,
fineries and pomp of royal etiquette.”
When Maclay attended the Senate on the following day, Saturday, May 9,
he notes: “I know not the motive but never was I received with more
familiarity, nor quite so much, before by the members. Ellsworth, in
particular, seemed to show a kind of fondness.”
XI.
DEFEAT OF THE TITLEISTS.
After correcting the minutes, the Title Committee, appointed by the
Senate on the day before, reported “His Highness, the President of the
United States of America, and Protector of the Rights of the Same” for
Washington. Senator William Few, of Georgia, spoke to Maclay, intimating
his unwillingness to do anything hastily. He then addressed the Senate
on the same lines, although he did not pointedly move for postponement.
Meantime the clerk of the House of Representatives appeared at the bar
and announced the adoption of the report of the Joint Committee, which
rejected all titles.
At this point Maclay got up, said that what Few had said amounted to a
motion for a postponement and asked leave to second him. “I then pointed
out,” records Maclay, “the rupture that was likely to ensue with the
other House; that this was a matter of very serious import and I thought
it our indispensable duty to avoid any inconvenience of that kind; that
by the arrangement between the Houses, in case of disagreement, a
conference might be requested; that my intention was, if the
postponement was carried, to move immediately for a Committee of
Conference to be appointed on the differences between the Houses and I
had hopes that by these means all subjects of debate would be done
away.”
Now Reed moved that the report might be adopted but he was not seconded.
Senator Caleb Strong [of Massachusetts] was in favor of the postponement
but was interrupted by the Chair. Senator [Tristram] Dalton [of
Massachusetts] also was in favor of it and Maclay records: “I could now
see a visible anxiety in the Chair. Strong was up again and said among
other things that he thought the other House would follow—but there was
risk in it.”
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