year. And these have frequently since been altered and modified in most of the States. The authority given to the President and Congress of the United States, to call the militia into the public service, and to direct and command them, has proved a subject of much difference of opinion, and of dispute, as to the extent of the power intended to be vested in the federal government; and particularly, what must be the exigency to justify such a call, or to require such service. It has been contended, that it is altogether a discretionary power, and that it may be exercised whenever Congress or the President may judge proper, even to the extent of calling forth the militia when there is no invasion, but merely apprehended; and of keeping them in service so long as may be supposed or pretended to be proper by the federal Executive. Others insist, that in this case, and in all others indeed, granting authority to the general government, the Constitution should be rigidly construed; and that the power delegated should not be exceeded; and therefore, insist, that the militia are only to be called out when an invasion takes place, or when it imminently and immediately threatens to take place; and that they should be promptly discharged when the danger no longer exists or impends; and by no means used as a standing army, or as regular troops.

Several of the old, or original States, claimed large tracts of wild lands in the west and northwest parts of the country, before the war of the Revolution, on the supposition that their respective territories extended to the farthest lakes, and to the Mississippi, if not to the Pacific ocean; for their patents were limited only by the Western ocean.

Soon after the peace of 1783, these States made cessions of certain parts of their claims, in the "far west," to the United States, but expressly for the benefit of all. The former Congress, under the Confederation, called upon the States, which advanced such claims, to cede the lands to the United States, and declared, "that they should be for the common benefit of the Union." The States which advanced these claims, made the cession on this express condition and these were Virginia, North Carolina,* Pennsylvania, New York, Connecticut and Massachusetts. When Louisiana, at a later period, was admitted into the Union, a condition was imposed, that it should cede to the

*North Carolina did not cede the territory which that State claimed till 1791, after the federal government was established.

United States all the waste and unappropriated lands lying in that newly acquired territory, purchased by the federal government; and that the same should be, and remain at the sole disposal of the United States. And yet the legislatures in some of the new States, have been so unreasonable as to claim a right to all the public lands within their respective territories; and would exclude the original States, who struggled and sacrificed so much for national freedom and independence, from all right or benefit in them. This great question is still (1839) undetermined. Congress has repeatedly made liberal grants of land to the new States, for the purpose of public roads and schools: but this seems not to satisfy the craving demands of the people in the States more recently formed in the territory, ceded for the benefit of the whole Union. It was good policy to make grants for the above objects in new States, as inducements to settle the waste lands, and for the improvement of the character of the population. This is for the benefit of the whole United States. But the old States have also a just right to a portion of the benefit of the public lands, in their separate and individual character. In this early period of the federal government, however, this subject was less warmly discussed, than it has since been. Most of the States, formed out of these lands, have been established at later periods: and seem now disposed to demand as a right, what was formerly requested of Congress as a favor.

After the defeat of the federal troops under General St. Clair, by the Indians, near the Ohio river, in November, 1791, new complaints were made against the war on the savage tribes, as impolitic and unjust. President Washington ordered a statement of the causes and reasons for employing troops to defend the frontier settlements, to be made by General Knox, then Secretary of War, which was published. The paper states, that treaties or conventions were formed with several tribes in the west and northwest, as early as 1775 and 1776: but that they had not been duly regarded by the Indians, during the war, nor afterwards: but from some cause, they had violated those treaties; (with the exception of the Oneidas and Tuscaroras, within the State of New York ;) and that numerous women and children had been slain by those tribes, at different times, without any sufficient pretence of aggressions on the part of the people of the United States: that when peace took place between Great Britain and the United States, instead of indulging resentments against the Indians, efforts

were made to establish and maintain peace with them on liberal terms. For this purpose, treaties were made in 1784, '85, '86, and '87; and the principles of justice and humanity governed in all these cases. In 1788, large sums were voted by Congress to defray the expenses of treaties, and for extinguishing the Indian claims, as far as they would consent; and for paying what had been previously promised for lands, which the Indians had ceded to Congress. In 1789, a treaty with several tribes on and near the Ohio river, and lake Erie was concluded; when former treaties were confirmed, and former boundaries established by mutual consent. Thus careful it appears was the government of the United States to satisfy the Indians, and to remove all causes of complaint. Owing, however, to some extraneous influence, or ignorance of the policy of Congress, a part of the Indians complained; and some of the Americans charged the government with being unjust.

The statement of the Secretary of War, further asserted, that no conflicting claim had been advanced by other tribes, under the pretence that the lands ceded to and purchased by the United States, belonged to a different tribe, or that they had any just control over them. Other Conventions were proposed in 1788 and 1789, but the Indians did not attend; and it was generally believed that there was an untoward influence from abroad, or a few white adventurers among them, whose sole object was their own individual interest and power, which prevented their meeting the agents of the United States. In the meantime the frontier settlements were attacked, and many outrages and murders committed: and the people in that region called repeated and loudly on the general government for protection. Still the President made a new attempt to negotiate. In 1790, he sent an agent to assure the tribes on the Wabash, and at Miami, that the United States desired peace, and wished to maintain friendly relations with them. But all these efforts failed, though some of the tribes wished for peace and friendship with the United States: And depredations were soon after made on the settlements, equally attrocious and revolting as before. When the people of Kentucky, and other settlements in that vicinity, meditated an attack on the Indians, without waiting for orders or the consent of the President, or his knowledge of their proposed enterprise, he restrained them. The depredations of the Indians, at that time were often committed on inhabitants who were settled south of the Ohio, and within the long acknowledged bounds of Virginia. It was estimated,

that, before the United States commenced hostile operations against the Indians, they had killed, wounded, or taken, one thousand and five hundred men, women and children, and had carried off two thousand horses, and other property to a large amount. The troops of the United States stationed in that region merely to occupy some forts, and for pacific purposes, were also attacked, and many of them killed by the hostile tribes, during this period. Col. Pickering held a treaty with them in 1791, when he made known the humane intentions of the federal government; and General St. Clair, gave similar assurances to the Delawares and others, when he first advanced into that territory to protect the inhabitants. At this period, the Governor of Pennsylvania, also requested a military force, of the President of the United States, for the purpose of giving protection to the inhabitants of that State, who lived in the northwest parts, and who were in great and continual danger from the hostile tribes of Indians. There seems to

have been an imperious call for the energetic measures then adopted by Congress, and recommended and approved by Washington, in employing troops, at that time, on the frontier settlements.

At the opening of this session of Congress, (which was in October, 1792,) the President, in his public message to the Senate and Representatives, referred to various subjects of a public nature, which he deemed important for the consideration of the national legislature among which were, -the public debt, and the necessity of further provision for supporting the credit of the United States-the exposed situation of the western frontiers; and the omission, on the part of Great Britian, to withdraw their troops from the forts within the national boundaries, formerly belonging to that power, but stipulated, by the treaty of 1783, to be given to the United States. For so long as the fortresses on lake Erie, at Detroit, or any of the branches of the Ohio river, were in the hands of the British, the western settlements were exposed to depredations from the savage tribes. It could hardly be supposed, that the British government, authorized their military officers in those forts to encourage the Indian assaults and murders; but it was evident, that while they held those posts the tribes were embolden, if not instigated by individuals, to commit depredations on the citizens of the United States. This conduct of the British ministry was considered highly improper, though they apologized for it, by pretending to a right to hold the forts, till the United States had made express

and ample provision for paying certain claims, made by the refugees from America, at the beginning of the Revolutionary war. Some of the States made such provision promptly, as to that class of the refugees embraced in the treaty of 1783; but other States had declined making any provision for that purpose. It was this conduct of the British government, which was in plain violation of the treaty, that threatened a war with England in 1793; but which the firmness and prudence of Washington happily averted.

In November, 1792, Mr. Ames, of Massachusetts, presented a memorial of W. Mifflin and others, on the subject of Negro Slavery, which was read and laid on the table. Two days after, Mr. Ames called up the memorial, when a warm dispute arose. The members from the Southern States, deprecated the consequences of such memorials. One of them moved, that it be returned to the memorialists, and the entry of it on the journal erased. The motion for returning the memorial was unanimously adopted; but the motion to erase the entry on the journal was withdrawn. This agitating subject had been previously introduced in Congress on presentation of a petition from some citizens of Pennsylvania. It has often since been brought forward, and served always to produce a warm and sometimes an angry discussion. The Constitution must be altered to justify Congress in legislating on the subject. And the interference of the non-slaveholding States, is not only useless, but altogether unjustifiable, from political, if not from moral considerations.

By an Act of Congress, in 1792, encouragement was given to the Codfisheries, followed chiefly in the eastern States; and in lieu of a drawback of the duty on salt and a bounty on fish exported, previously allowed, a bounty was now granted on the vessels employed in this business, according to their tonnage. Fish was a great article exported from the New England States, and it was also deemed important to give encouragement and support to this branch of business, as a means of having good seamen for a navy, when it should become necessary for national defence. The tonnage of vessels employed in the fisheries, and coasting trade, in 1792, was 152,000 tonsin 1813, 490,300-in 1828, 930,200-in 1832, 753,400.*

*The whole tonnage of vessels in the United States, registered, enrolled, and licensed, was, in 1789, 201,560-1800, 972,500-in 1810, 1,424,780— in 1820, 1,280,170—in 1830, 1,210,250,-and in 1832, 1,440,430.