tlemen from the South. They were the most competent. For his own part, he knew nothing about it. If Congress could not act in this matter, who ought to declare the fact? From whom would a statement of the fact come with the most weight? Should it come from Northern Senators, who had no hold on the confidence of the people of the South, or from the Southern gentlemen, who were most deeply interested in the suppression of any injurious excitement? From the South a report would come with a more conciliatory effect than from the North. No result could be more satisfactory to the South than that which was brought about by the influence of the Southern Senators. Mr. BROWN intended to vote for a reference of the subject to the Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads. It had been urged that it was more proper to send it to a special committee, because they would have more time to examine the subject, and would carry more ability into the examination. He entertained a different opinion. The Committee on the Post Office had all the necessary experience; they were conversant with all the Post Office laws. Gentlemen in all the important committees were much engaged. No one was entirely free. The special committee would not be able to afford more time to the investigation than the standing committee. Another reason had been urged, that the committee ought to be constructed from the Southern section of the country. He could not subscribe to the soundness of this doctrine. Gentlemen deprecate giving a party complexion to the matter; what would be the effect of sending it to a special committee? It would be more than giving a party complexion to the matter: it would be giving to it a sectional aspect, which was the worst kind of political aspect. The proper course appeared, in his opinion, to be, to display a confidence in the North, in the full conviction that they would do right. If they were to exclude the Northern gentlemen, it would imply a distrust which he was not willing to show. The proper course would be to confide the matter to the Northern Senators, who, he was confident, were as much interested as any others in putting down these incendiary efforts of a set of fugitives from the Northern States, and this was the course he was disposed to pursue in this case. He never had believed that there was a majority in the North prepared to take a course which would tend to the destruction of the most glorious confederacy that had ever been seen on the face of the earth. He was, therefore, disposed to send the subject to the Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads, the chairman of which was experienced, and fully conversant with the whole subject. Whatever could be done, must be through the Post Office Department. He would not think of attributing any party feeling on this subject to any gentleman here; for any one who would stir up the subject for the purpose of sustaining fanatic abolitionists, would bring up that which would have a tendency to dissolve our free and glorious institutions, and would render himself an object for the finger of scorn to point at. [SENATE. of War on the subject of the construction of the Cumberland road in the States of Indiana and Illinois; which was referred to the Committee on Roads and Canals. Also, a report from the Treasury Department, concerning insolvent debtors. A report, also, from the Treasury Department, in reference to custom-house officers; which was ordered to be printed. Numerous petitions and memorials were presented by the Chair, and referred to the appropriate committees. PATRIOTIC BANK OF WASHINGTON. Mr. KING, of Alabama, having presented a memorial from the Patriotic Bank of the city of Washington, Mr. BENTON said that a petition for rechartering a bank in the city of Washington had been presented by a gentleman near him, and been referred, without exciting his immediate attention. During the last session he had objected to the receiving of petitions of this character, and during the present he had found on his table-and he presumed other Senators had been equally fortunate-a pamphlet of some two hundred pages, in which, without alluding to him by name, an attempt was made to refute his arguments, and to turn the position which he had then taken up against all banking companies as now conducted. He still maintained that position, nor would the essay of any man move him from it. He still believed that the banking system was full of corruption every where; but that it had been more abused in this District than in any other quarter of the globe-that these ten miles square had more banking capital on paper than any other ten miles square in Europe, Asia, Africa, or America. He wished for the appointment of a special committee to inquire into the system upon which these corporations had acted; for he believed their currency had depreciated so low that the very washerwomen and laborers on canals had been cheated out of the better portion of their hard-earned wages, while at the same time the Government of the United States could have supplied them with more gold and silver than could possibly have been absorbed in all their business transactions. Such reports had reached him, indeed, as were sufficient to excite the indignation of any man. He intended to have proof upon every point; and if these reports were true, even in part, then the petitioners should have leave to withdraw, and all who followed in their track might go and do likewise. He had already taken a stand in favor of a hard-money currency, and he had no idea of being sneered out of all legislation upon the subject now. He believed there were ten or twelve banks, broken and unbroken, in the District; he believed they would all stop by the 4th of March, and he thought it would be better for the community if they were stopped now. Mr. KING, of Alabama, said that the memorial was handed to him by several of the most respectable individuals in this community, and that, as a member of the Committee on the District of Columbia, it was assuredly his duty to present it. How far we should go in char The question was taken on the motion to refer the subject to a select committee, and decided in the affirm-tering or rechartering banking companies was a quesative: Ayes 23. The committee, on motion of Mr. CALHOUN, was ordered to consist of five members, and was chosen as follows: Mr. CALHOUN, Mr. KING of Georgia, Mr. MANGUM, Mr. DAVIS, and Mr. Linn. Adjourned. TUESDAY, DECEMBER 22. A message was received from the President of the United States, transmitting a report from the Secretary VOL. XII.-3 tion for after consideration; as for this petition, it was perfectly respectful, and he hoped would be permitted to take the usual course. When the proper time arrived, the Senator from Missouri would have an opportunity of throwing such obstacles in its way as he might think necessary. Mr. BENTON said that, as for waiting till the bill was on its passage before he offered his objections, that was not the way in which the Bank of the United States was prostrated. The petition for rechartering might be uccessful, but the petitioners would find themselves SENATE.] Northern Boundary of Ohio--Michigan Senators. mistaken if they thought their purpose was to be accomplished without such improvements and modifications being insisted upon as the lights of the age seemed to require. NORTHERN BOUNDARY OF OHIO. Mr. MORRIS, in pursuance of notice given, asked and obtained leave, and introduced the following joint resolution; which was read, and ordered to a second reading: Whereas it is provided in the sixth section of the seventh article of the constitution of the State of Ohio as follows: "That the limits and boundaries of this State be ascertained, it is declared that they are as hereafter mentioned; that is to say, on the east by the Pennsylvania line, and on the south by the Ohio river, to the mouth of the Great Miami river; on the west by a line drawn due north from the mouth of the Great Miami river aforesaid; on the north by an east and west line drawn through the southern extreme of Lake Michigan, running east, after intersecting the due north line aforesaid, from the mouth of the Great Miami river, until it shall intersect Lake Erie on the territorial line, and thence, with the same, through Lake Erie, to the Pennsylvania line aforesaid: Provided always, and it is hereby fully understood and declared by the convention, that if the southerly bend or extreme of Lake Michigan should extend so far south that a line drawn due east from it should not intersect Lake Erie, or if it should intersect said Lake Erie east of the mouth of the Miami river of the Lake, then, and in that case, with the assent of the Congress of the United States, the northern boundary of Ohio State shall be established by and extend to a line running from the southerly extreme of Lake Michigan to the most northerly cape of the Miami bay, after intersecting the due north line from the mouth of the Great Miami river aforesaid; thence, northeast, to the territorial line, and by the said territorial line to the Pennsylvania line." And whereas the State of Ohio claims that the assent of the Congress of the United States has been virtually and substantially given to the sixth section of the seventh article of the constitution as above set forth, and more especially to the latter clause thereof, describing her northern boundary as contained in the proviso to said section, by admitting her Senators and Representatives to their seats in Congress, and more fully by the act of Congress as declared February 19, 1803, entitled an act to provide for the due execution of the laws of the United States within the State of Ohio, in the preamble to which act it is declared that the State of Ohio has become one of the United States of America, whereby, as a matter of right, the said State has acquired, and can rightfully exercise, jurisdiction on her northern border to the line as described in the latter clause of the proviso contained in the sixth section of the seventh article of her constitution; but as doubts have arisen whether the act of Congress of the 11th of January, 1805, entitled an act to divide the Indian Territory into two separate Governments, does not contravene the rightful jurisdiction of Ohio to the line as described in the article of her constitution as above stated: In order, therefore, that doubts may no longer exist on this subject, Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States in Congress assembled, That the assent of the Congress of the United States is hereby fully declared and given to the latter clause of the sixth section of the seventh article of the constitution of the State of Ohio, which is in the following words, to wit: "The northern boundary of this State shall be established by and extended to a direct line running from the southerly extreme of Lake Michigan to the most northerly cape of the Miami bay, after intersecting the due north [DEC. 22, 1835. line from the mouth of the Great Miami aforesaid; thence, northeast, to the territorial line, and by said territorial line to the Pennsylvania line." And be it further resolved, That any State or States that may be formed of the territory of the United States lying east of the Mississippi river, which Congress may hereafter deem proper to admit into the Union, shall be bounded on the south by the States of Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio, as the law may require. The Senate proceeded to ballot for the committee ordered to be appointed on the message of the Presi dent concerning the Ohio and Michigan controversy, when the following Senators were appointed: Mr. BENTON, Mr. WRIGHT, Mr. CLAYTON, Mr. CRIT TENDEN, and Mr. PRESTON. MICHIGAN SENATORS. On motion of Mr. BENTON, the Senate proceeded to consider his motion, laid on the table some days since, to extend the courtesy of the Senate to the Senators from Michigan, by assigning them chairs in the Senate. Mr. BENTON stated that he now proposed to modify his motion by substituting what he would now send to the Chair, which was copied verbatim from the resolution adopted by the Senate when Messrs. Blount and Cocke came here as Senators from the Northwest Territory. The resolution could be found in the 2d volume of the reprint of the Senate Journals, page 269. The only change was in inserting the words "on the floor," which he had added. The modification was then read, as follows: That Mr. LYON and Mr. NORVELL, who claim to be Senators of the United States, be received as spectators, and that chairs be provided for that purpose, [on the floor] until the final decision of the Senate shall be given on the application to admit Michigan into the Union. Mr. EWING moved to strike out the words "on the floor;" which was carried in the affirmative. Mr. TIPTON. I must claim the indulgence of the Senate a few minutes, to explain the reasons that influence the course I feel it to be my duty to pursue on the question now before us. Coming as I do from a new State, that but a few years ago was knocking at the door of Congress for admission into the Union, as Michigan now is, I cannot consent to give a silent vote that would be thought unkind to the people of that Territory, amongst whom it is my good fortune to have some valuable friends, or uncourteous to the gentlemen sent to represent her in this Senate. Sir, said Mr. T., I acknowledge the right of the people of the Territory, when they have 60,000 free inhabitants, to form a constitution, and to admission into the Union on an equal footing with the original States, provided the constitution formed by them is republican, and not incompatible with the constitution of the United States. It will be recollected by Senators that, two years ago, I had the honor to urge on the consideration of the Senate a bill providing for taking a census of the people of both Arkansas and Michigan Territories; and if they were ascertained to contain 47,700 inhabitants, federal numbers, the present ratio of representation in the other branch of Congress, to authorize them to form a constitution and State Government. It was not the pleasure of the Senate to adopt the measure I then proposed This I sincerely regretted, and still regret. I feel confident that the passage of this law at that time would have prevented most of the difficulty that has happened in a certain quarter; it would have promoted harmony and good feeling, and taught obedience to the laws; and more, these Territories would have been admitted into the Union, as independent States, at a much earlier day than they now can, under the existing state of things. The people of Michigan now inform us that they have ascertained, to their own satisfaction, that they have a sufficient number of inhabitants to enable them to form a constitution and State Government, and for their admission into the Union as an independent State; and they present a constitution formed by a convention of that Territory, and demand admittance. The Senator from Missouri has moved the Senate to allow two gentlemen, sent to represent the State of Michigan in the Senate, to take seats in this chamber. He tells us that we owe it to courtesy as well to the people of the Territory as to the two gentlemen sent to represent her. This is very civil, and looks well on paper; but, sir, courtesy is also due to the people of another section of the country, and my constituents come in for a share; and before I can vote seats in this chamber to Senators from Michigan, I must take the liberty of examining her constitution, to ascertain whether it is in conformity to the constitution and laws of the United States, and what territory it embraces within the bounds of the proposed new State. [SENATE. Let Michigan retrace her steps, and strike from her constitution all that part that claims a portion of the neighboring States, and present herself here, and I will be amongst the first to take her by the hand and welcome her into our great family, the confederacy. Let her come in as a peaceable and good-humored sister; I want no more schisms in our family. What have we lately heard on our borders? We have had flaming general orders, calling on the militia to stand by their arms, to maintain the integrity of certain boundaries that Congress had fixed, and that Congress alone has the right to alter. It is true, sir, that no blood was shed in this tumult, but it is equally true that things there assumed at one time a most alarming aspect. I am confident, said Mr. T., that, if Michigan be admitted with her constitution in its present form, there will be an appeal to the courts of the country, or, what is far worse, to arms. This will produce a state of things that I am sure every patriot will avoid. Mr. T. said he had much more to say on this subject, but would suspend further remark to some other opportunity. Mr. EWING said he would propose to the Senator from Missouri a modification of his motion. LUCIUS LYON, on the ground of his having been a Delegate in the other House, had a right to come on the floor of the Senate. No resolution, therefore, is necessary for him. He is already a privileged spectator. As far as that goes, a simple resolution to admit JoHN NORVELL as a spectator will be sufficient. He was not willing to do any thing which could be considered as directly or indirect I find, on examining the first article of her constitution, that Michigan attempts to include within her limits all the territory embraced in the Michigan Territory by an act of Congress of 11th February, 1805, organizing the Michigan Territory. That act establishes the south boundary of that Territory on a line to be drawn due east from the southern bend or extreme of Lake Michigan, and the Michigan convention has overlooked or disregarded an act of Congress of 19th June, 1816, authorizing the people of the Indiana Territory to form a constitution and State Government. This act pro-ly recognising the claims of Michigan. If the modifica poses to establish the north boundary of Indiana on a line drawn east through a point ten miles north of the southern extreme of Lake Michigan, provided that the convention of the people of Indiana would accept and ratify that boundary. The Indiana convention did accept and ratify the boundary thus proposed, and the country between these lines became part and parcel of the State of Indiana. I find, sir, said Mr. T., that the third section of the fourth article of the constitution of the United States reads thus: New States may be admitted by the Congress into the Union, but no new State shall be formed or erected within the jurisdiction of any other State, nor any State be formed by the junction of two or more States, or parts of States, without the consent of the Legislature of the States concerned as well as of Congress. I consider it unfortunate for Michigan that her convention has entirely disregarded this provision of the United States constitution. She has set up a claim to a tract of country ten miles wide, north and south, and extending from Lake Michigan to the east boundary of Indiana, over 100 miles. Indiana has been in possession of this part of her territory near twenty years; has laid off counties, built towns, opened roads, and made her local arrangements, and she can. not tamely surrender it up to any power on earth. This claim of Michigan was as unnecessary to her as it was unexpected to us; she is larger without that territory than Indiana is with it. The people residing there have no wish to be included in Michigan--Indiana will never surrender them to her. It is therefore, sir, impossible, under this view of the case, for her to be admitted under the present form of her constitution. I can no more vote seats in this chamber to the gentlemen sent here as her Senators, than to any other gentlemen that may be in attendance here from the Territory. One of her Senators has a right to the privileged seats, in consequence of having been a Delegate in the other House. I would be willing to vote like privileges to the other. Let them come in as spectators, not as Senators. tion were adopted, the whole of the words after the word "resolved" would be stricken out, and the following words inserted: "That JOHN NORVELL be admitted as a spectator." In this form he would vote for the motion. Mr. BENTON suggested that his motion was copied from the resolution on the journals. He thought we had better provide chairs. Mr. HENDRICKS said that he always regretted when an appeal was made to his liberality or courtesy for that which he could not grant, and that this was his present situation. What is the case? said Mr. H. A man comes into my house; he tells me that he has come for the purpose of appropriating to himself a part of my house, or of despoiling me of a portion of my goods; and that he has means in train by which, in his opinion, he will speedily accomplish these objects. But, inasmuch as it will be more convenient to him to attend to this work of spoliation within the house than out of doors, he asks that, through courtesy, I would assign him a seat, and permit him to remain till he can finish his work. Now, said Mr. H., this statement well enough describes the relations, as far as this proposition is concerned, between the two citizens of Michigan and the two Senators from Indiana on this floor. They say that they are Senators from the State of Michigan; that the sovereignty and independence of that State is extended over a large territory of the State of Indiana; that it is their intention to eject the jurisdiction of Indiana from this territory; and that, to enable them more conveniently and more speedily to do this, they ask to be admitted upon the floor of the Senate. Comity should never ask what comity can never grant; and this seems to be a case of that kind. It has been said on this floor, continued Mr. H., that Michigan is a State de facto. But this, with great deference to the opinion, on account of the source whence it comes, he must be permitted to controvert, and to say that he knew of no such case. He inferred, indeed, that no such case could exist, because the constitution says that "no new State shall be formed or erected within the jurisdiction of any other State, nor any State be formed by the junction of two or more States, or parts of States, without the consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned, as well as of the Congress." Now, sir, said Mr. H., if it had been indispensably necessary that Michigan should become a State, and that the State of Indiana should be partitioned and dismembered for her benefit, comity would have said that she should at least have asked the consent of the Legislature of that State; and the constitution of the United States, as well as comity would also have required the same thing. Comity, too, would have deferred something to the fact that the State of Indiana has been peaceably in the Union for about twenty years, and that, too, with boundaries prescribed and assented to by Congress. [DEC. 22, 1835. league were not entitled to a seat as a right, but the presiding officer gave them seats as a courtesy. We never applied for seats or took them. The case is dif erent here. These Senators have presented their credentials, and are bound to wait here until the admission of the State; and there could be no impropriety in their waiting on the same terms as the Senators from Tennessee. But, while the resolution carefully omits any word which can commit any Senator, while every such word is studiously left out, it may be, from the construction of the language, that the Senators from Michigan may think they cannot use the privilege at all, without surrendering their own grounds, and that they may believe that they cannot attend even as spectators in the gallery. He would leave it to gentlemen if it might not be better to give them chairs, and admit them as spectators. If they are allowed to listen to the debates which relate to the diagram of country to which they belong, they might be able to present their views. He had listened yesterday to the speech of the Senator from Ohio, which to him was unanswerable, but these gentlemen from Michigan might have found something to say in reply to it. They should have seats, to enable them to hear what concerns the diagram of country to which they belong, that if any erroneous facts or wrong analogies should be presented, they may furnish the correction. The Senate had better give them chairs, according to the precedent on the journals, and not use words such as might preclude them, by making them suppose they cannot accept the courtesy without the compromise of their rights. Sir, said Mr. H., I undertake to say that Michigan is not a State, neither de facto nor de jure, and that she never can be a State with her assumed boundaries. The President of the United States is bound to see that the laws of the Union are faithfully administered, in and over the Territory of Michigan, until the people of that Territory shall have the permission of Congress to pass from a Territorial to a State Government; and no one can doubt that he will faithfully perform that duty. It might, perhaps, be out of place here to say much about the rights, or pretended rights, of Michigan for admission into the Union. He would, however, say that she is not on an equal footing with any of the three States already formed out of the Northwestern Territory. Their boundaries were described by the ordinance of 1787, and by it they were made and called States. In it, too, they had a guarantee that they should be admit-preciate the feelings of delicacy so often mentioned in ted into the Union, with a population each of 60,000 free inhabitants. None of these pre-requisites exist in relation to Michigan. Congress has never yet determined to form any State north of the latitude of the southerly extreme of Lake Michigan. The people of Michigan petitioned Congress two years ago to do this, but it has never been done. There is no case in existence to which the present condition and attitude of Michigan can be assimilated. That of Tennessee was a much stronger case; but he was willing to accord to the citizens in question all that was granted to the Senators from Tennessee. And what was that? He took it from the pamphlet, furnished as he supposed by a citizen of Michigan, for he had searched no further. It was that they should be "admitted as spectators,' until the decision of the Senate on the pending bill. It would not enlarge the present privileges of one of the persons claiming to be received as a Senator from Michigan. That privilege he had already under our rules, in virtue of having been a Delegate in the other House; but it would confer this privilege on the other, who had it not. This much he was willing to do, and no more; and to effect this he offered an amendment to the proposition of the Senator from Missouri, or a substitute, whichever it ought to be considered, (for he had not the proposition before him,) proposing to extend the same privileges of the Senate to the honorable JoHN NORVELL, which, by our rules, are extended to the members of the House of Representatives and the Delegates from the Territories. Mr. HENDRICKS said that he could very well ap this discussion. The proposition before the Senate was exclusively one of courtesy and delicacy. He admitted, too, the propriety of prudence and caution in forming opinions about the right of Michigan to be received into the Union as a sovereign and independent State. But, in relation to himself and his colleague, a squeamish delicacy would be entirely out of place. For us to doubt or hesitate about our course or duty, with the constitution of Michigan on our tables, claiming as it does a large district of our State, would be wholly unpardonable. He, for one, had no opinion on this subject to form. He had but one course to take, and that was to resist the admission of Michigan as a State of this Union, at every step, until she expunged from her constitution her unfounded claim upon the territory of Indiana. The Senator from Missouri had spoken of precedents, and had instanced those of Tennessee and Missouri. But the Tennessee case conferred no greater privilege than that already enjoyed by the honorable LuCIUS LYON, one of the gentlemen in question, in virtue of his having been a Delegate in the House of Representatives, and no greater privilege than that proposed by his amendment to be conferred on the other, the honorable JouN NORVELL. The precedent of Missouri. And is there any similarity between the case of Missouri and that of Michigan? Surely, none. Missouri was a State, known as such to our laws. She had formed her constitution in pursuance of a law of Congress. She was a State de jure, as well as in form and in fact. She presented a constitution unexceptionable. There was no question of boundary; no question about her right of admission as a State. The only question was one involving the power of Congress to attach a condition, after her right to admission had become perfect. Here, in the case of Michigan, the question of State or no State has yet to be setMr. BENTON said we should be careful, lest the lan-led, as well as the question of boundary, involving, as guage be construed to expel these Senators altogether. it does, the integrity of one or more of the States. In He did not intend to charge any such design, nor would relation to other States, where there were no difficult he say that such would be the effect. It was a case in preliminary questions to settle, he believed that no which every man must consult his own bosom. When special comity had been shown to the Senators who prehe came here as a Senator from Missouri, he and his col-sented themselves. He referred to the admission of Resolved, That the same courtesy be extended to the honorable JonN NORVELL, as a spectator in the Senate chamber, which, by the rules of the Senate, is now extended to the Delegates of Territories and members of the House of Representatives. DEC. 23, 24, 1835.] Newspapers to Members-Sessions of Congress. Ohio, Louisiana, Indiana, and other new States, where the journals showed no resolutions of courtesy to the Senators in attendance before they were sworn as members of the body. He well recollected that the Senators from Indiana did not obtain seats until the joint resolution of admission had passed both Houses, and obtained the appropriate signatures. The precedents which the practice of the Senate in these cases afforded were against the application in the present case. Mr. BUCHANAN thought more consequence was given to this matter than it deserved. There were some points in this controversy on which, after the fullest examination, he had entirely made up his mind; and one of these was, never, while he had a seat on this floor, to give a vote which would have the effect of disturbing either the territory of Indiana or that of Illinois. Further than this, at present, he would not go. But, having come to this decision, he had as little hesitation to expressing it as the gentleman from Indiana. The State of Michigan now came here and asked admission. It was proper that those who had been sent by her as Senators should be present in this body to hear what was said, and to prosecute the claim in a proper manner. All agree that they shall be admitted in some way, and the only question is, whether chairs shall be assigned to them, or they shall be admitted on the footing of other privileged spectators. It had been said that it would be sufficient to admit Mr. NORVELL. He thought so himself; but, as the precedent went further, he would vote with the Senator from Missouri. But, if he were in the situation of that Senator, and the course would be agreeable to the gentleman from Michigan, he would so modify the motion as to make it agreeable to what seemed to be the wish of the Senate. NORVELL might be admitted, and, when admitted, he would have to sit somewhere. Mr. Mr. GOLDSBOROUGH suggested that the motion should be so modified as to admit the gentleman to the privileges of the Senate chamber. Mr. BENTON suggested that the members of the other House were all privileged to come into the Senate chamber. There were many other privileged persons, and the whole number might be three or four hundred. There were more privileged persons than could get into the chamber, and these gentlemen might be so situated as to be excluded by the press of other persons. If chairs were provided, and a thousand persons were pressing into the chamber, they would be able to go to their chairs. The question was put on the amendment moved by Mr. HENDRICKS, and dicided in the affirmative: Ayes 22, noes 18. The resolution, as amended, was then agreed to. After taking up sundry bills, and adopting various resolutions lying on the table, The Senate spent a short time in executive business, and then Adjourned. WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 23. NEWSPAPERS TO MEMBERS. The resolution offered yesterday by Mr. ROBBINS, concerning the usual supply of newspapers to each Senator, was taken up for consideration. Mr. KING, of Georgia, read the rule which provides that all resolutions proposing amendments to the constitution, or to which the approbation and signature of the President may be requisite, or which may grant money out of the contingent or any other fund, shall be treated, in all respects, in the introduction and form of proceedings in them, in the Senate, in a similar manner [SENATE. The resolution offered yesterday by Mr. PRENTISS was taken up for consideration. Mr. PRENTISS modified the resolution by striking out all after the words "circuit court," and inserting the following words: "in all cases where the validity of a right derived from any such patent shall come in question." The resolution, as modified and agreed to, reads as follows: Resolved, That the Committee on the Judiciary be instructed to inquire into the expediency of giving to the circuit courts of the United States original jurisdiction, exclusive of the district courts, of the process and proceedings prescribed by law for the repeal of patents for new and useful inventions and discoveries; and also of allowing an appeal to the Supreme Court, by writ of error or otherwise, from the judgment of any circuit from any such patent shall come in question. court, in all cases were the validity of a right derived The joint resolution introduced by Mr. MORRIS was read a second time, and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. BALLOT FOR CHAPLAIN. The Senate, according to order, proceeded to ballot for a chaplain. There were three ballotings: Mr. Higbee and Mr. Harrison were the principal candidates. On the first ballot each of these gentlemen received 12 votes; on the second ballot Mr. Harrison had 16, and Mr. Higbee 15 votes; and on the third ballot Mr. Higbee received 23 out of 38 votes, and Mr. Harrison 14. The Rev. Mr. Higbee was therefore elected chaplain of the Senate. Much other usual business was transacted to-day, in the reception of memorials, resolutions, introduction of bills, and the reference of portions of the President's message to the appropriate committees. The Senate then adjourned. THURSDAY, DECEMBER 24. After the reception of sundry memorials, Mr. ROBBINS, in pursuance of notice given, asked and obtained leave, and introduced a joint resolution providing for supplying the members of the Senate with newspapers, which was read, and ordered to a second reading. SESSIONS OF CONGRESS. Mr. HENDRICKS offered the following resolution: Resolved, That the Committee on the Judiciary be instructed to inquire into the expediency of fixing, by law, the time of the commencement and close of every succeeding session of Congress. The resolution having been read, Mr. HENDRICKS said it would be recollected that, at the last session of Congress, the Committee on the Judiciary had been instructed, on his motion, to inquire into the expediency of fixing, by law, the times of the commencement and close of every succeeding session of Congress. That this subject, owing to the great mass of business before the session, which was a short one, did not receive the action of the committee or the Senate; and it was his intention, at the present time, again to present it for consideration. He earnestly hoped |