The court was sometimes one and sometimes two days | in session. He thought the difficulty suggested of performing the tour not a formidable objection. So far as the constituents he had the honor to represent in part were concerned, he had no doubt they would be in favor of the amendment of the gentleman from New York, [Mr. WRIGHT.] He felt anxious for the passage of the bill. But he would ask how the bill was to be embarrassed? Certainly not by making it more acceptable to a large portion of the country. By making it more acceptable, a better feeling would exist towards it, which would be more likely to secure its passage.

Mr. CLAYTON said, on the whole, he felt disposed to vote for the amendment of the gentleman from New York, [Mr. WRIGHT,] and also for the amendment mentioned by the gentleman from Pennsylvania, [Mr. BuCHANAN,] if that gentleman should offer it. All he asked of gentlemen was to make the bill to-day as perfect as possible, in order that it might be passed to-morrow. The Senator from New York might, on the third reading of the bill, by general consent, offer such amendments as would render the details perfect.

After some further remarks from Messrs. DAVIS, BLACK, TALLMADGE, MOORE, SHEPLEY, PRENTISS, and KING of Alabama, the question was taken, and Mr. WRIGHT's amendment was adopted: Yeas 28, nays 12, as follows:

YEAS-Messrs. Benton, Black, Clayton, Davis, Goldsborough, Grundy, Hendricks, Hill, Hubbard, Kent, Knight, Leigh, Moore, Morris, Niles, Porter, Prentiss, Robbins, Robinson, Ruggles, Shepley, Swift, Tallmadge, Tipton, Tomlinson, Wall, White, Wright-28.

NAYS--Messrs. Brown, Buchanan, Calhoun, Clay, Crittenden, Ewing, King of Alabama, King of Georgia, Linn, McKean, Mangum, Southard-12.

After some verbal amendments were agreed to, submitted by Messrs. CLAYTON and LEIGH,

On motion of Mr. CLAYTON, the bill was laid on the table, and

The Senate adjourned.

TUESDAY, JANUARY 5.

NATIONAL UNIVERSITY.

Mr. LEIGH, from the Committee on the Judiciary, to whom the subject had been referred, made a report on the legacy of the late James Smithson, of London, for a university in the District of Columbia, accompanied by a joint resolution authorizing the President of the United States to appoint an agent or agents to take the necessary steps to secure said legacy for the purposes mentioned and specified in the will. Read, and ordered to a second reading, and the report ordered to be printed.

DISTRICT BANKS.

Mr. BENTON offered the following resolution, which lies one day for consideration:

Resolved, That a select committee of five members be raised, to act jointly with any committee raised for similar purposes by the House of Representatives, to whom shall be referred all the petitions now presented to the Senate for the renewal of bank charters in the District of Columbia, with authority to examine into the conduct and condition of said banks; and for that purpose to have authority to send for persons and papers, to inspect books, and to examine witnesses on oath; also, to examine into the condition of the currency in the District of Columbia, and the means of improving it, and approximating it to the currency of the constitution; also, to inquire into the necessity, if any, for banks of circulation in the District of Columbia, in contradistinction to banks of discount and deposite, and for dealing in

[JAN. 5, 6, 1836.

bullion and exchange; to inquire how far banks of any kind are wanted for the uses of the federal Government in this District; and wherefore the Treasurer of the United States may not act as keeper and payer of the public moneys within the District of Columbia, and drawer of checks and drafts in favor of those who choose to receive their money elsewhere. The said committee to have leave to employ a clerk, and to report by bill or otherwise.

JUDICIAL SYSTEM.

On motion of Mr. CLAYTON, the Senate proceeded to the consideration of the bill in addition to the act to amend the judiciary system of the United States.

Mr. TALLMADGE moved an amendment in the second section, after the word "annually,” in the twentieth line, by inserting the words "in the northern district of New York, at Albany, on the first Tuesday in June and the second Tuesday in October;" which was agreed to.

Mr. BUCHANAN moved an amendment in the tenth line of the first section, to make it read "the eastern and western districts of Pennsylvania." Also, in the second section, fifteenth line, by inserting the words "in the western district, in the city of Pittsburg, on the 17th day of March;" which was agreed to.

Mr. B. also introduced an amendment to prevent the bill in its operation from interfering with the holding of the courts in Utica, in the State of New York, and Williamsport, in the State of Pennsylvania; which was agreed to.

Mr. CLAYTON moved an amendment in the fourth section, after the word "Alabama," in the eighth line, by inserting the words "the northern district of New York, and western district of Pennsylvania;" which was agreed to.

After some further verbal amendments,

The bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading.

Several bills were severally read the third time, and passed; when,

On motion of Mr. WEBSTER,

The Senate proceeded to the consideration of executive business, and when the doors were opened, The Senate adjourned.

WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 6.

DISTRICT BANKS.

On motion of Mr. SOUTHARD, the consideration of the resolution on the District banks, offered by Mr. BENTON, was postponed till Monday next.

Several other resolutions on the table were severally considered and agreed to.

JUDICIAL SYSTEM.

The bill to amend the judicial system of the United States, (adding one to the number of judges of the Supreme Court, and altering the judicial districts, &c.,) was read a third time.

Mr. BLACK called for the yeas and nays on the pas sage of the bill, and they were accordingly ordered.

Mr. BENTON observed that he would not have said one word relating to this bill, if the yeas and nays had not been called; and, as they were called, he would not say more than a dozen. He should vote for this bill, because it suited the section of country from which he came, and because it was also desirable to several States that it should pass. He had, however, objections to it, which he should not then trouble the Senate with a detail of; and before he gave his vote he wished it distinctly understood that he had objections, and if ever

he was called on to state them, either there or elsewhere, he was ready to do so. One word, while he was up, in reference to a remark of the chairman of the committee the other day. He (Mr. B.) also objected to seeing the judges a debating body, though he should wish to see as many judges as twelve. He meant as many as twelve on paper, for he did not believe that if the number of the bench consisted by law of so many, they would ever be all present on the bench at one time. Mr. CLAYTON said his objections were the very opposite of the objections of the Senator from Missouri, [Mr. BENTON.] He (Mr. C.) was opposed to increasing the number of judges to twelve. He hoped the passage of this bill would put that question for ever at rest, and that the number of judges never would exceed nine,

at most.

Mr. PORTER rose briefly to remark that it was rather strange to hear a gentleman say he was about to vote for a bill, but had some objections to it. That occurred with regard to almost every bill that came before the Senate. Members had some small objections to important measures, but waived them on account of the greater good to be obtained. He should regret that the bill went to the other House under the disadvantage that there were serious objections to it. With respect to the number of judges on the bench, he should much regret to see more than twelve; for although twelve men might be stronger than six, he never could believe that they were wiser.

The question was then taken, and the bill was passed: Yeas 38, nay 1, as follows:

YEAS-Messrs. Benton, Black, Brown, Buchanan, Calhoun, Clayton, Crittenden, Davis, Ewing, Goldsborough, Grundy, Hendricks, Hubbard, Kent, King of Alabama, Knight, Leigh, Linn, McKean, Mangum, Moore, Morris, Niles, Porter, Prentiss, Preston, Robbins, Robinson, Ruggles, Shepley, Southard, Swift, Tomlinson, Tyler, Wall, Webster, White, Wright-38. NAY-Mr. Hill--1.

REGULATONS OF THE SENATE CHAMBER.

Mr. PRESTON moved the consideration of the resolution offered by him some days ago, and which in his absence had, on motion of Mr. TIPTON, been laid on the table.

The resolution reads thus:

Resolved, That the regulations in relation to the Senate chamber and galleries, adopted at the present session, be rescinded, except so much as relates to the reporters.

Mr. PRESTON said the object of the resolution was to establish things as they were before the adoption of the resolution now in force in the Senate, except as regarded the reporters, who were excepted in the resolution he had offered-seats having been provided for them, by the existing resolution, on the floor of the Senate. It was a privilege which, like others, might be abused; but inconvenience might, by proper circumspection in future, be avoided. It was very desirable to have persons in the lobby who had business, without going out during the session to speak with them. The lobby might, on extraordinary occasions, be crowded to some extent, but he thought it might be restricted on any occasion within proper bounds. He thought so grave, so dignified, and so aged a body, might safely be trusted with the privilege of keeping open doors. The supposed necessity of such a provision would induce a circumspection that would guard against the inconveniences heretofore experienced.

Mr. PORTER understood the Senator from South Carolina [Mr. PRESTON] to regard the rule adopted as an innovation upon the rules of the Senate. Until within a very few years back the regulation was precisely VOL. XII.-5

[SENATE.

the same as it is now. The resolution adopted for the regulation of the Senate chamber, and now in force, was the same, verbatim et literatim et punctuatum, as the one adopted by the House of Representatives. Until the adoption of the present regulation, the Senate had experienced great inconvenience. He would like the honorable Senator from South Carolina [Mr. PRESTON] to point out some means of prevention against the intrusion of a crowd. Would the inducements to the collection of a crowd be any less than heretofore? Would any Senator refuse the admission of any one who would ask him? Persons were much exposed in crowds. On one occasion an honorable gentleman had had his pocket picked in a crowd in the gallery. The attraction of an audience was great. There were occasions on which gentlemen would withdraw their attention from the business before the Senate, and turn round to more attractive objects in the gallery. He was willing to afford further facilities to spectators by making some additional exceptions to the rule prohibiting them, but he was opposed to any measure calculated to disturb the public business.

Mr. PRESTON said that, under the late rule, as far as his experience went, and he believed his and the gentleman's [Mr. PORTER's] was about the same, he thought the business of the Senate had been as well conducted as at any time. The presence of an audience evidently excited them to a more faithful discharge of their duty. It was a privilege incident to all deliberative bodies, and one that ought not to be withheld. He flattered himself that he was not more susceptible of those attractions alluded to by the gentleman [Mr. PORTER] than the gentleman himself; and he was very certain they had never hindered him [Mr. PRESTON] in the discharge of his duties. He had experienced much inconvenience under the present rule. He had at times, in the press of important business, been called three or four times at the door to persons who wished to see him. The rescinding of the rule would not be attended with so much inconvenience in the Senate as in the House of Representatives, where the throng was more general. It seemed to him that the whole organization of the Senate had fallen upon a very limited number of members.

It did not seem to him that there would be any difficulty in vesting the Senate with the power to say what number of spectators should be admitted. He did not believe it would be indiscriminately exercised. He had himself refused admission to persons applying to him on certain occasions, and he believed other Senators would exercise a reasonable discretion also. The gentleman [Mr. PORTER] had alluded to the circumstance of a gentleman having his pockets picked. He trusted the pocket that was picked belonged to the honorable gentleman who had introduced the person who did it. The privilege of witnessing the proceedings of the British Parliament was not denied the public. It had been stated that the presence of an audience was apt to divert the discussion of subjects before the Senate into other channels. He was not averse to the Senate exercising a proper influence upon popular opinion, and he could see no reason why the Senate should not have the same liberty in that respect that other bodies had. They had all firmness enough to secure the Senate from the inconveniences growing out of the extension of the privilege. He would he glad to see the resolution pass, or modified so as to suit the gentleman.

Mr. PORTER wished to exclude the idea that he was opposed to the proceedings of the Senate being made public. There are professional persons here, said he, whose business it is to take an account of the proceedings of the Senate; and others, who are connected with newspaper establishments, have access to us. He would

be sorry any Senator should be so unfortunate as to have his pockets picked. The gentleman who had had his pocket picked, no doubt, was deceived in the character of the person whom he had introduced.

He thought the gentleman [Mr. PRESTON] was not so old as to be impervious to the attractions of the ladies. No doubt, the animating motive was the country's good; but he would ask the gentleman if the splendid figures of speech the Senate had witnessed on certain occasions, were not stimulated in some degree by the smiles of the ladies? Some part of the gallery had been appropriated to the members of the other branch, and the adoption of this rule would tend to exclude them.

Mr. CALHOUN was disposed to put this question upon different grounds from what either of the gentlemen who had spoken upon it had. Our Government was a popular Government, and he was disposed to accommodate as much as possible the people that belonged to it. Those galleries were made for the accommodation of the public, and the public had a right to the use of them. The smaller gallery had been thrown open, but the more commodious one had been closed against aged persons and others, unless they had females under their charge. And shall we (said Mr. C.) keep that gallery (turning to the circular gallery) continually shut against the people of this Union? He had higher objects in view than some of the gentlemen who advocated the passage of the resolution. He looked to the great struggle they were going to have in that body (the Senate) with one branch of the Government; and it was plainly to be seen, by the course pursued in relation to this resolution, who were the advocates of power, and by whom secrecy was desired. In a struggle between power and the people, between power and liberty, an audience was materially necessary. In the great struggle for liberty the galleries were thrown open. The reports were thrown coldly on the world, and could not be relied on. He would suggest that a certain number of tickets should be given out, in order to prevent the gallery from being crowded to excess. He would hold that the generous-minded ladies themselves would fully accord with his views. Mr. C. concluded his remarks by demanding the yeas and nays.

Mr. CLAYTON moved to amend the resolution by striking out all after the word "resolved," and inserting "That the circular gallery of the Senate chamber be open for the admission of spectators, and that each Senator be allowed to admit any number not exceeding three into the lobby of the Senate in front of the chair." Mr. MANGUM thought it to be very desirable that the Senate should throw open its galleries entirely, and that the restrictions should apply to the number of persons to be admitted on the floor of the Senate. He had witnessed, under the change of the rule, in his own person, decided inconvenience, yet he should be willing to agree to any modifications of the resolution the gentleman might choose to propose, provided the galleries were thrown open to spectators. Under the old rule, spectators were not permitted to come within the bar of the Senate, nor to go behind the pillars, therefore no very great inconvenience was occasioned by their admission. He, himself, though occupying a seat of the outer range, had experienced no inconvenience from the spectators. He would agree to the resolution, if the restrictions were confined to the floor of the Senate, but he would never agree that the galleries should be closed. There would be one inconvenience, however, in the restrictions, as to the floor of the Senate. have, said he, strangers here from all parts of the Union, and we have, in our intercourse with them, to go out of the chamber, thus incurring the risk of being absent when a vote is taken; while, under the old rule, we could still have the necessary intercourse with our friends

We

[JAN. 6, 1836.

and constituents, without losing any part of the business going on. He felt that there was much force in the remarks of the gentleman from South Carolina, that the public eye should not be shut on the proceedings of that body. He wished for himself, and for those with whom he acted, to have a fair chance on that floor; for he believed that, if a fair chance was to be had, it would only be had on that side of the Capitol. Again, he was not willing to incur the risk of the imputation that might be cast on them, in consequence of restricting the admis sions into the chamber, that the Senate did not wish to give the utmost publicity to its proceedings. As to the galleries, they should be thrown freely open to all. It was what the public had a right to expect, and he hoped the Senator from Delaware would modify his resolution so as to meet their just expectation.

Mr. CLAYTON was perfectly willing to take the suggestions of the gentleman from North Carolina. His only object was to admit as many as possible in the circular gallery, without excluding the ladies. He thought the restrictions as to the floor of the Senate should still be continued.

Mr. PRESTON regretted that his friend from Delaware should persist in giving the same effect to his amendment. He was inclined to think that the inconveniences under the old rule had been much exaggerated. No deliberative body had ever conducted its business in a more orderly manner than the Senate, and in none had there been less interruption to the proceedings. As for accidents such as had been alluded to by the Senator from Louisiana, they were unavoidable, and might occur any where; for he had heard that a gentleman had been robbed at a private party in Washington. But he put it to gentlemen, if the business of the Senate had not always been conducted in the most orderly manner, and whether they would continue these restrictions on account of the slight inconveniences that had attended the operations of the old rule. On what occasions, he asked, had such great crowds been collected there? Why, on occasions of great excitement, when subjects of deep and absorbing interest were debated, and he was very willing on such occasions to submit to slight inconvenience, rather than exclude any who could by possibility be admitted. He had witnessed, for many years past, the occasional throngs which debates of great interest and importance had collected there, and, although almost suffocated by the crowds, yet there had been no interruption to their proceedings. If any were excluded, he did not hesitate to say that it should be the ladies rather than those who came from different parts of the Union, to hear and report what passed in that body. He was not disposed to give to the ladies more than their sex deserved; it was not desirable that they should be there at all. It was man, thinking man, for whom they acted, who should superintend their proceedings. He again repeated the belief that the inconveniences under the old rule had been greatly exaggerated-he had never seen the business in any manner interrupted. He laid down this general proposition, that it was the bounden duty of that body to give to the public, to the utmost extent, the proper accommodation. He objected to the limitation proposed by the Senator from Delaware. They had already closed more than half of their house to spectators; the small gallery was daily crowded almost to suffocation, while the circular gallery seldom contained more than a dozen ladies. He believed that no serious inconvenience had resulted from the old rule, and he hoped that his resolution would be permitted to pass without limitation.

Mr. CALHOUN said he should vote for the resolution of his colleague, with the amendment of the Senator from Delaware, because he wished to take the question as to opening the galleries. If, hereafter, it should be found

that the lobby could contain more than the amendment proposed to admit, without inconvenience, it might be further opened; but he was of opinion that the galleries ought to be opened. It was the nature of power to shut its doors, and hide its proceedings from the public eye; but those who resisted power had an interest in giving to their efforts the utmost publicity. He wished the whole people of the United States to have an opportunity of witnessing what passed in that chamber. As he desired to have the question essentially on the opening of the galleries, he should vote for the amendment.

Mr. BENTON had but one word to say, and that was drawn from him by what he had heard of the hardship of those who were almost suffocated in the crowds attending the little gallery, while so few occupied the large one. Whoever encountered that hardship, he would undertake to say, had brought it on himself, because he could easily be relieved of it, by taking a lady under his arm, and going into the other gallery; and if he had such an antipathy to the ladies as to prefer the crowds of the little gallery to their society, he (Mr. B.) had no sympathy for him. The circular gallery was freely open to all, under the rule as it then stood. Every gentleman could go there if he pleased; and if he did not know how, he (Mr. B.) would tell him. He had simply to get a young lady, or an old one, or any lady he pleased, to go with him, and he would find the doors open.

Mr. TALLMADGE said he should vote against the amendment of the gentleman from Delaware, [Mr. CLAYTON,] and if the amendment of that gentleman did not succeed, he would then offer an amendment to admit a certain number in the circular gallery. He was willing to give to each Senator the privilege of admitting a certain number of persons in that gallery. He had no objection to affording every facility to spectators; but owing to the inconvenience mentioned by some of the gentlemen, growing out of an unlimited privilege, he would prefer extending the convenience to the circular gallery. Mr. SHEPLEY suggested to the gentleman from New York, [Mr. TALLMADGE,] to submit his views in the form of an amendment to the amendment. The resolution, thus amended, would accomplish the object the gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. CALHOUN] had in view. Mr. TALLMADGE then submitted the following amendment to the amendment:

"That each Senator have the privilege of admitting into the circular gallery number of gentlemen." Mr. WEBSTER said the public had a right themselves to the use of the galleries until they were filled. He was opposed to granting tickets, and was for opening the galleries to all, without distinction of persons. It was preferable that fathers and brothers should meet and sit together in the same gallery, to having them forced into separate galleries, merely because some of them happened not to have ladies in their charge.

Mr. CALHOUN said that the amendment to the amendment of the Senator from New York did not answer his purpose at all. He did not wish to be troubled with applications for admission there, nor did he wish to put the people to the trouble of asking for admission. They had a right to be there, to come there, and stay there, whenever the Senate was in session. It was impossible to look at that debate without seeing the nature of it, and from what quarter the oppo. sition to the resolution came. Those who had got power were not willing that the truth should be heard boldly and openly. We, said he, who are on the opposite side, and who oppose power, ought to desire to give the utmost publicity to our proceedings. No, sir, said he, no modification of the amendment will answer my purpose; nothing which will exclude a single individual, will ever meet my consent.

[SENATE.

Mr. BUCHANAN said he had not expected this debate could possibly assume the character which it had now taken. The change of the rules of the Senate, in regard to the use of the lobby and galleries, had been made by common consent. It was not the work of any political party in this body. The change was made, as he had supposed, for the accommodation of all parties in the Senate, as well as for that of the people. Under these circumstances, he could not but feel surprised when the Senator from South Carolina [Mr. CALHOUN] very broadly insinuated that there was a struggle in this body between two parties--the one the advocates of liberty, the other of power, and that the advocates of power desired secrecy.

[Mr. CALHOUN here said that he had affirmed it.] The Senator, then, has affirmed it. Sir, said Mr. B., if the gentleman intends to assert that the friends of the administration on this floor desire to envelop the proceedings of this body in mystery and darkness, the assertion is wholly unfounded. In saying so, I mean no personal offence. We are not the advocates of power against liberty, and our conduct has never shown that we were. It is easy for the Senator to make general charges of this kind, but he will find it very difficult to place his hand upon any single fact to support them.

Mr. B. said he was neither ashamed nor afraid to speak, and to vote, and to act, openly, and fearlessly, and directly, upon every question which may come before the Senate. He did not shun, but courted, publicity. Neither his political friends nor himself had any thing to conceal. He had never been consulted in respect to the existing rule. He should now vote for the amendment proposed by the Senator from Delaware, [Mr. CLAYTON.] He was willing that the upper gallery should be thrown open to all visiters who might think proper to attend. Although our convenience might be sacrificed by again crowding the lobby behind the seats of the members, he could endure this inconvenience as well as any other Senator. On this subject he would go as far as he who should go farthest. Let all the American people who can be accommodated be received into this chamber.

Mr. CALHOUN remarked that he was much gratified at what had been said by the Senator from Pennsylvania, and hoped that every gentleman on the same side would concur with him. It was not for him or that gentleman to decide which of them were on the side of liberty in the contest between liberty and power-that must be left to time and to posterity for a fair decision. He was not called on then to show the many arbitrary acts of the present administration; but, on a proper occasion, he would be ready to go into the subject. He did hope that this session would show that the gentleman from Pennsylvania, and those with whom he acted, were not the advocates of power. He did hope that when that great measure, the expunging resolutions, came up, it would be seen that those gentlemen will be found on the side of liberty in its contest with power.

Mr. BUCHANAN said the Senator from South Carolina had acted very wisely in referring the great questions now before this body and the country to time and to posterity. If he had submitted them to the people of the present generation, they are already decided against him,

In relation to his future course, Mr. B. said he would wait for the proper occasions to present themselves, and should express his opinions on subjects as they came before the Senate. "Sufficient for the day is the evil thereof." He had no hesitation, however, in now declaring his opinion upon the expunging resolution, as the Senator had introduced it into this debate. On that question he should be found in direct opposition to the gentleman.

The question was here taken on Mr. TALLMADGE'S motion, and it was lost: Yeas 6, nays 34, as follows: YEAS-Messrs. Prentiss, Shepley, Swift, Tallmadge, Tipton, Wright-6.

NAYS-Messrs. Benton, Black, Brown, Buchanan, Calhoun, Clayton, Crittenden, Davis, Ewing, Goldsborough, Grundy, Hill, Hubbard, Kent, King of Alabama, King of Georgia, Knight, Leigh, Linn, McKean, Mangum, Moore, Morris, Niles, Porter, Preston, Robbins, Robinson, Tomlinson, Tyler, Wall, Webster, White-34.

The question then being on Mr. CLAYTON's amendment,

Mr. NILES moved to divide it so as to take the question first on the first clause, as to opening the galleries. Mr. BENTON suggested that this division was not sufficiently explicit. To say "open the galleries," implied that they were closed; whereas one was already entirely open, and the other open to gentlemen accompanied by ladies. The division ought to be more explicit, otherwise those who voted against the first clause might seem to vote against admitting spectators.

Mr. NILES then moved to amend the resolution by inserting the word "circular," so as to apply the amendment to the opening of the circular gallery; which modification being accepted by Mr. CLAYTON, the division of the question was ordered, and it was accordingly taken on the first clause of the amendment, and decided in the affirmative: Yeas 35, nays 7, as follows:

YEAS-Messrs. Black, Brown, Buchanan, Calhoun, Clayton, Crittenden, Davis, Ewing, Goldsborough, Grundy, Hill, Hubbard, Kent, King of Alabama, King of Georgia, Knight, Leigh, Linn, McKean, Mangum, Moore, Morris, Niles, Prentiss, Preston, Robbins, Robinson, Shepley, Southard, Swift, Tomlinson, Tyler, Wall, Webster, White-35.

NAYS-Messrs. Benton, Hendricks, Porter, Ruggles, Tallmadge, Tipton, Wright-7.

The question was next taken on the second clause of the amendment, allowing each Senator to admit number of spectators into the lobby, and decided in the negative: Yeas 18, nays 24, as follows:

YEAS-Messrs. Black, Brown, Buchanan, Calhoun, Clayton, Crittenden, Davis, Ewing, Goldsborough, Leigh, Mangum, Preston, Robbins, Robinson, Tomlinson, Tyler, Wall, Webster--18.

NAYS--Messrs. Benton, Grundy, Hendricks, Hill, Hubbard, Kent, King of Alabama, King of Georgia, Knight, Linn, McKean, Moore, Morris, Niles, Porter, Prentiss, Ruggles, Shepley, Southard, Swift, Tallmadge, Tipton, White, Wright--24.

The question being on the resolution, as amended, Mr. BENTON asked the Secretary to read the resolution of the present session, by which the old rule was changed, and it was accordingly read.

Mr. BENTON remarked that he only wished to make sure of the words of the resolution, as it applied to the circular gallery, and he now held that gallery to be open, and that all that had been said in relation to it had been misapplied. He did not wish to give a vote which was to be understood, there or elsewhere, as intending to shut up either of the galleries; nor did he wish to give any vote admitting, what every body knew to be untrue, that the galleries were closed. He wished in the most emphatic manner to declare that the circular gallery, instead of being closed, was open to every gentleman who could get a lady to accompany him; and by lady he meant each respectable female in the United States. It might be that some few strangers here would not be sufficiently acquainted in Washington to get ladies to accompany them; those few, he thought, could always be accommodated in the small gallery; but the great mass could easily find female acquaintances, and if they

[JAN. 7, 1836.

did not take the trouble to wait on a lady, they might encounter the inconvenience (if any) of the smaller gallery. The point, however, he wished to bring out, was, that his friend from Louisiana, [Mr. PORTER,] who had introduced the resolution now in force, who had been put forward by the general understanding of the inconveniences of the old rule, and who had since been abandoned by so many, never contemplated by his resolution to shut the galleries against the public. He wished to give that gentleman his support, by assisting him in bearing the brunt in defence of a resolution which was introduced and adopted by general consent of the Senate.

There was one gallery [pointing to the small one] open to every body, and there was the other [pointing to the circular gallery] equally open to all, save those whose limited acquaintance with females prevented them from being accompanied by a lady. Certain he was that there were more who could get ladies willing to accompany them, by hundreds upon hundreds, than the gallery would hold. Were they, then, under these circumstances, to vote so as to admit the fact that the galleries were closed. Were they on an occasion like that to call for testimony. If they did, the doorkeeper would tell them that once already this session hundreds had to go away from that very gallery, because it was already crowded almost to suffocation. He had made these few observations, because he wished to avoid, if possible, the imputation that this gallery had been shut up by the resolution of his friend from Louisiana, [Mr. PORTER;] and he should go with that gentleman in support of the rule as it stood.

Mr. CLAYTON did not consider the adoption of the resolution, or the amendment he had offered, as any attempt at censuring the committee by whom the resolution now in force was proposed for adoption. He had adopted the rule as a matter of experiment, but it had failed. He had observed the gallery into which gentlemen were admitted crowded, while the circular gallery had been occasionally vacant. True, the circular gallery was not directly, but it was virtually, shut against any gentleman, who had come even five hundred miles, who had not a lady under his charge.

The question was then taken on the resolution as amended, and it was adopted: Yeas 31, nays 11, as follows:

YEAS-Messrs. Black, Brown, Buchanan, Calhoun, Clayton, Crittenden, Davis, Ewing, Goldsborough, Hubbard, Kent, King of Alabama, King of Georgia, Knight, Leigh, McKean, Mangum, Moore, Morris, Niles, Prentiss, Preston, Robbins, Robinson, Shepley, Swift, Tomlinson, Tyler, Wall, Webster, White―31.

NAYS--Messrs. Benton, Grundy, Hendricks, Hill, Linn, Porter, Ruggles, Southard, Tallmadge, Tipton, Wright--11.

The resolution was thereupon adopted in the following form:

"Resolved, That the circular gallery of the Senate be opened for the admission of spectators." On motion of Mr. HENDRICKS, The Senate adjourned.

THURSDAY, JANUARY 7.

SLAVERY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

Mr. MORRIS presented two petitions from Ohio, praying for the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia.

Mr. CALHOUN demanded that the petitions should be read.

The Secretary having read the petitions,

Mr. CALHOUN demanded the question on receiving them; which was a preliminary question, which any