"Whether the great interests of agriculture, manufactures, commerce, or navigation, can, within the pale of your constitutional powers, be aided in any of their relations; whether laws are provided in all cases where they are wanting; whether those provided are exactly what they should be; whether any abuses take place in their administration, or in that of the public revenues; whether the organization of the public agents or of the public force is perfect in all its parts; in fine, whether anything can be done to advance the general good, are questions within the limits of your functions which will necessary occupy your attention. In these and other matters which you in your wisdom may propose for the good of our country, you inay count with assurance on my hearty coöperation and faithful execution."

Several changes had taken place in the Senate since the preceding session. From Virginia, William B. Giles, now improved in his health, took the place of Venable, resigned; and Andrew Moore of the same State, that of Nicholas, resigned. From Delaware, James A. Bayard succeeded Wells, resigned. From New York, Dr. S. L. Mitchell succeeded Armstrong, whose seat had been vacated by his appointment to the French mission.' Benjamin Howland, of Rhode Island, succeeded Potter, deceased. These personal changes involved no political ones.

The great event of the session was the trial of Samuel Chase, one of the associate Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States, impeached by the House of Representatives before the Senate. The articles of impeachment charged Chase with arbitrary, oppressive, unjust, and intemperate conduct on various occasions.

The managers chosen by the House were J. Randolph, Rodney, Nicholson, Early, Boyle, Nelson, and G. W. Campbell. On Nelson's declining, Clarke was chosen in his place. The counsel for Judge Chase were Harper, Martin, Hopkinson, and Key; and Charles Lee was subsequently added. The respondent asked a delay until the next session. This was refused, on the ground that he had already had ample time for preparation; but a delay of a month was granted.

Arbitrary, indecorous, and unquestionably illegal conductconduct that now would be no more likely to be ventured upon or tolerated in the same office in the United States than the reënactment of the Alien and Sedition laws by Congress—was clearly proved upon this openly and officially partisan judge. But on the question addressed to each senator, "is the respondent guilty or not guilty, of a high crime or misdemeanor as charged in

In place of his brother-in-law, R. R. Livingston, resigned.

article of impeachment?-the constitutional majority of two-thirds in no case voted for his conviction. A majority, however, in several instances so voted. For example, on article fourth, charging that the conduct of the respondent in Callender's case "was marked during the whole course of the said trial, by manifest injustice, partiality and intemperance," in refusing a postponement, "in the use of unusual, rude, and contemptuous expressions towards the prisoner's counsel," "in repeated and vexatious interruptions," and in "an indecent solicitude "for the conviction of the accused, the number who pronounced guilty were eighteen-not guilty, sixteen and on article eighth, charging that at the Circuit Court at Baltimore, May, 1803, the respondent in his charge to the grand jury delivered "an intemperate and inflammatory political harangue," exhibited conduct "indecent and unbecoming a judge of the United States," made an unwarrantable interference with the legislature of a State, etc., the number who pronounced guilty were nineteen-not guilty, fifteen.

There was not, it is probable, a senator (beyond possibly two or three political monomaniacs) who doubted either the impropriety or the illegality of Judge Chase's conduct; but whether he had committed a high crime, deserving not only deprivation of office, but the attending lasting disgrace, was a question which admitted of a greater diversity of honest judgment. The feeling of conservatism, the consciousness of the deep danger of interfering with the independence of the national judiciary, and especially of having its tenures made the sport of partisan majorities in Congress-a subject to which recent incidents in some of the States were calling much attention '-interfered most powerfully to save him.

And another consideration plead still more strongly for him. The grey-haired old man who sat awaiting his doom had been a member of the Congress of 1776. He had been among the foremost of those who had offered their necks to the cord and their property to the flames for their country. His signature was attached at the head of the delegation of his State to the Declaration of Independence. Few doubted that the fiery and characteristic vehemence he had manifested in hunting down

The Republicans of Pennsylvania had nearly or quite all the Federal judges of the Supreme Court of that State on trial for impeachment.

and persecuting from city to city the advocates of democracy, was as sincere as that which urged him undaunted against the power of Britain. And some other incidental circumstances befriended him.' But his acquittal produced deep temporary

irritation. John Randolph, the same day, moved to submit to the State Legislatures an amendment of the Constitution to the following effect:

"The judges of the Supreme Court, and of all other courts of the United States, shall be removed by the President on the joint address of both Houses of Congress requesting the same, anything in the Constitution of the United States to the contrary notwithstanding."

This was referred to the consideration of a committee of the whole House-yeas, sixty-eight; nays, thirty-three. It was then made the order of the day for the first Monday in December ensuing.'

Nicholson offered another constitutional amendment:

"That the Legislature of any State may, when the said Legislature shall think proper, recall, at any period whatever, any senator of the United States who may have been elected by them; and whenever a vote of the Legislature of any State, vacating the seat of any senator of the United States, who may have been elected by the said State, shall be made known to the Senate of the United States, the seat of such senator shall thenceforth be vacated."

This was referred to a committee of the whole House by a vote of fifty-three to forty-six, and then was made the order of the day for the first Monday in December, by a vote of seventy to twenty-eight. The divisions of the House on this and on Randolph's proposition must undoubtedly be understood as showing that a large majority of that body were disposed, at the moment, to pointedly condemn the Senate's action

One of the first proceedings of Congress, this session, was to pass a joint resolution bestowing a sword on Captain Stephen Decatur, and on each of the officers and crew of the ketch Intrepid" two months' pay, as a testimonial to their gallantry

1 In our judgment, the articles of impeachment were not skillfully drawn to procure a conviction. They showed more of John Randolph's spirit and tone (he took the lead in the whole affair) than those of a wary, discreet, experienced prosecutor. Mr. Randolph, too, took a very leading part on the trial. He evinced singular abilities perhaps for a lay man. But, it is not denied that he was overmatched by the professional skill of the defence; and his colleagues could not act very independently for themselves under his dictatorial and irascible leadership.

2 Congress had but two more days to sit.

in attacking and destroying, in the harbor of Tripoli, a Tripolitan frigate of forty-four guns. This was the former "Philadelphia," lying filled with men under the guns of that city, and almost surrounded by other armed Moorish vessels. Her destruction (February 14th, 1804), by the crew of a vessel of three or four hundred tons, the manner in which it was accomplished, and the escape of Decatur and his men from the conflagration and the tempest of shot which that conflagration directed upon the assailants, reads more like a narrative of romance than a sober incident of reality.

The President's recommendation of the extension of the gunboat system for the defence of our harbors and seaport towns,'

1 His scheme was more fully developed and his general reasons for it given in answer to inquiries from Nicholson, chairman of the committee to whom the subject was referred in the House of Representatives. This letter demands the perusal of those who would fairly understand the celebrated gunboat project which has drawn so many sneers on the head of its proposer:

"DEAR SIR:

"WASHINGTON, Dec. 14, 1805.

"Mr. Eppes has this moment put into my hands your letter of yesterday, asking information on the subject of the gunboats proposed to be built. I lose no time in communicating to you fully my whole views respecting them, premising a few words on the system of fortifications. Considering the harbors which, from their situation and importance, are entitled to defence, and the estimates we have seen of the fortifications planned for some of them, this system cannot be completed on a moderate scale for less than fifty millions of dollars, nor manned, in time of war, with less than fifty thousand men, and in peace, two thousand. And when done they avail little; because all military men agree, that wherever a vessel may pass a fort without tacking under her guns, which is the case in all our seaport towns, she may be annoyed more or less, according to the advantages of the position, but can never be prevented. Our own experience during the war proved this on different occasions. Our predecessors have, nevertheless, proposed to go into this system, and had commenced it. But no law requiring us to proceed, we have suspended it.

If we cannot hinder vessels from entering our harbors, we should turn our attention to putting it out of their power to lie, or come to, before a town, to injure it. Two means of doing this may be adopted in aid of each other. i. Heavy cannon on travelling carriages, which may be moved to any point on the bank or beach most convenient for dislodging the vessel. A sufficient number of these should be lent to each seaport town, and their militia trained to them. The Executive is authorized to do this; it has been done in a smaller degree, and will now be done more competently.

"2. Having cannon on floating batteries or boats, which may be so stationed as to prevent a vessel entering the harbor, or force her after entering to depart. There are about fifteen harbors in the United States which ought to be in a state of substantial defence. The whole of these would require, according to the best opinions, two hundred and forty gunboats. Their cost was estimated by Captain Rogers at two thousand dollars each; But we had better say four thousand dollars. The whole would cost one million of dollars. But we should allow ourselves ten years to complete it, unless circumstances shorld force it sooner. There are three situations in which the gunboat may be. 1. Hauled up under a shed, in readiness to be launched and manned by the seamen and militia of the town on short notice. In this situation she costs nothing but an inclosure, or a sentinel to see that no mischief is done to her. 2. Afloat, and with men enough to navigate her in harbor, and take care of her, but depending on receiving her crew from the town on short warning. In this situation, her annual expense is about two thousand dollars, as by an official estimate at the end of this letter. 3. Fully manned for action. Her annual expense in this situation is about eight thousand dollars, as per estimate subjoined. When there is general peace, we should probably keep about six or seven afloat in the second situation; their annual expense twelve to fourteen thousand dollars; the led up. When France and England are at war, we should keep, at the utmost,

encountered a great amount of invective and ridicule; and many of the officers of the navy joined heartily in this feeling. An English view of navy life then prevailed extensively in our country. Our eye rests on a published letter of Colonel Burr to Charles Biddle (July 20th, 1803), wherein, speaking of the two young Biddles' going the day before on board the frigate President, he said: "The more I reflect on the destination of these young men, the more I am pleased with it; and if I had but one son, I think I should place him in the navy. If the object be ambition, our navy presents the best prospect of honor and advancement. A young man of merit may be sure of rapid promotion and opportunities of distinction. If the pursuit be wealth, still the navy offers the fairest and most honorable means of acquiring it."

This reflects the public sentiment of the day. The President's plan, so far as it extended, would overturn this whole system at once-shut up these convenient avenues to fame and wealth for the sons of influential families-and for the quarterdeck, the high command, the fierce conflict of great squadrons, the prize-money where whole convoys of merchantmen were swooped up by the victor, the pomp of armadas sweeping over the ocean to wage and provoke wars, substitute a mere defensive system, carried on in boats of one or two guns, temporarily manned in part by a sort of marine militia, and when out of service, hauled up high and dry, like a farmer's cart"under a shed." A change like this would not be expected to be relished by the officers, or by persons anxious to obtain commissions. Mr. Cooper, indeed, we believe, says that the gunboats were popular, at least for a time, among the younger officers. But it is probable this was rather among the class of young men, who expected nothing but as the reward of hard work and

twenty-five in the second situation, their annual expense fifty thousand dollars. When we should be at war ourselves, some of them would probably be kept in the third situation, at an annual expense of eight thousand dollars; but how many, must depend on the circumstances of the war. We now possess ten, built and building. It is the opinion of those consulted, that fifteen more would enable us to put every harbor under our view into a respectable condition; and that this should limit the views of the present year. This would require that an appropriation of sixty thousand dollars, and I suppose that the best way of limiting it, without declaring the number, as perhaps that sum would build more. I should think it best not to give a detailed report, which exposes our policy too much. A bill, with verbal explanations, will suffice for the information of the House. I do not know whether General Wilkinson would approve the printing his paper. If he would, it would be useful.

"Accept affectionate and respectful salutations.

"TH. JEFFERSON."