Before a question was taken on the motion to strike out the section, Mr. JACKSON moved that the committee should rise. If they rose he would oppose their having leave to sit again, with the intention of referring the bill to the Committee of Commerce and Manufactures.

Leave having been refused to them to sit again, Mr. J. RANDOLPH moved that a committee be appointed to inquire whether any, and what, further additions may be necessary to the Naval Establishment of the United States,

Abridgement of the Debates of Congress, from 1789 to 1856, Vol. 3 (of 16) — Part 171

Mr. ALSTON moved to amend the motion by striking out “a committee be appointed,” and inserting “the Committee of Commerce and Manufactures be instructed.” Messrs. ALSTON, NICHOLSON, and EUSTIS supported, and Mr. J. RANDOLPH opposed this amendment. Carried--yeas 51, nays 46.

Abridgement of the Debates of Congress, from 1789 to 1856, Vol. 3 (of 16) — Part 171

The motion thus amended was supported by Messrs. HUGER and ELMER, and opposed by Messrs. VARNUM and SMILIE. Carried--yeas 57, nays 44.

Abridgement of the Debates of Congress, from 1789 to 1856, Vol. 3 (of 16) — Part 171

Mr. JACKSON then moved the reference of the bill to the Committee of Commerce and Manufactures. Agreed to without a division.

Mr. J. RANDOLPH said, that no people were more fully impressed with the importance of preserving unpolluted the fountain of justice than the citizens of these States. With this view the Constitution of the United States, and of many of the States also, had rendered the magistrates who decided judicially between the State and its offending citizens, and between man and man, more independent than those of any other country in the world, in the hope that every inducement whether of intimidation or seduction which could cause them to swerve from the duty assigned to them might be removed. But such was the frailty of human nature that there was no precaution by which our integrity and honor could be preserved, in case we were deficient in that duty which we owed to ourselves. In consequence, sir, of this unfortunate condition of man, we have been obliged, but yesterday, to prefer an accusation against a judge of the United States who has been found wanting in his duty to himself and his country. At the last session of Congress a gentleman from Pennsylvania did, in his place, (on the bill to amend the Judicial system of the United States,) state certain facts in relation to the official conduct of an eminent judicial character, which I then thought, and still think, the House bound to notice. But the lateness of the session (for we had, if I mistake not, scarce a fortnight remaining) precluding all possibility of bringing the subject to any efficient result, I did not then think proper to take any steps in the business. Finding my attention, however, thus drawn to a consideration of the character of the officer in question, I made it my business, considering it my duty, as well to myself as to those whom I represent, to investigate the charges then made, and the official character of the judge, in general. The result having convinced me that there exists ground of impeachment against this officer, I demand an inquiry into his conduct, and therefore submit to the House the following resolution: