[Page]
[Page]

PROCEEDINGS OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE UNITED STATES, IN THE CASE OF Robert Randall and Charles Whitney.

PUBLISHED BY ORDER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

[Page]

PROCEEDINGS, &c.

INFORMATION being given to the House, by the following members in their places, to wit; Mr. Smith, of South-Carolina, Mr. Murray, of Maryland, and Mr. Giles, of Virginia, that a person of the name of Robert Randall, had made, or communicated to them, respec­tively, certain overtures to obtain their several support in this House, to a memorial intended to be presented by the said Robert Randall, on behalf of himself and others, for the grant of a tract of land, containing eighteen or twenty millions of acres, bordering on lakes Erie, Mi­chigan and Huron, and lying within the limits of the United States; for which support, the said members, respectively, were promised to receive of the said Robert Randall and his associates, a consideration or emolument in lands or money: and this House regarding the said information as sufficient evidence of a contempt to, and breach of the privileges of this House, in an unwarrant­able attempt to corrupt the integrity of its members:

Resolved, That Mr. Speaker do issue his warrant directed to the Serjeant-at-arms attending this House, commanding him to take into custody, wherever to be found, the body of the said Robert Randall, and the same in his custody to keep, subject to the farther order and direction of the House.

A warrant, pursuant to the said resolution, was ac­cordingly prepared, signed by Mr. Speaker under his seal, attested by the Clerk, and delivered to the Serjeant, with order forthwith to execute the same, and make due return thereof to the House.

[Page 4] Information being also given to the House, by Mr. Buck, one of the members from Vermont, of an appli­cation to him by a person of the name of Charles Whit­ney, by which there is good reason to believe, that the said Whitney is a partner and associate of the before named Randall, and equally concerned in the business and overtures of the said Randall; a similar warrant was ordered, signed, and delivered to the Serjeant, as afore­said, for taking into his custody, the body of the said Charles Whitney, subject in like manner to the further order and direction of the House.

The Serjeant-at-arms having returned, on the war­rants issued to him yesterday, that he had executed the same on the bodies of Robert Randall and Charles Whit­ney, the persons therein named, and that he now held them in his custody, subject to the further order and di­rection of the House: It was, on motion,

Resolved, That a Committee of Privileges, to consist of seven members, be appointed, and that the said com­mittee be instructed to report a mode of proceeding in the case of Robert Randall and Charles Whitney, who were taken into custody yesterday, by order of the House, and that the said committee have leave to sit immedi­ately.

Ordered, That Mr. Baldwin, Mr. William Smith, Mr. Giles. Mr. Murray, Mr. Livingston, Mr. Coit and Mr. Goodhue, be appointed a committee, pursuant to the said resolution.

Mr. Baldwin, from the Committee of Privileges, to whom it was referred to report a mode of proceeding in the case of Robert Randall and Charles Whitney, made a report, which was read, considered, and agreed to by the House, as followeth:

Resolved, That the said Robert Randall and Charles Whitney, be brought to the bar of the House, and in­terrogated by the Speaker, touching the information given against them, on written interrogatories, which, [Page 5] with the answers thereto, shall be entered on the minutes of the House. And that every question proposed by a member, be reduced to writing, and a motion made, that the same may be put by the Speaker. That after such interrogatories are answered, if the House deem it necessary to make any further enquiry on the subject, the same be conducted by a committee to be appointed for that purpose.

The said Robert Randall was accordingly brought to the bar of the House, in custody of the Serjeant; and the charge against him, as stated in the journal of yes­terday, being read, he was interrogated, by Mr. Speaker, "whether he did admit, or deny the truth of the said charge?" to which interrogatory he answered, that he was not prepared to admit or deny the same; but re­quested that time might be allowed him to make answer, and offer a vindication of his conduct, until the day af­ter to-morrow: Whereupon,

It was ordered, that the said Robert Randall, do now withdraw in custody, until the House shall presently de­cide on his request.

The said Robert Randall accordingly withdrew, in custody, and after debate,

It was resolved by the House, that time be allowed him, until to-morrow, twelve o'clock, to make answer, in conformity to his request.

Resolved also, That it be an addition to the charge a­gainst the said Robert Randall, "that he informed a member of this House, that a number of the members of this House, not less than thirty, had engaged, or were engaged to support his memorial and application; or words to that effect."

The said Robert Randall was then returned to the bar, in custody, and notified by Mr. Speaker, of the in­dulgence, and further proceeding of the House respect­ing him: after which,

It was ordered, that the said Robert Randall be de­tained in custody of the Serjeant, and brought up again to the bar of the House, to-morrow, at twelve o'clock.

[Page 6] Charles Whitney, the other person named in the warrant of Mr. Speaker, was then brought to the bar, in custody of the Serjeant, and the charge against him, as stated in the journal of the proceeding of yesterday, being read, the following interrogatories were propound­ded to him, by Mr. Speaker; to which he gave the re­spective answers thereto subjoined—

Question. What is your name?

Answer. Charles Whitney.

Question. Where do you reside?

Answer. In the state of Vermont.

Question. What is your occupation?

Answer. I am a farmer.

Question. When did you come to this city?

Answer. About the first of this month.

Question. Where is your usual abode whilst in this city?

Answer. At the green-tree tavern, in Fourth-street.

Question. Are you, or are you not guilty of the charge which has been read to you, of being a partner and as­sociate of Robert Randall, and equally concerned in the business and overtures of the said Randall?

Answer. I am not guilty: I am equally concerned with Mr. Randall in the present land business, but am ignorant of any improper motives, or improper conduct of the said Randall therein; and can only answer for myself.

Question. Are any other persons associated with Mr. Randall and yourself, in this business, and what appro­priations or disposition of the said lands did you design to make?

Answer. Colonel Pepune, and Mr. Jones, of Massa­chusetts, and colonel Ebenezer Allen, of Vermont, a­greed to associate with us in this business; and it was our intention to divide it into forty one shares, and as­sociate with us such other influential characters as we could engage, in order to divide with us the great ex­pense, and trouble of the undertaking.

Question. Are any persons within the British lines as­sociated with you in this business?

[Page 7] Answer. Yes.—Mr. Askins senior, Mr. Askins ju­nior, Mr. Robinson, Mr. Innis, a Mr. Pattenson, mer­chants and traders residing at Detroit, and its vicinity, are concerned with us.

Question. Are any of the persons you have named at Detroit, as concerned with you, in civil or military com­mission under the British government?

Answer. Yes.—Mr. Askins the elder, is said to be in civil commission, as a judge.

Question. Have you any instrument of association between yourself and partners?

Answer. I have: it is signed by the persons last nam­ed, and is I believe now at my lodgings.

Question. Have you any objections to produce the said instrument?

Answer. I don't know that I have; but being with­out counsel I wish for time to reflect upon it.

Question. Are you acquainted with a person of the name of John Gove, and did you make application to him to become an associate with you?

Answer. I am acquainted with Mr. Gove, and did apply to him, to become an associate; to which I un­derstood him to have agreed.

Question. Where does Mr. Gove lodge?

Answer. At the green-tree tavern, in Fourth-street.

Question. Was Mr. Gove authorized by you, to ap­ply to any members of Congress in favor of your propo­sal?

Answer. I did mention to Mr. Gove, that he might apply to the members in favor of our proposal.

Question. Were there any shares of the said land to be left open or unappropriated, between you and your associates?

Answer. There were shares left open to be filled at my pleasure.

Question. Did you make any, and what application to Mr. Buck, one of the members of this House, from the state of Vermont, to support your application?

[Page 8] Answer. I did apply to Mr. Buck, at his house in Vermont, and represented to him, generally, the nature and advantages of our plan; but I made no proposal to him of benefit or advantage to himself, or of other improper inducement.

Mr. Buck then informed the House, that the said Charles Whitney had made overtures to him in Ver­mont, offering a share in land, or an equivalent in mo­ney; or words to that effect: Whereupon,

It was moved and seconded, that the said Charles Whitney do now withdraw in custody, and that all further proceedings respecting him be adjourned, until to-morrow, twelve o'clock.

And, on a question taken, the same was ordered ac­cordingly; with an instruction to the Serjeant, to keep him separate and apart from Robert Randall.

A petition of Robert Randall, in custody of the Ser­jeant-at-arms, was presented to the House and read, praying that he may be indulged with the assistance of counsel, and a reasonable time to prepare for his de­fence, on the charges now depending against him be­fore the House: Whereupon,

It was resolved, that the prayer of the said petition be granted.

The said Robert Randall was then brought to the bar, in custody of the Serjeant, and it being demanded of him by Mr. Speaker, "what further time he re­quired to prepare for his defence?" he answered until Friday next.

Resolved, That further time be allowed the said Robert Randall, until Friday next, to prepare for his defence; and that in the mean time, he be remanded in custody of the Serjeant, until further order.

The Speaker laid before the House, an instrument of writing, purporting to be, "articles of agreement en­tered into and concluded at Detroit, the twenty-sixth day of September, in the year of our Lord, one thou­sand [Page 9] seven hundred and ninety-five, for the purpose of obtaining the pre-emption right from the United States of America, and extinguishing the right of the native Indians to a certain territory therein defined, contain­ing by computation, eighteen or twenty millions of acres, and lying on lakes Erie, Huron and Michigan, between Ebenezer Allen and Charles Whitney, of the state of Vermont, and Robert Randall of the city of Philadelphia, on the one part; and John Askin, Jona­than Scheiffelin, William Robertson, John Askin, ju­nior, David Robertson, Robert Innes and Richard Pattenson, all of Detroit, of the other part;" which in­strument of writing had been given up by Charles Whitney to the Serjeant-at-arms, and by the Serjeant delivered to the Speaker.

The said instrument of writing was read, and ordered to lie on the table.

Charles Whitney was then brought to the bar, in custody of the Serjeant, and the further information against him, by Mr. Buck, one of the members from Vermont, as stated in the journal of the proceedings of yesterday, being read to him, he was interrogated by Mr. Speaker, "whether he did admit or deny the same?"—To which he answered, that he did wholly deny the same: Whereupon,

It was ordered, that he be remanded to the custody of the Serjeant, until further order of the House: and On motion,

It was resolved, that the Committee of Privileges be instructed to consider and report to this House, the pro­per mode of conducting the further enquiry, and the trial in the case of Robert Randall and Charles Whit­ney.

The Speaker laid before the House, a letter from Robert Randall, in custody of the Serjeant, "stating, that the engagements of the gentlemen of the bar of this city, will prevent them from assisting him as counsel, [Page 10] until Saturday evening; and praying a farther postpone­ment of the proceedings respecting him, until the earliest part of next week," which was read: Whereupon,

Ordered, That further time be allowed the said Robert Randall, until Monday next, in conformity to his re­quest.

Mr. Baldwin, from the Committee of Privileges, to whom it was referred to consider and report on the proper mode of conducting the further enquiry, and the trial in the case of Robert Randall and Charles Whitney, made a report, which was read, and debate arising thereon,

An adjournment was called for.

The House resumed the consideration of the report from the Committee of Privileges, to whom it was refer­red to consider and report the proper mode of conduct­ing the further enquiry, and the trial in the case of Robert Randall and Charles Whitney; and the said report being again read, and amended at the Clerk's table, was, on the question put thereupon, agreed to by the House, as followeth:

That the proper mode of conducting the further en­quiry, and the trial in the case of Robert Randall and Charles Whitney, will be, to proceed, first, with a fur­ther hearing of Robert Randall, at the bar of the House.

That the information that has been given against the said Robert Randall and Charles Whitney, be reduced to writing, and signed by the informants themselves, respectively, and entered at large on the journal. That the said information be read to the prisoners, and that they be called upon by the Speaker, to declare what they have to say, in their defence.

That if the said prisoners shall offer any parole evi­dence, in their exculpation, the same shall be heard, at the bar of the House; excepting the members of the House, who may give their testimony on oath in their places; and no question shall be put to any member, [Page 11] on the part of the prisoner, by way of cross examina­tion, except leave be first given by the House, and every such question shall be put by the Speaker: and that the judge of the district of Pennsylvania be re­quested to attend, for the purpose of administering an oath or affirmation, to all witnesses. That all questions, on the part of the House, to be asked of the said wit­nesses, shall be put by the Speaker.

That, on every debate, the prisoners and their coun­sel shall be directed to withdraw; and that, when they shall have concluded their defence, and are withdrawn, the sense of the House shall be taken, on the guilt or in­nocence of the prisoners, respectively.

Pursuant to the proceedings of the House on Friday last, Mr. Smith of South-Carolina, Mr. Murray of Ma­ryland, Mr. Giles of Virginia, and Mr. Buck of Ver­mont, delivered in at the Clerk's table, their several in­formations, in writing, subscribed with their names, re­spectively, in the case of Robert Randall and Charles Whitney; which are as follow:

William Smith, one of the representatives of the state of South-Carolina, in the Congress of the United States, declares—

That on Tuesday last, the twenty-second instant, a per­son who called himself Randall, and who is said to be from the state of Maryland, applied to him at his lodgings, in the city of Philadelphia, and requested a private and confidential conversation of an hour, which the informant agreed to; and at the time appointed, which was the same evening, the said Randall being alone with the informant, communicated to him a pro­posal for procuring from the legislature of the United States, a grant of about eighteen or twenty millions of acres, in the north western territory, between lakes Mi­chigan, Huron and Erie. That the said Randall observ­ed, that the grant he proposed, would be of great service to the United States, from the persons who would be in­terested [Page 12] therein, (to wit; certain Canada merchants, at or near Detroit, whose names he did not mention) having great influence over the Indians, who were not pacified by the late treaty concluded with general Wayne; and that the said persons would extinguish the Indian claims, at their own expense; and after setting forth the saving of expense, by the cessation of the Indian war, and other reasons to induce a belief that the proposed grant would be of public utility, he proceeded to inform the informant, that the intention was to divide the land into about forty shares, twenty-four of which would be allowed to, or distributed among such persons (mean­ing, as this informant understood him, from the whole purport of his conversation, members of Congress) as would favor the measure: that of these twenty-four shares, he had the management or distribution of twelve, for the southern part, (meaning, as the informant un­derstood, the southern members of Congress) and ano­ther person, whose name he did not mention, had the disposition of the other twelve, for the eastern part, (still, as the informant understood, and believes, meaning as aforesaid.) That he, the said Randall, proposed subdi­viding the said shares into so many portions, as to have a sufficiency to obtain a majority (meaning, as the in­formant understood him, a majority of Congress) and that gentlemen, after the session was over, or when they returned to private life, might then have such parts of shares, as the said twenty-four shares would be re­served for such of them as would favor the business, on the same terms as the original associators. That the view of him, the said Randall, and of those concerned with him, was to present a memorial, on the following Mon­day, to Congress, to obtain the said grant for a small price, mentioning half a million of dollars; and that he supposed the land was worth more than two shillings an acre. On taking leave, he pressed the informant for an early and decisive answer to the foregoing propo­sals; to which the informant replied, that he would not wish to see him again before Friday morning, and [Page 13] requested him to call on him at Congress, and not at his lodgings; but the House did not sit on Friday, and the informant has not seen him since. The informant fur­ther says, that the foregoing is the substance and pur­port of the communication to him made by the said Randall, on the subject above set forth; and that the im­pression clearly made on the mind of the informant, by the overtures, was, that under a pretext of public uti­lity, the object of the application was, to secure the in­formant's influence, as a member of Congress, by a temptation of great personal advantage. That the in­formant, the next morning, communicated the sub­stance of the foregoing to Mr. Murray, one of the mem­bers from Maryland, and consulted him on the most proper mode of proceeding on so delicate an occasion; that Mr. Murray advised a consultation with Mr. Hen­ry, of the Senate; and that, in consequence of such con­sultation with Mr. Murray and Mr. Henry, on the fol­lowing day (Thursday) it was resolved, that the in­formant should immediately communicate the whole transaction to the President of the United States; which he accordingly did.

(Signed) WILLIAM SMITH.

Mr. Murray declares, that on Wednesday last, the twenty-third instant, Mr. Smith, member of Congress, of South-Carolina, informed him, that a man of the name of Randall, of Maryland, had the evening before attempted to bribe him in western lands, on condition of his supporting an application, which Randall told him he should soon make to Congress; the object of which application was, a grant from Congress, of from eighteen to twenty millions of acres of land, between Erie, Hu­ron and Michigan. That Mr. Smith was extremely so­licitous, that some other gentleman should immediately be informed of the infamous proposal, and that he said he would mention it to Mr. Henry, of the Senate, and advise with him, upon proper measures for the detecting [Page 14] of the full extent of the scheme, and crushing it.—That he had no opportunity of talking to Mr. Henry, on that day; but early on the morning of the twenty-fourth in­stant, communicated the intelligence to Mr. Henry, who recommended, that Mr. Smith should immediately in­form the President: That on the said day, Mr. Randall of Maryland, was introduced to him, the informant, and requested a confidential interview, at his, the in­formant's lodgings, which the informant readily pro­mised him, to be at five, for the purpose of developing his scheme. That Randall came at or near five, that day last named, to wit; on Thursday, and communi­cated to Mr. Henry and himself, in general terms, the outline of a plan, by which he, Randall and his Cana­da friends, would extinguish the Indian title to all the lands between lakes Erie, Huron and Michigan, as mark­ed on a map which Randall then shewed, containing from eighteen to twenty millions of acres. That he, the informant, then asked Randall into his apartment, where they were alone. That Randall expatiated at first upon the public utility of his scheme, which was, that Congress should grant to him, and his company, all the land afore­said mentioned, for five hundred thousand, or at most, one million of dollars; and that he would undertake, in four months, that the harmony of the Indians should be secured to the union; or if Congress thought proper, that the Indian tribes, now on said land, should be removed to the British side, or down lake Michigan, reserving to some aged chiefs, a few miles square; that his com­pany and himself had determined to divide the lands aforesaid, into forty (or forty-one) shares. That of these shares, twenty-four were to be reserved for the dis­posal of himself and his partner, now in town, for such members of Congress as assisted them, by their abilities and votes, in obtaining the grant aforesaid.—That of these twenty-four shares, his partner had twelve un­der his management, for the eastern members of Con­gress, and that he, Randall, had the other twelve shares under his management, for the southern members of [Page 15] Congress. That these shares were to be so divided as to accomplish the object by securing a majority of Congress. That the informant started an objection to land speculation, as troublesome, and that he, Randall, said, if you (meaning the informant,) do not chuse to accept your share of the land, you shall have cash, in hand, for your share. That the informant appointed Randall to meet him in the lobby of the House, on Monday, the twenty-eighth instant. That Randall told him, a memorial was to be handed in, upon this subject, on said Monday; but refused to inform the informant, what member was to present it. That Randall told him, that he, Randall, mentioned his plan to some members in the general way only—meaning thereby, as he under­stood him, a view of the sounder part of the plan, as being conducive to public utility. That, in the early part of the confidential and secret conversation, Randall said, that the members of Congress, who would behave handsomely, should come into their shares, on the same terms upon which the company obtained the grant; but soon after made proposals, more openly, seductive and corrupt; closing them with the offer of cash in hand, as aforesaid.—That the informant on that evening when Randall went away, told Mr. Henry of the whole of Randall's offers aforesaid; then called on the Secretary of State, and communicated the same to him; and next morning early, informed the President of the transaction.

(Signed) W. V. MURRAY.

William B. Giles, a member of the House of Repre­sentatives, in the Congress of the United States, de­clares—

That in the evening of Thursday, the seventeenth of December, one thousand seven hundred and ninety-five, as well as this informant recollects, a person called upon this informant, at his lodgings, under the name of Robert Randall, with an introductory note from Mr. Gabriel [Page 16] Christie, in the usual form, dated the fifteenth of the same month.

That the said Robert Randall informed this informant, that he had some business of importance to communicate to this informant, which would probably come before Congress: That it respected the fur trade, at present car­ried on by the British traders with the Indians, through the lakes. He observed, that it would be important to change the course of that trade into some channel through the United States.—That he believed he could put Congress upon some plan of effecting that object.—That the plan was of a secret nature.—That he was not then prepared to disclose it, and requested a private interview with this informant, for that purpose, at some other time. Upon which request, this informant appointed the next Satur­day, at twelve o'clock, (being the nineteenth of Decem­ber) to receive the communication.

That about the time appointed, the said Robert Ran­dall called on this informant, and after some general con­versation, informed this informant, that an association had been formed by himself and others, with some of the most influential traders at Detroit, for the purpose of purcha­sing all the lands contained in the peninsula formed by the lakes Erie, Huron and Michigan, and the waters connect­ing those lakes, amounting in the whole to twenty or thir­ty millions of acres, if the consent of Congress could be obtained for the extinguishment of the Indian claims thereto. The said Randall then produced a map of the peninsula and lakes.

That this tract of country was to be divided into shares, and that a number of shares was to be left unappropriated, until the necessary law of Congress should pass, authoriz­ing the extinguishment of the Indian claims; and might then be filled up by those who might think proper to con­cur in the plan, and should give their aid for procuring the passage of such law. Upon this intimation, this in­formant observed, that he hoped the said Randall did not intend to address the information of the unappropriated shares, particularly to this informant.

[Page 17] To which the said Randall replied, that he did not: That he only meant it as general information; but he could see no impropriety in the members of Congress be­ing concerned in the scheme, if the public good was to be promoted by it; and that thirty or forty members were already engaged in its support; or words to that effect.

After some further conversation of a general nature, respecting the present state of the fur trade; the value of the lands contained in the peninsula; and the probable effect of the late treaty upon that trade and country, the said Randall enquired of this informant "whether he deemed his plan advisable, and whether it would meet with the support of this informant, in Congress." To which this informant replied, that if the said Randall should bring his proposals before Congress, this infor­mant would give them the consideration which his duty required, and should give such vote as he deemed right; or words to the same effect. Very shortly after this observation, Mr. Edward Livingston, a member of Con­gress from New-York, entered the room, and the said Randall left it, without further observation, as well as this informant recollects. This informant immediately communicated the contents of this conversation to Mr. Livingston, and declared that he considered the proffer of the unappropriated shares to the members of Con­gress, a direct attempt at corruption.

This informant, on the same day, communicated the substance of the conversation to the Speaker of the House of Representatives of the United States, to Messrs. Blount and Macon of North-Carolina, and to Messrs. Madison and Venable of Virginia. It was deemed ad­visable by all these gentlemen, as well as by this infor­mant, to permit the plan to be brought before Congress in the usual way, by memorial, and to cause a detection, by means of a committee, to whom the said memorial should be referred: and in the mean time, if the said Randall should again call on this informant, he should proceed to make further discovery of the real state and nature of the transaction.

[Page 18] That on the next day, the said Randall did again call on this informant, and informed him, that he, the said Randall, then proposed to disclose his plan more particularly; and after some general remarks upon the public utility, as well as individual benefit of the plan, he said that it was in substance as follows:

The tract of country before described, was to be divided into forty-one shares; five of which were to be reserved to the Indian traders at Detroit; the other thirty-six were to be divided into two departments; eighteen to the eastern, and eighteen to the southern department. That six, out of the eighteen shares, were to be reserved to his eastern partner and associates, and six, out of the remaining eighteen, to himself and his associates. That the remaining twenty-four shares were to be left unappropriated, for the use of such members of Congress as should support the measure. That the names of those members were not to be made known until after the law for the extinguishment of the Indian claims had passed: and then requested this informant to prepare some writing which would compel the osten­sible persons to surrender the unappropriated shares to the real supporters of the measure, after it should be effected. That one million of dollars were spoken of, as the price for the lands; but that he deemed that sum by far too much; and as Congress would have to fix the price, they might make the terms such as to en­sure considerable emoluments to the purchasers. That a majority of the Senate had consented to give the plan their support, and within three of a majority of the House of Representatives. After much further conver­sation on the subject, which this informant thinks unne­cessary to particularize, the said Randall promised to wait again on this informant, at his lodgings, on Tuesday evening, at seven o'clock, and introduce to this infor­mant, his eastern associate.

The said Randall did not call at the appointed hour, and this informant did not see him again until Friday, the twenty-fifth of December, when the said Randall [Page 19] again called on this informant, and after making an apology, for not calling at the appointed hour of the preceding Tuesday, informed him at the door of his apartment, that his memorial to Congress would be ready to be presented on the next Monday; but as several gentlemen were in this informant's room, at that time, the said Randall did not enter, and no further conversation was then had: since which time this in­formant has not seen the said Randall, until he was brought to the bar of the House of Representatives, in custody.

This informant further saith, that he communicated the substance of every material conversation with the said Randall, to the Speaker of the House of Repre­sentatives, and to the several gentlemen before men­tioned.

(Signed) WILLIAM B. GILES.

I, Daniel Buck, inform and say, that about ten days previous to my setting out on my journey to Congress (which was on the thirtieth day of November last,) a stranger, whom I now know to be Charles Whitney, in custody of the Serjeant-at-arms, called at my office in Norwich, in the state of Vermont, introduced him­self by the name of Whitney, and informed me, that he had some business of importance which he wished to converse with me upon. I asked if he wished to be in private, he signified that he did, upon which my clerk withdrew; and the said Whitney proceeded to in­form me that the business of which he wished to con­verse, was of great importance to the public, as well as to the individuals immediately concerned.—That it would come before Congress, but was so circumstanced as to render it necessary to make a previous statement to some of the members, that they might be able to ex­plain to others; and the whole thereby be better prepa­red to judge upon the business: he declared he wished for nothing improper, and that he did not want that I [Page 20] should favor the plan, unless I saw it to be consistent; for he said he wanted nothing but what was perfectly just and honorable, and was confident that if the mat­ter could be understood, it would appear to be of great public utility: he then stated, that he and his associa­tes had discovered a large and immensely valuable tract of land, between, or contiguous to, lakes Erie, Huron and Michigan, (if I mistake not the names) which he said might be purchased of the Indians, at a low rate: That this purchase would conciliate the affections, and secure the friendship of the hostile tribes.—That he, the said Whitney, together with Ebenezer Allen, doctor Randall, and a number of Canadian merchants at De­troit, had formed an association for the purpose of extinguishing the Indian title, and petitioning Con­gress for the pre-emption right to those lands; that if they succeeded, it was their intention immediately to make settlement on them.—That those merchants had such influence with, and controul over the Indians, that there would be no difficulty with them; and that such a settlement would be a barrier against the savages, and effectually secure peace to the United States.—That those merchants were then employed in the business, among the Indians; and that his partner, doctor Ran­dall and his other associates, had such connections, that there was a fair prospect of success.—That it was not their intention, however, to engross all this property to themselves; but that it was to be divided into a num­ber of shares, and that he and the said Randall had the disposal of them.—That he, the said Whitney, was then directly from Philadelphia, and that it was agreed that Randall should dispose of a part amongst his friends, and the influential characters in the southern states; that he, the said Whitney, was to distribute the other part amongst his the said Whitney's friends, and the influ­ential characters in the eastern and northern states.—That they had already got a number engaged, but that the subscription was not full, and that I might become an adventurer, if I wished for it; and as he conceived [Page 21] that I could make myself acquainted with the facts, they, the said associates, would be able so clearly to demon­strate the public utility of the measure, that there could be no impropriety in my being concerned in the business, as I should thereby only connect my private interest with the public good; and while I was advancing the greatest interest of my country, might put two or three thousand dollars in my own pocket. Upon my sug­gesting that, by a late treaty, a peace was already con­cluded with the Indians: and that this was a business that might involve in it an important national question, as, by the treaty, the right of purchasing lands of the Indians, was reserved to the United States, the said Whitney replied and said, that the Indians were greatly dissatisfied with the treaty, and would not keep it; and that another war would be the certain consequence, un­less other measures were adopted. He then renewed the protestations of the purity of his intentions, and said, that he conceived that they (meaning himself and associates, as I understood him) should so clearly evince the utility of the plan, as that there could be no doubt of its pro­priety in the mind of any well-wisher to his country; and said, that he thought it would be hard to suppose that members of Congress were, in consequence of their appointment, to be deprived of those advantages to ac­quire property which might be taken by others. The said Whitney shewed me a plan of the country, and the articles of agreement between the associates, which appear to be the same as have been read in Congress: he also said much upon the magnitude of the object, in respect to the subscribers and partners: and though I cannot now repeat his expressions, yet I can truly assert, that I then clearly understood him, that if I would subscribe as a partner, my name might be kept secret, and after the grant was obtained, if I chose to relinquish my share in the lands, I might receive money in lieu of it; though no specified sum was mentioned, other than has already been stated; and the conversation finally broke off upon my declaring that I would make no engagement in the [Page 22] business, until I was better informed as to the merits of the question.

(Signed) DANIEL BUCK.

The House then proceeded to a further hearing in the case of Robert Randall; and the said Robert Ran­dall being brought to the bar, in the custody of the Ser­jeant, and attended by his counsel, the informations, in writing, of Mr. Smith of South-Carolina, Mr. Murray of Maryland, and Mr. Giles of Virginia, were read to him.

It was then demanded of him, by Mr. Speaker, "what he had to say in his defence?" to which he answered, that he was not guilty.

It was further demanded of him, by Mr. Speaker, "whether he had any witnesses that he wished to be examined in proof of his innocence?" to which he answered, that he had not.

Application was then made to the House, by the pri­soner's counsel, that the informations which had been delivered in against him, may be attested by the oaths of the informant members, and that he may be permitted to examine them, on oath, touching the same, subject to the order of the House: Whereupon,

The prisoner, with his counsel, having withdrawn from the bar; it was, after debate,

Resolved, That the prisoner be informed, that if he has any question to propose to the informants, or other members of the House, he is at liberty to put them in the mode already prescribed: that the said informant members be sworn to the declaration just read, and also, to answer such questions, as shall be asked of them, touching the same.

The prisoner, with his counsel, having then returned to the bar, and being informed of the further proceed­ing respecting him; the informant members were re­spectively sworn to the truth of the written informations which they had severally delivered in against him; and [Page 23] also true answer to make to such questions as should be asked of them, touching the same: the said oaths being administered to them, by the judge of the district of Pennsylvania, who attended for that purpose.

The House then resumed the hearing of the said trial, and having made some progress therein,

It was, on motion, resolved, that farther proceeding be adjourned until to-morrow, twelve o'clock.

The House resumed the adjourned hearing in the case of Robert Randall; and the prisoner, by his counsel, being fully heard at the bar of the House, and his de­fence closed; it was, on motion,

Resolved, That this House will, to-morrow, at twelve o'clock, proceed to a final decision on the said case.

On motion of Mr. Christie of Maryland, and Mr. Sedgwick of Massachusetts, the several informations heretofore given by them on oath, in the case of Robert Randall, and now delivered in, in writing, at the Clerk's table, subscribed with their names, respectively, were read, and ordered to be inserted in the journal, as fol­low:

The declaration of Gabriel Christie is, that some time in the month of October or November last, this informant was in Philadelphia, when he saw Robert Randall, who had, as he informed this informant, just returned from Canada, where he had been disappointed in the business he went to that country on; but he, Randall, informed this informant, that on his way home, he had called at Detroit, where he had spent some time; and had, he believed, entered into an asso­ciation, to which, if he got the consent of the govern­ment of the United States, would be of considerable advantage to him, and those who chose to associate with him; and informed this informant, that he might be concerned with him, provided he liked the specula­tion: [Page 24] he then informed this informant, that he had associated with a number of influential persons at De­troit, for the purpose of obtaining the pre-emption right to a large tract of country within the territory of the United States, and produced to this informant, the original association. After this informant had heard all that Randall had to communicate to him, this in­formant told Randall, that he considered his scheme as a wild goose one; and that this informant would not have any concern in it. Randall then requested this informant, to give him his opinion in what manner he, Randall, ought to proceed: this informant told him, that the most proper person to apply to, was Mr. Ran­dolph, the late secretary of state; and if he, Randall, thought proper, this informant would inform Mr. Ran­dolph of it, and get his advice, which Randall agreed to: this informant then went to Mr. Randolph, and gave him all the information that the informant had received from Randall. After considering the business some time, Mr. Randolph advised, that an application should be made to the President of the United States; which advice, the informant gave to Randall, who seemed, at that time, fully satisfied with the proposal, and requested the informant to introduce him to the President, for that purpose; but as this informant was going out of town in a day or two, he told Randall, that he would introduce him to the President, on his return to Congress. When the informant came to Philadelphia, in December, he found Randall in the city; and after asking Randall, what he had done in his business, and whether he still meant to apply to the President, Randall then informed the informant, that his friend and associate, Mr. Whitney, had arrived in Philadelphia, and that upon consulting with him, they came to a determination not to apply to the Pre­sident, as he heretofore had agreed, but had determin­ed to present a memorial to the legislature, for a grant of the said land. This informant told Randall, that he disapproved of this mode, and asked Randall who [Page 25] had advised him to it. Randall then informed the in­formant, that this said Mr. Whitney had informed him, that he had consulted with a number of the eastern members of Congress, and in particular, with Mr. Sedg­wick, who had advised this mode of proceeding. Ran­dall also informed this informant, that Mr. Sedgwick had agreed to draw up, and present his memorial. This informant then informed Randall, that by this mode of proceeding, he had put it out of this inform­ant's power to be concerned with him, if he thought ever so well of it. Randall asked the informant the reason; the informant answered, that it would be im­proper in any member of Congress, to be concerned in any thing that he was to vote on. This informant was not able to impress Randall with the propriety of his remark. The informant never understood, that Mr. Sedgwick was, in any manner, concerned with Randall, or his associates; but that he, Mr. Sedgwick, thought the thing a public benefit, and would support it. That Randall never informed this informant, that any of the members of Congress were concerned, but that a majority of them thought favourably of the plan, and would support it. In all the conversation the in­formant had with Randall, this informant told him, that he could not expect this informant's assistance, as the informant would never agree to sell any of the lands of the United States, for less than a dollar per acre. Randall then informed the informant, before a witness, that it was strange, that the informant was the only person in Congress, that he had applied to, but what seemed to think favorably of his plan; the informant told Randall, that his opinion was fixed, and still advised his application to the President, which Randall declined.

(Signed) G. CHRISTIE.
[Page 26]

The informant, Theodore Sedgwick, a member of the House of Representatives of the United States, declares, that some time before he left the place of his residence in Massachusetts, one Israel Jones, esq of Adams, in that state, waited on him and introduced to him, a man whom he now knows by the name of Charles Whitney, of the state of Vermont. That Mr. Jones is a man of respectable character, a magistrate, a member of the state legislature, (as the informant believes) and a trustee of the corporation of Williams college. That Mr. Jones informed the informant, that he, with others, had in contemplation an application to Congress, for a grant of a tract of country lying be­tween the lakes Huron, Michigan and Erie.—Consi­derations of a public nature having been stated and enlarged upon, the opinion of the informant was re­quested, relative to the propriety and success of the proposed application. He answered in substance, that he believed it was to be doubted whether the legisla­ture would undertake actually to contract for any of the vacant public lands, and that the doubt was still stronger respecting these lands, the Indian claim to which had not been previously extinguished. He stated to Mr. Jones that, by reason of sickness in his family, it was not probable he should attend the next session of Congress; at all events, however, he advised Mr. Jones not to make an early application, as it was probable the subject of disposing of the public lands would occu­py the attention of Congress, during the then ensuing session; and that, by the delay, Mr. Jones could form a more correct judgment of the course which it would be most eligible for him to pursue, relative to this subject. That while the informant was waiting on Mr. Jones to the door, at his departure, Mr. Jones asked him if there would be any impropriety in a member of Congress be­ing concerned in an application for a grant of lands? The informant answered, that it would depend on the circumstances under which the application was made; proper, if the application was made to a land-office, but [Page 27] otherwise, if to the legislature; because in the latter case it would be for a man to contract with himself: to this answer Mr. Jones gave an explicit assent. That the in­formant never at any time before or afterwards, to his remembrance, saw the said Whitney, until he saw him in this city, during the present session. That the inform­ant came from his own home to New-York, in compa­ny with col. Pepoon, stated by the said Whitney, as one of his associates. That the informant hath been inform­ed and believes that the said Pepoon is now in this city; but that he had never spoken to the informant on the subject of the said land speculation. That not long after the arrival of the informant in this city, the said Whit­ney, one morning waited on him, and stated to him an intended memorial respecting the tract of land aforesaid, and urged on the consideration of the informant, the motives of a public nature for a grant thereof. That the informant enquired of the said Whitney, to what state he belonged, and being answered to Vermont, he recommended to him to request the representatives of that state to present his memorial. That the said Whit­ney requested the informant to peruse his memorial when it should be prepared, which he understood was not then the case. That he answered, according to his best re­collection, that whenever he had leisure he should be willing to do it; or to that effect. That the whole time of the interview he believes did not exceed six, he is very confident, could not exceed ten minutes. That twice afterwards, the informant's servant informed him, that the said Whitney wished to see him, and that he caused himself to be denied; and the informant is very confi­dent he never undertook either to draft, or to present any memorial, for the said Whitney.

On the morning of the twenty-eighth of December, Mr. Smith of South-Carolina, informed the informant of what he afterwards stated in evidence to the House, respecting Robert Randall. The informant advised Mr. Smith, as soon as possible, to make the same known to the House of Representatives, (which Mr. Smith inform­ed [Page 28] the informant he had determined to do) and the in­formant having previously advised the said Whitney to apply to the Representatives of Vermont, he thought it his duty, and he accordingly took the earliest opportu­nity to request Mr. Smith of that state, to avoid pre­senting any memorial with which he might be entrusted for a grant of land, and desired him to make the same request to Mr. Buck, the other member from the same state.

The informant further declares, that he never, to his remembrance, saw Robert Randall, till he saw him at the bar of the House.

THEODORE SEDGWICK.

The House, then, according to the order of the day, proceeded to a final decision, in the case of Robert Ran­dall; and,

A motion being made and seconded, that the House do come to the following resolution:

Whereas any attempt to influence the conduct of this House, or its members, on subjects appertaining to their legislative functions, by motives, other than the public advantage, is a high contempt of this House, and a breach of its privileges: And whereas it does appear to this House, by the information, on oath, of sun­dry members, and by the proceedings thereon had be­fore the House, that Robert Randall did attempt to in­fluence the conduct of the said members, in a matter relating to their legislative functions, to wit, the sale of a large portion of the public property, by motives of private emolument to the said members, other than, and distinct from, the public advantage; Therefore,

Resolved, That the said Robert Randall has thereby committed a high contempt of this House, and a breach of its privileges:—

The previous question thereon was called for by five members, to wit;—Shall the main question, to agree to the said resolution, be now put?

[Page 29] And, on the question;—Shall the said main question be now put?

It passed in the negative.

A motion was then made and seconded, that the House do come to the following resolution:

Resolved, That it appears to this House, that Ro­bert Randall has been guilty of a contempt to, and a breach of the privileges of this House, by attempting to corrupt the integrity of its members, in the man­ner laid to his charge,

And, on the question thereupon,

It was resolved in the affirmative— YEAS 78. NAYS 17.

The yeas and nays being demanded by one fifth of the members present,

Those who voted in the affirmative, are
  • David Baird,
  • Abraham Baldwin,
  • Thomas Blount,
  • Benjamin Bourne,
  • Theophilus Bradbury,
  • Nathan Bryan,
  • Daniel Buck,
  • Dempsey Burges,
  • Samuel J. Cabell,
  • Joshua Coit,
  • Isaac Coles,
  • William Cooper,
  • Henry Dearborn,
  • George Dent,
  • Gabriel Duvall,
  • William Findley,
  • Abiel Foster,
  • Dwight Foster,
  • Jesse Franklin,
  • Albert Gallatin,
  • Ezekiel Gilbert,
  • James Gillespie,
  • William B. Giles,
  • Nicholas Gilman,
  • Henry Glen,
  • Benjamin Goodhue,
  • Chauncey Goodrich,
  • Andrew Gregg,
  • Christopher Greenup,
  • Roger Griswold,
  • William B. Grove,
  • George Hancock,
  • Carter B. Harrison,
  • Robert Goodloe Harper,
  • Thomas Hartley,
  • Jonathan N. Havens,
  • Daniel Heister,
  • Thomas Henderson,
  • James Hillhouse,
  • William Hindman,
  • Aaron Kitchell,
  • John Wilkes Kittera,
  • George Leonard,
  • Edward Livingston,
  • Samuel Lyman,
  • William Lyman,
  • Francis Malbone,
  • John Milledge,
  • Andrew Moore,
  • Frederick A. Muhlenberg,
  • William Vans Murray,
  • Anthony New,
  • Josiah Parker,
  • John Patten,
  • Francis Preston,
  • John Reed,
  • Theodore Sedgwick,
  • John S. Sherburne,
  • Samuel Sitgreaves,
  • Jeremiah Smith,
  • Nathaniel Smith,
  • Isaac Smith,
  • Samuel Smith,
  • William Smith,
  • John Swanwick,
  • Zephaniah Swift,
  • [Page 30] Absalom Tatom,
  • George Thatcher,
  • Richard Thomas,
  • Mark Thompson,
  • Uriah Tracey,
  • John E. Van Allen,
  • Philip Van Cortlandt,
  • Joseph B. Varnum,
  • Abraham Venable,
  • Peleg Wadsworth,
  • John Williams, and
  • Richard Winn,
Those who voted in the negative, are
  • Theodorus Bailey,
  • Richard Brent,
  • Gabriel Christie,
  • Thomas Claiborne,
  • John Clopton,
  • Samuel Earle,
  • Nathaniel Freeman, jun.
  • John Hathorn,
  • James Holland,
  • George Jackson,
  • Matthew Locke,
  • Samuel Maclay,
  • Nathaniel Macon,
  • James Madison,
  • John Nicholas,
  • John Page, and
  • Israel Smith.

Another motion was then made and seconded, that the House do come to the following resolution.—

Resolved, That the said Robert Randall be brought to the bar, reprimanded by the Speaker, and committed to the custody of the Serjeant-at-arms, until the further order of this House.

And, on the question thereupon,

It was resolved in the affirmative.

Pursuant thereto, the said Robert Randall was brought to the bar in custody; reprimanded by Mr. Speaker, and remanded in custody of the Serjeant-at-arms, until further order of the House.

The House according to the order of the day, pro­ceeded to the further hearing and trial in the case of Charles Whitney: Whereupon,

The said Charles Whitney being brought to the bar, in custody of the Serjeant-at-arms, the information in writing, delivered in against him by Mr. Buck, one of the members from Vermont, was read, and it was de­manded of him by Mr. Speaker, "what he had to say in his defence?" to which he answered, that he was not prepared to make defence, and requested that fur­ther time might be allowed him for that purpose, until Monday next.

The said Charles Whitney, then withdrew from the bar in custody, and the House proceeded to consider of his request; when,

[Page 31] A motion being made and seconded that the House do come to the following resolution,

Resolved, That Charles Whitney be discharged from the custody of the Serjeant-at-arms.

It was resolved in the affirmative—YEAS 52. NAYS 30.

The yeas and nays being demanded by one fifth of the members present,

Those who voted in the affirmative, are
  • Theodorus Bailey,
  • Abraham Baldwin,
  • Benjamin Bourne,
  • Theophilus Bradbury,
  • Dempsey Burges,
  • Samuel J. Cabell,
  • Gabriel Christie,
  • Thomas Claiborne,
  • Joshua Coit,
  • William Cooper,
  • Henry Dearborn,
  • Samuel Earle,
  • William Findley,
  • Nathaniel Freeman, junior
  • Albert Gallatin,
  • Ezekiel Gilbert,
  • William B. Giles,
  • Nicholas Gilman,
  • Henry Glen,
  • Chauncey Goodrich,
  • Andrew Gregg,
  • William B. Grove,
  • Wade Hampton,
  • George Hancock,
  • Carter B. Harrison,
  • Robert Goodloe Harper,
  • John Hathorn,
  • Jonathan N. Havens,
  • William Hindman,
  • James Holland,
  • George Jackson,
  • Aaron Kitchell,
  • George Leonard,
  • Samuel Maclay,
  • Nathaniel Macon,
  • John Milledge,
  • John Nicholas,
  • John Page,
  • Josiah Parker,
  • John Patten,
  • Francis Preston,
  • Theodore Sedgwick,
  • Samuel Sitgreaves,
  • Nathaniel Smith,
  • Israel Smith,
  • Isaac Smith,
  • Samuel Smith,
  • Zephaniah Swift,
  • Mark Thompson,
  • Joseph B. Varnum, and
  • Richard Winn.
Those who voted in the negative, are
  • David Baird,
  • Thomas Blount,
  • Daniel Buck,
  • Isaac Coles,
  • George Dent,
  • Gabriel Duvall,
  • Abiel Foster,
  • Dwight Foster,
  • Jesse Franklin,
  • Benjamin Goodhue,
  • Daniel Heister,
  • James Hillhouse,
  • John Wilkes Kittera,
  • Edward Livingston,
  • Samuel Lyman,
  • William Lyman,
  • Francis Malbone,
  • Andrew Moore,
  • John Reed,
  • John S. Sherburne,
  • Jeremiah Smith,
  • William Smith,
  • Absalom Tatom,
  • George Thatcher,
  • Richard Thomas,
  • John E. Van Allen,
  • Philip Van Cortlandt,
  • Abraham Venable,
  • Peleg Wadsworth, and
  • John Williams.
[Page 32]

A petition of Charles Whitney, was presented to the House and read, praying that certain testimony, in his behalf, applying to the late charges against him, may be entered on the journal of the House.

Ordered, That the said petition do lie on the table.

A petition of Robert Randall, was presented to the House and read, praying to be released from the impri­sonment to which he is subjected by the order of this House, of the sixth instant.

Ordered, That the said petition do lie on the table.

The House proceeded to consider the petition of Ro­bert Randall, which lay on the table: Whereupon,

Resolved, That Robert Randall be discharged from the custody of the Serjeant-at-arms, upon the payment of fees.

Extract from the Journal.

JOHN BECKLEY, Clerk.

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal. The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.