| 1) May 25, 1790 (1st Congress) 1 Senate Journal, supra note 82, at 145–46. |
The Senate was considering the House’s “bill, entitled an act for finally adjusting and satisfying the claims of Frederick William de Steuben” (see Original).The committee on the bill proposed this amendment: “In the second line, strike out from the word ‘order’ inclusive, to the end of the bill, and insert [see Amendment.]” |
That, in order to make full and adequate compensation to Frederick William de Steuben, as well for the sacrifices and eminent services, made…to the United States during the late war… there be paid to the said Frederick…seven thousand dollars…and…an annuity of… [2,000] dollars during life…to be paid in quarterly payments [.]
2 Annals, supra note 83, at 1556–57. |
That, in consideration of the eminent services of the Baron de Steuben, rendered to the United States during the late war, there be paid to him an annuity of two thousand dollars…in quarterly payments [.] |
Both provided Frederick William de Steuben a lifetime annuity of $2,000 paid quarterly for his wartime services to the United States. |
| 2) Aug. 7, 1790 (1st Congress) 1 Senate Journal, supra note 82, at 208–09. |
The Senate began discussing the House’s “bill, entitled ‘An act making an appropriation for discharging the claim of Sarah Alexander, the widow of the late Major General Lord Stirling, who died in the service of the United States’” (see Original). The committee on the bill reported this amendment: “Strike out of the section all subsequent to the word ‘that,’ in the second line, and substitute as follows…[see Amendment.]” |
[No text of the original bill is in the journals or Annals. However, the Annals contains the following House resolution from August 2, 1790, which was in response to “the petition of the widow [Sarah Alexander] of the late General Sterling” and which was the basis of the original House bill:] Resolved, That the sum of [$6,972]…being the half-pay of a Major General in the late American army, for the term of seven years, be allowed.
2 Annals, supra note 83, at 1717–18. |
The Register of the Treasury shall…grant unto Sarah [Alexander], the widow of the late Major General Earl of Stirling, who died in the service of the United States, a certificate, to entitle her to a sum equal to an annuity for seven years half pay of a Major General[.] [This amendment contained several other allotments for other similarly situated individuals.] |
Most likely, both provided Sarah Alexander—as a Major General’s widow—the half-pay of a Major General. |
| 3) March 3, 1795 (3rd Congress) 2 Senate Journal, supra note 82, at 184. |
The Senate was discussing the House “bill, entitled ‘An act to authorize the [U.S.] President… to obtain a cession of claim to certain territory’” (see Original). Aaron Burr of New York then proposed “to amend the bill, to be read as follows…[See Amendment.]” |
[No text of the original bill is in the journals or Annals. However, the Annals contains the following House resolution from February 26, 1795, which was in response to “the disposition of Indian lands by the Legislature of the State of Georgia” and which was the basis of the original House bill:] Resolved, That the [U.S.] President…be authorized to obtain a cession of the State of Georgia of their claim to the whole, or any part, of the land within the present Indian boundaries.
4 Annals, supra note 83, at 1256–57. |
Be it enacted...That the [U.S.] President…be… authorized…to obtain, by purchase or donation, a relinquishment and cession of the whole or any part of the lands claimed by or under the state of Georgia, and without the ordinary jurisdiction thereof[.] |
Most likely, both authorized the U.S president to obtain a cession of the Indian lands claimed by the State of Georgia. |
| 4) June 12, 1795 (10th Session of Executive Proceedings of the Senate in 3rd Congress) 1 Senate Executive Journal, supra note 84, at 179. |
The Senate was considering a treaty with Great Britain that President George Washington had sent the Senate on June 8. That day, the Senate had approved a resolution “[t] hat the Senators be under an injunction of secrecy on the communications this day received from the [U.S.] President…until the further order of the Senate.” On June 12 when the treaty was being discussed, a resolution was proposed to publish the treaty (see Original). But immediately thereafter, a motion was made and approved “to modify the motion [to publish the treaty] as follows…[see Amendment].” |
[T]hat the said treaty be published [i.e., rescind the enjoined secrecy and make the treaty widely and publicly known]. |
That so much of the resolution of [June 8]… as enjoins secrecy upon the Senators with respect to the communications on that day received from the President, be rescinded. |
Both removed the secrecy of the treaty. |
| 5) Jan. 9, 1798 (5th Congress) 7 Annals (House), supra note 83, at 814–17. |
The House began discussing a resolution about a land dispute between Indians and the State of Tennessee (see Original). William Clairborne of Tennessee then “moved to strike out all the words of the resolution after the word ‘for,’ in second line, and to insert [see Amendment.]” |
Resolved, That the sum of---dollars be appropriated for the relief of such [Tennessee] citizens…as have rights to lands within the…State…and have made actual settlements thereupon, and who have been deprived of the possession of the said lands by the operation of the act for regulating the intercourse with the Indian tribes. The said sum to be subject to the order of the [U.S.] President…to be expended under his direction… in extinguishing the Indian claim to the above described lands, in case he shall deem it expedient to hold a treaty for that purpose[.] |
Resolved, That the sum of---dollars be appropriated for the extinction of the Indian claim to all or any part of the land within the limits of the State of Tennessee, in case the [U.S.] President…shall think it expedient to hold a treaty for that purpose. |
Both shared key components, such as an appropriation toward the extinction of the Indian claim to land said to be within the limits of the State of Tennessee. |
| 6) March 24, 1800 (6th Congress) 3 Senate Journal, supra note 82, at 56. |
The Senate was in the middle of an episode, partially discussed earlier, in which the Senate ultimately tried arresting editor William Duane of the General Advertiser newspaper for publishing a leaked version of a controversial election bill and for comments critical of Federalists in power.
Dunn, supra note 94, at 171–74; Schafer, supra note 97. On this date, a Senator introduced a resolution essentially stating that Duane be allowed to be heard by counsel (see Original). Immediately, another Senator motioned “to strike out all the motion subsequent to the word ‘Duane,’ and insert [see Amendment.]” |
Resolved, That William Duane be permitted to be heard by counsel, he having appeared… and requested that he might be heard by counsel. |
Resolved, That William Duane, having appeared at the [Senate] bar… and requested to be heard by counsel on the charge against him…be allowed the assistance of counsel[.] |
Both permitted William Duane to be heard by counsel. |
| 7) April 24, 1800 (6th Congress) 3 Senate Journal, supra note 82, at 80. |
The Senate brought up the “bill supplementary to the act to suspend part of an act, entitled ‘An act to augment the army of the United States, and for other purposes’” (see Original). The committee on the bill reported this amendment: “Line 2, after the word ‘that,’ strike out to the end of the bill, and insert [see Amendment].” |
Be it enacted...That all further appointment of officers authorized by the act intitled “an act to augment the army of the United Sates and for other purposes,” shall be suspended until the further order of Congress; unless in the recess of Congress…war should break out between the United States and the French Republic, or imminent danger of [French] invasion…shall, in the opinion of the [U.S.] President…be discovered to exist[.]
Bill supplement augmentation of the army. April 3rd 1800; Sen 6A-B1, Box 1, Folder 2, Internal Ref: 12E2C 5/9/2; RG 46, NAB. |
Be it enacted...That, it shall be lawful for the [U.S.] President… to suspend any further military appointments under the act to augment the army of the United States, and for other purposes… according to his discretion[.] |
Both authorized the suspension of military appointments being made under the given act with possible exceptions at the president’s discretion. |
| 8) April 25, 1800 (6th Congress) 10 Annals (House), supra note 83, at 159; 689; 698–99. |
The House discussed a Senate amendment to the House’s “bill to divide the Territory of the United States Northwest of the Ohio into two separate governments” (see Original). At the time, there was a large territory in the United States called the “Territory of the United States North-West of the River Ohio.” The bill aimed to split up this territory into two governments. The Senate amendment to the bill recommended “striking out the whole bill, and inserting a new one [see Amendment].” |
Sec. 1. Be it enacted...That the territory of the United States, north-west of the river Ohio, shall, for purposes of temporary government, be divided into two districts…and that part of the said territory which lies to the westward of the said line, shall form one district, to be called the ----territory, and that which lies to the eastward of said line, shall form one other district, to be called the ----territory...
H.R. 39 - 6th Congress (1799–1801): A Bill, To divide the Territory of the United States North-West of the Ohio, into two separate Governments, 6th Cong. (1800), https://www.congress.gov/bill/6th-congress/house-bill/45/1800/03/20/text. |
That from and after the fourth day of July next, all that part of the territory of the United States, north west of the Ohio river… shall, for purposes of temporary government, constitute a separate territory, and be called the Indiana Territory.
Message to Congress, April 21, 1800 (Senate Amendment): A Bill, To divide the Territory of the United States North-West of the Ohio, into two separate Governments, 6th Cong. (1800), https://www.congress.gov/bill/6th-congress/century-of-lawmaking-historical-document/73/1800/04/21/text?s=1&r=1. [Five other sections further established the two governments, such as a section establishing the seats of the governments of the Indiana Territory and the reshaped Territory of the United States North-West of the Ohio river.] |
Both split the “Territory of the United States Northwest of the Ohio River” into two separate territories. |
| 9) February 6, 1801 (6th Congress) 3 Senate Journal, supra note 82, at 121–22; 10 Annals, supra note 83, at 896–97; 900. |
A Senator read the “bill providing for the more convenient organization of the courts of the United States” (see Original). A senator suddenly motioned to “strike out the whole of the bill” after the second line and insert a lengthy new bill (see Amendment). |
[Text of the entire bill is not in the journals or Annals. However, the Annals mentions the following two sections of the bill:] Sect. 13: The circuit courts shall have cognizance of all actions, or suits, matters or things, cognizable by the Judicial authority of the United States… where the matter in dispute shall amount to ---- hundred dollars, and where original jurisdiction is not given by the Constitution...to the Supreme Court. Sect. 48: [An annual salary of $2,000 shall be assigned to] each of the Circuit Judges... to be appointed by virtue of this act[.] |
Passing of this act, there shall be four circuits [i.e., circuit courts] in the United States; the first to consist of the district[s] of Maine… New Hampshire…and Rhode Island: the second to consist of the district[s] of Connecticut… New York, and New Jersey; [and so on.] |
Both established U.S. circuit courts. |
| 10) Dec. 14, 1801 (7th Congress) 11 Annals (House), supra note 83, at 313; 319–24. |
The House continued discussing a motion made by Joseph Nicholson of Maryland on December 8. This motion called for an accounting of the oversight by the [Treasury] Secretary of public money spent by Timothy Pickering, a former Secretary of State (see Original). Nicholson decided to “modify his [own] motion” by proposing a different motion in its place (see Amendment.) Another representative immediately responded that he was “well pleased with the substitute[.]” |
Resolved, That the [Treasury] Secretary…be directed to lay before this House an account of all moneys received by Timothy Pickering, Esq., former Secretary of State, together with Mr. Pickering’s account of disbursements, and his vouchers for the same. |
Resolved, That a committee be appointed to inquire and report, whether moneys drawn from the Treasury [which surely include Timothy Pickering’s transactions] have been faithfully applied to the objects for which they were appropriated…and to report…whether any further arrangements are necessary to … secure the accountability of persons entrusted with…public money. |
Both requested a legislative accounting of Treasury transactions involving Timothy Pickering. |
| 11) April 5, 1802 (7th Congress) 11 Annals (House), supra note 83, at 1133–34; 1139–41. |
The House was considering a resolution by Roger Griswold of Connecticut. This resolution called for, given a recent Convention between the United States and France, legislative oversight of the finances involved in repairing the French ship corvette Berceau captured by U.S. forces in 1800 (see Original). The following two amendments were proposed in tandem to produce a “gut-and-amend” procedure: 1) Griswold decided to amend his resolution to add language asking the Navy Secretary for “all…documents related to the sale, purchase, and repairs of the vessel” (see Amendment) and then 2) Samuel Smith of Maryland proposed to “strike out all the resolution, excepting that which called for papers.” |
Resolved, That the Secretary of State be directed to report to this House whether the sum of $32,839 54 [sic], laid out in repairing the corvette Berceau…was expended… agreeably to the stipulations of the Convention between the United States and France. |
Resolved, That the Secretary of Navy be directed to lay before this House copies of all… documents which relate to the sale, purchase, and repairs of that vessel [corvette Berceau]. |
Both directed a U.S. secretary to provide the House information regarding the repair of the corvette Berceau ship as part of legislative oversight of the finances involved. |
| 12) Feb. 23, 1803 (8th Congress) 3 Senate Journal, supra note 82, at 266; 270–71; 273–75. |
The Senate was considering a series of related resolutions presented together for consideration on February 16, 1803, that addressed growing concerns of a hostile France, which then controlled the Louisiana Territory and Mississippi River (see Original). John Breckinridge of Kentucky then proposed to “amend the resolutions under consideration, by striking out all that follows the word ‘resolved,’ and inserting as follows…[see Amendment].” |
Resolved, That the United States have an indisputable right to the free navigation of the river Mississippi, and to a convenient place of deposite for their produce and merchandise in the island of New Orleans… -That he [the U.S. president] be authorized to call into actual service any number of the militia of the states of South Carolina, Georgia, Ohio, Kentucky, Tennessee, or of the Mississippi territory, which he may think proper, not exceeding fifty thousand, and to employ them, together with the military and naval forces of the Union, for effecting the objects above mentioned. -That the sum of five millions of dollars be appropriated to the carrying into effect the foregoing resolutions [.] |
Resolved, That the [U.S.] President…is hereby, authorized, whenever he shall judge it expedient, to require of the executives of the several states to take effectual measures to organize, arm, and equip, according to law, and hold in readiness to march, at a moment’s warning, 80,000 effective militia, officers included… Resolved, That -- dollars be appropriated for paying and subsisting such part of the troops aforesaid, whose actual service may be wanted[.] |
Both shared several key components, including authorizations for 1) the president to mobilize tens of thousands of militia troops (from various states) and 2) an appropriation to fund this mobilization. |
| 13) Jan. 11, 1804 (8th Congress) 4 House Journal, supra note 81, at 527–28. |
The House was discussing a committee report on the “memorials of Alexander Moultrie, of the State of South Carolina, in [sic] behalf of himself and others, and of the Virginia Yazoo Company, by William Cowan, their agent.” This report involved a complicated land dispute involving multiple parties. A resolution was proposed that would, regarding the report, allow a specific company to be heard by its agent at the Bar of the House (see Original). Another representative motioned to “amend the same, by striking out all the words from the word ‘Resolved,’ in the first line, to the end of the motion, and inserting, in lieu thereof, the following words…[see Amendment].” |
Resolved, That the South Carolina Yazoo Company be heard by their agent, on Monday next, at the Bar of the House. |
Resolved that this House will, on Monday next, hear all the agents of the different companies [such as South Carolina Yazoo Company], claiming lands South of the State of Tennessee, who may choose to speak at the Bar of this House. |
Both allowed at least one company to speak about the given topic at the Bar of the House. |
| 14) Jan. 3, 1805 (8th Congress) 3 Senate Journal [Trial of Samuel Chase], supra note 82, at 514–15. |
The Senate was conducting the trial of Samuel Chase, a Supreme Court justice and well-known Federalist. The House had impeached Chase over allegations of violating principles of justice with partisan rulings. Stephen Bradley of Vermont proposed an order compelling Chase to respond to the charges by a specific deadline (see Original). William Giles of Virginia then motioned “to amend the motion, and to strike out all that follows the word ‘Ordered,’ and insert [see Amendment.]” |
Ordered, That Samuel Chase file his answer with the Secretary of the Senate, to the several articles of impeachment exhibited against him by the House of Representatives, on or before the -- day of --. |
Ordered, That -- next shall be the day for receiving the answer, and proceeding on the trial of the impeachment against Samuel Chase. |
Both gave Samuel Chase a deadline to submit his response to the impeachment charges. |
| 15) Feb. 5, 1805 (8th Congress) 3 Senate Journal, supra note 82, at 446; 14 Annals (Senate), supra note 83, at 39. |
The Senate resumed discussion of the “bill, entitled an act to regulate the clearance of armed merchant vessels” (see Original) and a previously proposed amendment to it. The Annals suggest that this previously proposed amendment was the one made by the committee on the bill on January 21, 1805, as no other amendment was proposed to the bill after this one was proposed. In any case, the committee amendment proposed to “strike out the whole of said bill, after the enacting clause, for the purpose of inserting an amendment [see Amendment].” |
Be it enacted…That, after due notice of this act at the several custom-houses, no merchant vessel armed, or provided with the means of being armed at sea, shall receive a clearance…to leave the port where she may be armed or provided, without bond, with two sufficient sureties being given by the owner…or by the master or commander, to use of the United States, in a sum equal to double the value of said vessel…Provided, That the regulations herein contained shall not be construed to extend to vessels bound to any port or place in the Mediterranean, or beyond the Cape of Good Hope...
14 Annals (Senate), supra note 83, at 722–23. |
Be it enacted...That after due notice of this act at the several custom houses, no armed merchant vessel, or vessel prepared for armament, the property of any [U.S.] citizen … or person residing therein, shall receive a clearance, or be permitted to depart from any port in the United States, to any island in the West Indies, or any port or place in this continent, situated between Surinam and the western boundary of the United States, unless the owner or owners, agent or agents, and the commander of such vessel for the intended voyage, shall give bond in a sum equal to double the value of such vessel, her arms, tackle, apparel, and furniture…
Report of the Committee to whom was referred the Bill, entitled “An act to regulate the clearance of armed merchant vessels.” January 21, 1805. Sen8A-D1, Box 5, Internal Ref: 12E2C 5/11/2; RG 46, NAB. |
Both permitted an armed merchant vessel to get clearance to depart a port if a bond at least equal to double the vessel’s value is provided by the vessel owner or the master/commander. |
| 16) Feb. 16, 1805 (8th Congress) 3 Senate Journal, supra note 82, at 455–56. |
The Senate was considering the “bill further providing for the government of the territory of Orleans” (see Original). Back-to-back amendments were proposed to “gut-and-amend” the bill. The first amendment was to “[s]trike out of the first section of the bill all that follows the enacting clause, and insert [see ‘Sec. 1’ of Amendment].” And the second amendment was to “[s]trike out the residue of said bill, and insert in lieu thereof the following…[see Sect. 2 – Sect. 6 of Amendment].” |
[Sec. 1.] Be it enacted...That the [U.S.] President…is hereby authorized to establish within the Territory of Orleans, a government in all respects similar (except as is herein otherwise provided) to that now exercised in the Mississippi Territory[.] Sec. 2. And be it further enacted…the Governor of the said Territory shall cause to be elected twenty-five representatives, for which purpose he shall lay off the said Territory into convenient election districts, on or before the --day of-- next, and give due notice thereof throughout the same and first appoint the most convenient place within each of the said districts, for holding the elections; and shall nominate a proper officer or officers to preside at and conduct the same, and to return to him the names of the persons who may have been duly elected[.]
14 Annals (Senate), supra note 83, at 45–46. |
[Sec. 1.] That, for…the people of Louisiana to enjoy the right of self government, the [U.S.] President…is hereby authorized to cause the territory ceded by the Republic of France to the United States, by the treaty concluded at Paris on the 30th of April, 1803 [i.e., what became the territories of Louisiana and Orleans], to be laid off on or before the -- day of -- into convenient election districts, having reference to population and location, and not exceeding the number of -- districts; and to appoint the most convenient time thereafter, as well as place, within each of said districts, for holding an election; and to appoint in each district a proper person or persons, inhabitants of the same, respectively to preside at and conduct the election which is hereinafter described[.] [Sect. 2 – Sect. 6 further provided for the government.] |
Both established 1) “convenient election districts...for holding an election” by a certain deadline in the Territory of Orleans and 2) the “most convenient place[s]” for elections with “proper officers” to preside over and conduct the elections. |
