JAN. 10, 1832.] Apportionment Bill. [H. OF R. Geor ment, and such a Government was best preserved by the posed, it would happen that this inconvenience would representatives of the people. The constitution, proceed-press the most heavily on States which before had been the ing on that principle, had entrusted them with large most favored. For example, the State of Massachusetts powers. All money bills must originate in that House; would now have an unrepresented fraction of 34,000 peoevery tax the people had to pay must be voted by their ple; but under a former census she had had but 3,000; own immediate representatives. No appropriation could and on one occasion even less than one thousand. be made of the public money without their consent. They gia, too, would now have a large fraction; but then, under possessed the sole power of impeachment. They had a the last census, she had been the most favored of all the concurrent voice in the question of war and peace. They States. The largest fraction under the present plan would were immediately entrusted with all the concerns and in-fall to the lot of South Carolina. And although this arrangeterests of the great body of the people. It was surely ment might be complained of by those States to whom large proper that the representative should know his constitu- fractions fell, yet it would be found that whatever other ents, and be known by them. There was a natural sympa- number might be adopted, a similar result could not thy between electors and elected. They were the depository be avoided. Mr. P. concluded by expressing the entire of the wishes, wants, and will of the people. The Sena- submission of himself and his colleagues in the committors were representatives of the sovereignties of the States, tee to whatever disposition the House might make of the and were elected for a longer term, but the representa- subject. tive came fresh from the people. In turning his atten- Mr. CRAIG, of Virginia, moved to amend the bill by tion to the subject submitted to the committee, he had striking out the words "forty-eight" wherever they ocbecome aware of a fact which he had not before observ-curred, so as to leave the number blank. Mr. INGERSOLL took an appeal to the House. Mr. TAYLOR, of New York, went at considerable length into the question of order, and argued to sustain the decision of the Chair. Mr. INGERSOLL spoke for some time in support of his appeal. Mr. ROOT, of New York, suggested that it would be best to consider the bill as reported in blank, and thereupon to receive in succession such motions as might be made for filling the blank with the various numbers differ ed; it was, that at the time of the adoption of the federal This motion gave rise to a debate turning entirely on constitution no fewer than eight of the States had present-questions of order, and which occupied the committee ed as an objection to that instrument their fear that the till three o'clock. The motion was opposed by Mr. INHouse of Representatives would never be suffered to be- GERSOLL, of Connecticut, as being in violation of the come of a sufficient size to give the people their due spirit of the eighteenth rule of order, which declares that weight in the Government; and, in these eight States, a motion to strike out and insert is not divisible. amendments had actually been proposed, with a view to The CHAIR having pronounced the motion to be in guard against such a state of things. The greatest argu- order, ment he had heard urged in favor of a reduction of the number of members in that House was, that a smaller number would conduce more to the despatch of business. He would proceed to examine that argument. The despatch of business, and a due representation of the people, were two very different things. It was very possible that a reduction of numbers would tend to despatch of business. If the House should contain but fifty, or even its minimum number of twenty-four members, it would, no doubt, get through its business in a shorter time. But, in that case, would the people enjoy an adequate repre-ent members might prefer. sentation? In a despotism, or an aristocracy, there was more despatch of business; but those forms of Government were not on that account preferable to a republic. There was not so much in this argument as at first there might appear to be. Whatever the number of members might be, he took it for granted that the great mass of the public business would be done. The annual appropriations for the army, navy, and the civil list, would be made, and the essential interests of the country attended to, by a House of any size within the constitution; and beyond that, he thought a very great amount of legislation by no means desirable. Too much legislation was worse than too little. Another objection he had, indeed, heard, though generally made in a facetious rather than a serious manner; it was, that the dimensions of that Hall were such that it would not contain a larger number. In reply to such an objection, it was sufficient to say that he pre-ported in blank. sumed they were not to consult the architect as to what But the motion was lost without a count. should be the ratio of the people's representation. Mr. McDUFFIE opposed the decision of the Chair. Mr. SPEIGHT called for the reading of certain clauses of the lex parliamentaria; when Mr. INGERSOLL, upon further reflection, concluded to withdraw his appeal. Mr. JARVIS, of Maine, now moved to amend the amendment of Mr. CRAIG, by inserting the words "seventy-five." Mr. WAYNE denied that such a motion could be considered as an amendment to the amendment; but the CHAIR pronounced the amendment in order; when, after some further debate, in which Messrs. GILMORE, WICKLIFFE, WILDE, and WAYNE took part, Mr. WARD, of New York, moved that the committee rise and recommit the bill, with instructions to have it re Mr. THOMAS, of Louisiana, having made some observations in approbation of the course pursued by the chairman, The question was taken on Mr. JARVIS's motion, and The question now recurring on the motion of Mr. CRAIG to strike out the words "forty-eight," Mr. ROOT moved that the bill be considered as reported in blank, and motions thereupon received for filling the blanks. Mr. P. said that the committee would very gladly have escaped from the responsibility of recommending any specific number as a rule of representation; but they had understood the terms of the resolution by which they re-negatived. ceived their appointment to be such as made it their imperative duty. They were not particularly attached to the particular number of 48,000; they had been led to fix on that number, because it would leave the fractions as equal as any other. There was one remark which he had omitted to make in its proper place. The committee were fully aware that the arrangement would be considered as pressing very hardly by those States whose fractions were very large. This had always been a subject of Mr. JENIFER, of Maryland, moved to fill the blank complaint when former apportionments had been un- with the words forty-five. The Chair receiving this motion, der consideration. But, according to the ratio now pro The CHAIR pronounced this motion out or order. Mr. HUBBARD, of New Hampshire, supported the motion of Mr. CRAIG. Mr. CRAIG took an appeal, H. OF R.] Payment for Lost Property.-Apportionment Bill. [JAN. 11, 1832. The CHAIR explained its reasons for the decision; when ants who had been calling for justice since 1815, year Mr. CRAIG, by advice of his friends, withdrew his after year, till the present time--was it right, he would appeal. ask, to tell them that they came too late? He wished the The debate was now resumed with great spirit and ani-resolution to be adopted, that their cases might be refermation, and was continued by the following gentleman: Messrs. POLK, DANIEL, ADAMS, WICKLIFFE, CRAIG, TAYLOR, VINTON, and McDUFFIE; when, On motion of Mr. WICKLIFFE, The committee rose, and reported progress. Mr. WICKLIFFE moved that the Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union be discharged from the further consideration of the bill, and that it be recommitted to the committee who had reported it, with instructions to report it in blank; but The SPEAKER pronounced such a motion at this time out of order, unless by the unanimous consent of the House. Whereupon, on motion, the House adjourned. / WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 11. PAYMENT FOR LOST PROPERTY. red to a select committee of unprejudiced members, and finally decided on in a spirit of liberal and equal justice. With such a decision of Congress, the party would be satisfied, and their claims ultimately set at rest. Mr. WHITTLESEY, of Ohio, shortly replied. He explained the remarks which had been adverted to by Mr. COOKE, and said he had been greatly misunderstood, indeed, if that gentleman supposed he meant to throw any censure upon him for the introduction of the resolution. Far from it; that gentleman, as a member of the House, had a right, and it was his duty, to submit any proposition which he might deem required by the welfare of his constituents, or the interests of his country. He [Mr. W.] had observed that the claimants might prefer their claims by petition, and that the Committee of Claims still acted in such cases on the spirit of the acts of 1816, although the acts had expired. Mr. W. reviewed the course that had been pursued since the passing of that act, and But The House having resumed the resolution offered by maintained that the Government had behaved towards the Mr. COOKE, of New York, that a committee be appointed sufferers by the late war with generosity unparalleled in to inquire into the expediency of making further provi- the history of any Government on earth. In addition to sion for extending and the more effectually carrying into the two hundred and fifty thousand dollars appropriated effect the provisions of the act of Congress entitled "An by the act of 1825, a sum vastly greater in amount had act authorizing the payment for property lost, captured, been distributed by the Committee of Claims. or destroyed, by the enemy, while in the military service what did the resolution propose? An extension of the of the United States, and for other purposes," passed principles of the act of 1816. Would the gentleman 9th April, 1816, and the several amendments thereto, and from New York extend those principles so as to include that said committee have leave to report by bill or other-compensation by the Government for all losses sustained wise-by our citizens from the enemy, when inflicted by them Mr. COOKE, of New York, resumed his argument in according to the authorized rules of legitimate warfare? support of the adoption of the resolution. He observed Why, in that case, in the event of a city being destroyed that it was not his design to detain the House any great by an enemy, the Government would be called upon to length of time on the subject. He wished that it would pay for every damage sustained by every inhabitant of it. be their pleasure, however, to put themselves in posses- The proposition would be monstrous, and the fulfilment sion of the facts connected with the object of the resolu- of the obligations which it would impose, impracticable. tion, although it was at that time unnecessary to discuss No man would go so far as to defend such a measure. Mr. their merits. For the information of those gentlemen W. expressed his own opinion that a commissioner should who might not have had seats in the House at the time of be established to decide on claims of a nature like those its last action upon it, he would briefly mention what had referred to in the resolution, a mode of disposing of them been done in relation to the claims alluded to. Mr. C. here which he thought far preferable to letting them come into went into a history of the circumstances connected with the House at all. In conclusion, he observed that the the passage of the laws of 1816 and '25, relative to in- bill of 1816 did not emanate from the Military Committee, demnities for property destroyed. The sum of 250,000 but both in the House and the Senate, from the Committee dollars was appropriated for that purpose by the act of of Claims. Mr. COOKE refused to accept the amendment as a modification, and the question was then taken on the amendment, and carried—yeas 71. The resolution, as amended, was then agreed to. APPORTIONMENT BILL. 1825, and of that but about 20,000 dollars was now left Mr. WICKLIFFE objected to so protracted a discusunapplied. From that period there had been no further sion on a mere motion for a committee, and suggested enactments on the subject. He proceeded to review the that it would be better to submit the subject to the Comobjections raised to the adoption of his proposition; and mittee of Claims; and he moved an amendment to that in answer to the remarks of the chairman of the Commit- effect. tee of Claims, [Mr. WHITTLESEY, of Ohio,] that the resolution would lead to the opening of old claims, said that, even if it did, he trusted nothing injurious to the country could result from the reinvestigation of all just claims. If the decision on these claims were right, there was nothing to be feared from approaching them; and if wrong, an opportunity would be afforded them of renMr. POLK now moved that the House proceed to the dering justice to individuals from whom it had been with consideration of the business on the Speaker's table, and held. Another subject had been urged, that it would the orders of the day; with a view, should the motion break in upon the rules of the department. And what of prevail, to move to go into Committee of the Whole on that? Those rules, he conceived, were under the super- the state of the Union, and take up the apportionment vision of Congress, and, if they were good, would not be bill. altered; if improper, as some of them most certainly Mr. WICKLIFFE observed that it must have been were, or had been, it was time for their revision or aboli- evident to all that there was a strong disposition on all tion. Again, it had been said that we should open the sides to get clear of the difficulty experienced yesterday statute of limitations. Now, in reply to that, he must in Committee of the Whole, from the apportionment bill say that he did not look upon that House in the light having been reported with a particular number in it, inof a court of common law; and he would repeat that stead of a blank; and he hoped he should get the unanihe knew of no just or equitable limitation in point of mous consent of the House to make the motion that the time of an honest claim. Was it right to say to the claim-Committee of the Whole be discharged from the further JAN. 12, 1832.] Colonizing Free Negroes.-Duties on Imports. consideration of the bill, and the committee who reported it be directed to report it in blank. Mr. BURGES objected, giving as his reason that he was unwilling that the bill be so reported. He, however, withdrew his objection; but it was immediately renewed by Mr. McCor. Mr. WICKLIFFE then moved for a suspension of the rule, which prevented his now making his motion. [H. OF R. against the resolution, but was in favor of the principle contained in it. Mr. JENIFER said that he should have no objection to the proposed postponement, did the resolution contain any principle at all, but it contained none. It was a mere proposal for inquiry; and as some of the Legislatures of the States were now in session, he was very desirous that the House should go into the consideration of the subject in time to act upon it before those Legislatures should rise. Mr. TAYLOR suggested it would be a better mode of getting at the object for the House to negative the motion of the gentleman from Tennessee, [Mr. POLK.] Mr. ARCHER said that the objection of the gentleman A discussion on order now took place, when the Chair from North Carolina involved the question whether the pronounced its construction of the rule as lately amended; House could constitutionally inquire at all into such a which was, that if, at the expiration of the hour allotted subject. If the gentleman from Maryland should refuse to the consideration of reports and resolutions, any sub- to acquiesce in the proposed postponement, Mr. A., ject was under consideration or discussion in the House, though reluctant to do so, should be compelled by duty to he should permit the discussion to continue, unless some move to lay the resolution on the table; in which case, the member moved to proceed to the business on the Speak- gentleman would find it a more difficult thing to get his er's table, and the orders of the day; but, should there resolution up again for consideration, than if it had been be no subject before the House when the hour expired, postponed. he should proceed to the business on his table, if any, and to the orders of the day, without any motion to that effect. THURSDAY, JANUARY 12. COLONIZING FREE NEGROES. Mr. JENIFER moved the following resolution, viz. Resolved, That a committee be appointed to inquire into the expediency of making an appropriation for the purpose of removing from the United States, and her territories, the free people of color, and colonizing them on the coast of Africa, or elsewhere. Mr. JENIFER thereupon agreed to the postponement of his resolution until Monday next. DUTIES ON IMPORTS. Mr. BOULDIN, of Virginia, inquired of the Chair whether it would be in order for him then to state to the House the circumstances under which a resolution offered by him some days since had been laid upon the table. The CHAIR replied that it would not, unless the House should agree to take up the resolution for consideration. Mr. BOULDIN thereupon asked that the yeas and nays might be called upon the question of consideration. They were ordered accordingly, and, being taken, stood as follows: In supporting the resolution, Mr. JENIFER observed that the State of Maryland was deeply interested in the subject of the resolution, inasmuch as she possessed a greater YEAS.-Messrs. Adams, Adair, Alexander, Robert actual amount of the population referred to than any other Allen, Anderson, Angel, Appleton, Archer, Armstrong, State in the Union. Virginia, he believed, stood next, Babcock, Noyes Barber, Barnwell, Barstow, Isaac C. in this respect; and Delaware, in proportion to her whole Bates, James Bates, Bell, Bergen, Bethune, James Blair, population, had possibly still more than either. Maryland John Blair, Boon, Bouck, Bouldin, Branch, John Brodfelt severely the evils resulting from the presence of a head, John C. Brodhead, Cambreleng, Carr, Carson, population of this description; and if there existed within Chandler, Chinn, Choate, Claiborne, Clay, Clayton, Coke, the power of the Government a constitutional remedy, Collier, Conner, Craig, Davenport, John Davis, Warren she believed it ought to be applied for her relief. If R. Davis, Dearborn, Doubleday, Drayton, Duncan, Ellsthere was any subject in which that State might be said to worth, George Evans, Edward Everett, Felder, Findlay, feel a more lively interest than in almost any other, it Fitzgerald, Foster, Gaither, Gordon, Griffin, Hammons, was this. It was expedient, and very desirable, that if Harper, Hawes, Hawkins, Hoffman, Holland, Howard, any legislation took place on this subject, it should be had Hubbard, Hunt, Huntington, Ihrie, Irvin, Isacks, Jarvis, at as early a period as possible. The Legislatures of R. M. Johnson, Cave Johnson, C. C. Johnston, Kavanagh, several of the States were now in session, and some of Lamar, Lansing, Leavitt, Lecompte, Lewis, Mann, Mardis, them would be looking to the General Government for Mason, Maxwell, McCarty, William McCoy, McDuffie, its co-operation. If, on deliberation, it should be concluded that there was no provision in the constitution, and no means in the hands of the Government, then the States would have to look to their own resources; and they ought to know this as early as practicable. He had proposed a select committee on this subject, only because there was no standing committee to whom it seemed to belong. Mercer, T. R. Mitchell, Newnan, Newton, Patton, Polk, NAYS.-Messrs. C. Allan, Allison, Arnold, Banks, Beardsley, Briggs, Bucher, Bullard, Burges, Cahoon, Mr. SPEIGHT said that the subject embraced in the Condict, Condit, E. Cooke, B. Cooke, Cooper, Coulter, resolution was one of great importance, and he wished Crane, Crawford, Creighton, Dayan, Denny, Dewart, the gentleman would consent to defer the reference for a Dickson, Joshua Evans, Horace Everett, Ford, Gilmore, few days. It was one on which he had himself received Grennell, Heister, Hogan, Horn, Hughes, Ingersoll, Jenimany communications from his constituents, and he was fer, Jewett, Kennon, Adam King, John King, Henry desirous that some further time might be allowed him King, Letcher, Lyon, R. McCoy, McKennan, Milligan, before any action of the House was insisted upon. Mr. Muhlenberg, Pearce, Pierson, Pitcher, Potts, Randolph, S. said he was in favor of the policy which dictated the Root, Russel, Southard, Stephens, Sutherland, Philemon resolution, and, could he be satisfied that the General Go-Thomas, Tompkins, Tracy, Vance, Vinton, Wardwell, vernment possessed the power referred to, he should be Washington, Watmough, Wilkin, Wheeler, E. Whittlevery glad to see such a measure adopted. He would sey, F. Whittlesey, E. D. White, Young.-70. suggest to the gentleman from Maryland the expediency So the House agreed to consider the resolution. of postponing the measure until Monday next. He wished And it having been read as follows: the gentleman distinctly to understand that he was not VOL. VIII.-97 Whereas, in certain ports of the United States ad valo H. OF R.] Duties on Imports. rem duties are laid on various articles of import, but the per centum duty required is not laid on the cost or value at the place of production, but on that cost with all charges (except insurance) added, and with ten or twenty per cent. added to that aggregate: And whereas, also, various minimum values or prices are affixed by law, (by which to ascertain the amount of duties chargeable on the same goods,) differing widely from the cost thereof; so that from the law itself the rate of duty to be paid on the importation of any given article, subject to ad valorem duties, cannot be ascertained: Resolved, therefore, that the Committee on Commerce be instructed to inquire into the practical effect of these laws, and report to the House the actual per centum on the prime cost, which is imposed by them. That they also inquire how far these duties are, in effect, prohibit ory, setting forth, as distinctly as they can, the various descriptions of imports that are thus interdicted our shores, and, so far as may be practicable, to state the costs and charges at which such interdicted goods might be imported. Mr. STEWART, of Pennsylvania, moved to amend the resolution by striking therefrom the word commerce, and inserting the word manufactures, so as to direct the inquiry to the Committee on Manufactures. The resolution, he observed, was of an argumentative kind, and had respect to a subject which most appropriately belonged to the Committee on Manufactures. [JAN. 12, 1832. As to the proposal to send this resolution to the Committee on Manufactures, from the very organization of that committee, it was not supposed, or supposable, that they possessed the knowledge requisite to furnish an answer to the inquiries contained in the resolution. It was the Committee on Commerce who might be expected to be most competent to say by what sum the first cost of the foreign article was to be augmented, before the rate of duty was applied. If the charges, for example, amounted to twenty per cent. on coarse woollens, the duty, instead of forty-five dollars in a hundred, would actually be fifty-nine dollars and forty cents. The proposed inquiry was one immediately connected with a course of trade, &c.—matters with which the Committee on Manufactures, as such, were not supposed to be conversant. If the name of a committee afforded any indication as to what species of knowledge more particularly belonged to such committee, the Committee on Manufactures were not prepared to answer any one of the inquiries contained in the resolution. The committee was to inquire whether any, and, if any, what goods were interdicted by duties, amounting, in effect, to a prohibition. What did the Committee on Manufactures, as such, (he spoke of them only in their official capacity, and meant not to derogate from the individual intelligence of any of the gentlemen who composed it,) know on that question? How did they know whether the duty did or did not prevent the importation of a particular article which he had some time since wished to purchase, and of which he still stood in great need-he meant the article Mr. BOULDIN, in reply, said he thought it must be called common plains, (an article used in the clothing of clear to every man who read the resolution, that it con- negroes.) Could the Committee on Manufactures be extained no argument. The preamble stated two or three pected to tell why that article was not now imported? facts, which he was confident no man in that House was Or could the question so properly belong to them as to the prepared to deny. He referred to the tariff laws as they Committee on Commerce? The resolution required that now existed. Those laws, for example, laid an ad valo- the House and the nation should be informed what the rem duty of forty-five per cent. on certain woollen goods, goods were that were thus prohibited, and at what prices. but by further provisions that valuation was to be founded, These were inquiries which could be readily answered by not upon the prime cost of the article, but upon that cost the Committee on Commerce, and by no other committee. increased by all the charges excepting insurance, and ten If any political preferences could be expected so far to per cent. more upon the whole. This was a statement of operate as to prevent a committee of that House from givfacts, not an argument. It referred to what appeared upon ing a plain and candid answer to a question of this kind, the statute book. The resolution also affirmed the exist- (a thing which he would not believe,) still it must be reence of various minimums, by which goods were to be membered that a majority even of the Committee on Comestimated in a manner widely different from their actual merce were as fast bound to the far-famed American value, and it affirmed that the duties were laid on these system as any other gentleman in that House. Whatever minimum values. This, too, was no argument. It was a might be their political opinions, he reposed the highest statement of fact, and it stated facts; in consequence of confidence in their integrity and intelligence, and he exthe existence of which, the resolution itself had been offer- pected from them a deliberate inquiry into the fact, and ed. It was a fact that from reading the statute book it candid answers to the inquiries submitted to them. was not possible to learn what rate per cent. of duty was concluded by expressing his hope that the resolution actually payable on a bale of cotton imported. It was ne- would be permitted to take the course he had indicated cessary to know, not the prime cost of the article only, for it. but what were the charges upon it, and under what range Mr. SPEIGIIT supported the reference of the resoluof minimums it would fall. Mr. B. said he could not see tion to the Committee on Commerce, to whom he insisted why it was, while we were continually boasting that that it properly belonged; unless, indeed, as going to inevery thing done under this Government had to be laid quire into what might be considered a departure from plainly open to public view, that in this particular subject the true intent and meaning of the tariff laws, it did not gentlemen seemed to be so fearful to have set down in the more properly pertain to the Committee of Ways and report from a committee in whom the House and the na-Means. He tion might have confidence, what was the actual amount of Mr. HOFFMAN took the same side, which he supportduties paid under the tariff laws, and that in terms which ed by some remarks which were too imperfectly heard might be understood by every one. For himself, he de- to be correctly given. He was understood, however, to clared that he did not know what rate per cent. of duty remark that the Secretary of the Treasury proposed in was laid by law on the articles referred to in the preamble his annual report to lay before the people the real Governand the resolutions which he had offered. He did not him- ment value of every article imported into the United States. self know this, and he had not been so fortunate as to have a conversation with any one who could inform him; but he was persuaded that when the resolution went to the Committee on Commerce, where care had been taken to combine so much varied information on all matters relating to the commerce of the country, the House would obtain a plain, succinct, and simple statement of the facts of the case. The resolution would be useful, as tending to elicit that table. [H. OF R. succeed. No doubt every committee of that House would Committee on the Apportionment Bill, moved that the give, so far as they were able, the whole truth, and no- House do now proceed to the bills upon th Speaker's thing but the truth, in reply to an inquiry of the House; but he thought the Committee on Commerce could answer the present inquiries much more readily than any other committee. Mr. WICKLIFFE desired, before the question should be taken, to know whether the friends of the present number of 48,000 as the ratio for one representative, which was now contained in the apportionment bill, would permit him to make a motion to discharge the Committee of the Whole from the further consideration of that bill, in order that it might be recommitted to the committee which had reported it, with instructions to report it in blank. If they would, he should vote in favor of the present motion; if not, he should vote against it. No reply being given to Mr. WICKLIFFE's inquiry, the question was put on the motion of Mr. POLK, and carried by a large majority. time. On motion of Mr. POLK, the House now went into Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union, Mr. HoFFMAN in the chair, and took up THE APPORTIONMENT BILL. The question being on the amendment proposed by Mr. JENIFER, of Maryland, to the amendment proposed by Mr. CRAIG, of Virginia. (Mr. CRAIG's motion was to strike out the words forty-eight, and Mr. JENIFER's to insert in lieu thereof the words forty-five. Mr. DENNY, of Pennsylvania, observed that gentlemen seemed to have great apprehension lest this resolution should be sent to the Committee on Manufactures. For himself, he had as great confidence in the Committee on Commerce as any other gentleman; but he would inquire, how had the present tariff laws come into that House Had not the bill been reported by the Committee of Manufactures? When did the system of minimums originate? Had it not been in the Committee on Manufactures? Who might be expected to be better judges of the true construction and practical operation of that law than those The House then proceeded to the orders of the day, who had framed it? Why then should the subject be And Mr. WICKLIFFE asked the unanimous consent of taken from that committee and given to another, which the House to make a motion for discharging the Committee had never yet expressed any favorable opinion in reference of the Whole from the consideration of the apportionment to American manufactures which that law had been enact- bill. ed to protect? Mr. D. said that he differed entirely from Mr. MITCHELL, of South Carolina, objected. the gentleman from Virginia, [Mr. BOULDIN,] in point of Mr. WICKLIFFE then moved to suspend the rule fact. The gentleman had asserted that the rate of duty which prevented him from making that motion at this on ad valorem goods could not be ascertained, whereas the fact was that it had been ascertained, and had always The question being taken, the yeas were 80, the nays been known. The law had itself fixed the value, and had 72: but as it required two-thirds of the House to suspend not left it to be regulated by fraudulent foreign invoices. a rule of order, Mr. WICKLIFFE's motion was lost. Was the gentleman willing to exclude that inquiry also in his resolution? Was he willing to charge the committee with inquiring whether the law was not evaded, and the country imposed upon by false invoices from abroad? No reference to that fact was to be found either in the gentleman's preamble or his resolution, although he professed to desire to get at the true foreign value of the articles imported. If the gentleman wanted to find out the true cost of the article where it was produced, he sought a thing which was beyond the reach of the Committee on Commerce. Inquiring and persevering, as the gentleman [Mr. CAMBRELENG] was known to be, who was at the head of that committee, this was a matter far beyond his ken. It lay so deeply hidden in the fraud and chicane of foreign manufactures, that it could not be got at even by those who confessed and deplored the frauds and impositions by which foreigners had crippled our manufactures, and continued to this very hour to injure the industry of our country, in spite of all the vigilance and activity which could be employed to prevent it. He again inquired whether it was not fit that an inquiry respecting the tariff law should Mr. BELL said he would appeal to the honorable gengo to the committee which had reported the law. He did tleman from Kentucky, [Mr. WICKLIFFE,] whom he looked not wish at that time to enter into a discussion on mini-pon as one of the most zealous opposers of the number mum and ad valorem duties. That subject would come up 48, to assign, if he could, a single reason why the striking in due time. But he was opposed to taking an inquiry out that number would give a greater vote to any other from a committee to which it naturally and appropriately number he might propose, than he would get if 48 were belonged, to give it to one who had disappointed the suffered to remain. Suppose the bill were now in blank, friends of the protecting system. The resolution propos- and any gentleman should propose to fill it up with 45; if ed the inquiry to the actual per cent. upon the prime cost he could not get a majority, his proposition must fail. of the article at present collected under the tariff law. Would it be precisely the same on a proposition to strike The prime cost, he repeated, was what the Committee on out and insert? He thought the objection was an imaginCommerce never could report to that House. That com- ary impediment. His own individual opinion would be for mittee might indeed tell the House that such and such a much higher number; and if he thought by striking out amounts are put down as the prime cost in the invoices 48 his object might be attained, he would go with the received in foreign manufactures, and their agents in this honorable gentleman from Kentucky; but he did not think country. But the experience of our American merchants so, and he approved the conduct of the committee in not had fully satisfied the country that those statements were having reported the bill in blank. utterly unworthy of credit. The law had, therefore, fixed Mr. WICKLIFFE said that he had voted against striking a price, and, to make sure against abuses, had directed ten out 48 and inserting 45, not that he preferred 48 to 45, or per cent. to be added to it. Mr. D. concluded his re- perhaps a dozen other numbers which might be named, marks by again expressing his confident hope that the but because he objected to 45 itself. He had adverted, subject would not be taken out of the hands of the Committee on Manufactures, to which it belonged. Before any question was taken on the resolution, the hour expired, and Mr. POLK, chairman of the select The question was put, and Mr. JENIFER'S amendment was negatived. Mr. EVERETT, of Massachusetts, inquired of the Chair whether, when a number had been proposed and negatived, it would be in order again to propose the same number in committee. The CHAIRMAN replied in the negative, but suggested that it might be done on a motion to reconsider. The question recurred on Mr. CRAIG's motion to strike out the words forty-eight. the other day, to the difficulties which had arisen in the Committee of the Whole, from the select committee having fixed upon the number 48, and from their pertinacity in still clinging to it, and thereby interposing obstacles to |