JAN. 16, 1832.] Duties on Imports. [H. OF R. as the monster did that of Sinbad the Sailor, and we are should feel so little disposed to offend. But, said Mr. C., as capable of shaking them off. Sir, this language towards while I make this concession to the gentleman from Massathe manufacturers is abusive, and in charity I excuse it on chusetts, an explanation is due to myself. The gentlethe ground that those who utter it are ignorant of the men man has been pleased to say that we have been bobbing of whom they speak. I do not intend, sir, to be forced, for a long lost document sunk by its weight in the bottom at this time, into the discussion of the great questions of the sea--he has almost insinuated that the gentleman which have been stated. But I felt it a duty I owed to the from Virginia, [Mr. BOULDIN,] and myself, had arranged worthy class of my fellow-citizens who have been greatly the matter between us--that we had prepared our fishing misrepresented, and to that efficient body of working men rod, hook, and line, to drag up this ponderous document. whom I immediately represent, to repel the unfounded What were the circumstances which caused the excitecharges brought against them, and to throw them back ment to which the gentleman has referred? The gentleupon the assailants, to whose skirts they will cling. man from Virginia, some two or three weeks since, offerSir, the proposition of the gentleman from Virginia ed a resolution simply requiring some mercantile calculademands an account of the effect and operation of the re- tions which I certainly thought would be useful to every venue laws; but the object seems to be to limit the inquiry member of the House, whatever might be his doctrines, to the per centage paid for goods. This would be a most in examining the great question of a general reduction of imperfect view of the matter--it would be but a glance our taxes. The resolution called for calculations of the at one side--and while I do not object to the views and charges of importation, freight, exchanges, transportawishes of the mover, I desire information of a more en- tion, &c., on woollens and cottons. It required simple larged character, which will enable us to understand the calculations of the duty under the various minimums when great interests committed to our care, and guide us to use- these goods were honestly imported, and a statement of ful results. such cottons and woollens as were prohibited by the heavy duties imposed by this mode of calculation, which arbitrarily imposes the duty in some instances on five times the value of the article. Among other things, I should hope the complaints as to frauds may be carefully investigated. Sir, it is alleged that a foreign house has, during the past season, been compelled to pay, in additional duties alone, by having their goods marked up above their own false valuation, fifteen thousand dollars; and others have also paid large sums in the same way. These are the men that are cry ing out at the doors of this Hall against moneyed aristocrats. These matters, sir, ought to be looked into with care, for public sentiment demands it. There is another matter which also deserves examination in connexion with this subject--it is our statute value of the English pound sterling. By an early law of the United States, the value of imported goods was required to be set down in the invoice in the currency of the country from whence they were imported, and, that there might be no diversity of opinion, the value of foreign coins fixed by law that of the pound sterling at four dollars and forty-four cents, where it has remained to this day, and is so estimated at the custom-house now. The actual value, however, in our present currency, is about four dollars and ninety cents. This brings goods into the country under their actual cost, as the statute value is false, and a part of the protection to our industry is taken away in this manner. 1 am not sure that I understand the exact reason of this change of value which time has effected, but it seems to me to be explained in this way: silver, in England, is a tender for debts only which are under forty shillings; gold is, therefore, the metallic medium of that country. The value of gold to that of silver is as one to sixteen; and this is nearly the ratio in Europe, while, by our laws, we value it as one to fifteen. The consequence is, our statute value of gold in the coin is less than it is worth in Europe, and hence it becomes mere merchandise, and is bought up for exportation. The value of silver, on the other hand, in England, is less than the statute value of our coins, and as it is also there a mere article of merchandise, our coins will not sell there for the same as they pass here. These circumstances only cause perplexity, and it is time this Government looked into the matter, and conformed its laws to the actual value of the precious metals. On the whole, these are matters which ought, in the adjustment of the revenue, to receive attention, and I hope the gentleman from Pennsylvania will withdraw his amendment, and let the sense of the House be expressed upon my proposition. This, sir, was a very simple inquiry. The information ought to have been desired by, as it was certainly useful to all. But what was the course pursued by the gentleman from Massachusetts? The moment the resolution was presented, that gentleman moved to lay it upon the table. The gentleman from Virginia afterwards moved to take it up, and the House refused. He renewed the attemptcalled for the yeas and nays. Then the gentleman from Massachusetts voted for it; but for what purpose? Not, sir, to obtain the information sought for, but to propose a substitute-a sort of blanket, which effectually smothered the inquiry proposed by the gentleman from Virginia. If the gentleman will read his resolution, the House will perceive that it would have put an end to the inquiry. He must pardon me, sir, for evincing some excitement that a gen. tleman of his high standing-one not surpassed in either House for candor or ability-should endeavor, by such means, to suppress a call for information. I will support his resolution whenever he chooses to propose it; but not as an extinguisher to the inquiry proposed by the gentleman from Virginia. The gentleman has thought proper to treat with contempt all petty calculatious about flannels, baizes, fearnoughts, toilinets, swansdowns, &c. &c. These were strange terms to his ears; he is utterly ignorant of them. This is not surprising, sir, for one of the champions of the American system. He moves in a lofty elevation, far above the meridian of the poorer and laboring classes. Sir, the gentleman may be, as he professes to be, utterly ignorant of the common terms applied to those substantial necessaries of life; but I will venture to say there is not a laborer, a mechanic, or a farmer, in the Union, who does not well understand all the terms which the gentleman has attempted to ridicule. The gentleman from Massachusetts has introduced much extraneous matter, to which, on a proper occasion, I shall reply. Some things require to be noticed now. He has thought proper to refer incidentally to a report of the Committee on Commerce-to a statement of British tonnage, &c. I will merely now say, sir, that the statement to which he refers rests upon the authority of British official documents-the best that we can have on this side of the Atlantic; and, sir, I will add, that, whenever that genMr. CAMBRELENG rose in reply. He, perhaps, owed tleman will question the facts or the arguments of that rean apology to the gentleman from Massachusetts. He port, I shall at least feel it a duty to defend them. On this certainly did, if on Friday last he had uttered any thing floor that has never yet been done, as the gentleman from harsh or rude towards that gentleman. There was no one Massachusetts knows. And yet, sir, I have seen it gravely who stood higher in his respect-certainly none whom he stated in the North American Review, as a matter of fact, VOL. VIII.--98 H. OF R.] Duties on Imports. that that report had not only been discussed, but refuted. I had thought, sir, that there were gentlemen on this floor connected in some measure with that Review, who might have contradicted that statement. [JAN. 16, 1832. branches of industry; and whether the consumption and general industry of the country may not be relieved from oppressive taxation; whether a duty of twenty-five per cent., and incidental charges equal to twenty-five more, is not an adequate permanent encouragement for any branch of industry; and whether we are not imperatively called upon to reduce the extravagant rates of seventy-five, one hundred, and one hundred and fifty per cent. now imposed. We are approaching, sir, a dangerous crisis-one which will require the exercise of all our patriotism. It will be wise in our manufacturers, our iron masters, and sugar planters, to prepare for the crisis, and, in a spirit of patriotism, to make some sacrifice of a portion of their incomes to the public good. The public voice demands a reduction of our revenue to the measure of our annual exfor our large capitalists to resist. Should they persist in a determination to surrender nothing, but to persevere in a system of injustice and oppression, they may postpone the reduction of our taxes, but the longer it is postponed the worse it will be for every branch of industry. They may rely upon it the contest will never be terminated until The gentleman from Massachusetts has spoken of the importance to the country of the woollen manufacture, and has enlarged upon its advantages to the wool grower. concur with that gentleman in his view of its importance; but when he addresses an argument ad captandum to our wool growers, he must pardon me if I answer him in a similar way. I hope he will offer a resolution proposing that the Committee on Manufactures should inquire what quantity of woollen goods have been imported by those patriotic and disinterested manufacturers whom he has described, for the purpose of encouraging foreigners, for whom the gentleman seems to entertain such an antipathy. Let penditure. It may not be prudent, it may not be wise, us see how far our patriotic and disinterested manufacturers have been encouraging the British wool grower by importing British wool and British yarns. Sir, I do not object to these importations. Our manufacturers have a right to get their materials wherever they can buy them the cheapest; but let us not be told of the frauds of merchants, and the patriotism of manufacturers. our taxes are reduced. House can desire. Mr. DAVIS observed, in explanation, that the gentleman had mistaken what he had intended to say, if he supposed him to have imputed to the gentleman from New York any dishonorable motives in the part he had taken. The gentleman has also referred to the proceedings on To satisfy the gentleman from Massachusetts that we the tariff of 1828. When he referred, sir, to the votes on were not bobbing for the lost document, I hope the genthat occasion, I expected, at least from one of his candor, tleman from Virginia will allow his resolution to go to the that he would have fairly stated the occasion of the votes Committee on Manufactures. It calls for nothing but calto which he has referred. He knew, sir, that it was our culations and information which I am sure will be faithdesign to defeat that bill--a bill denounced on all hands--fully given by that committee, and which is all that the and justly, and upon high authority, denominated a "bill of abominations." If that denounced bill became a law, it was not the fault of those with whom I had the honor of acting, but of those gentlemen who voted for the bill with all its "abominations." Sir, the gentleman from Massachusetts shall not misunderstand me. He has represented me as pronouncing philippics against the manufacturing interest. It is true that I have spoken freely, and I shall do it again, of that class of manufacturers who are perpetually making appeals to this House for laws to enable them to increase their exactions from the community. These are the gambling offspring of your tariff laws. But, sir, that gentleman has never heard me assail that much more numerous class of our manufacturers who rely upon their own efforts, and pray that Congress will let them alone. These are not the feeble creations of artificial legislation. They rest on a more solid and substantial foundation. Mr. CAMBRELENG replied that the document to which his remarks had referred was not that which the gentleman from Massachusetts seemed to apprehend there was a design to fish up, but a different one, drawn up since. Mr. BOULDIN now addressed the House, observing that, when he had at first moved the resolution, he had no thought that that sort of discussion would follow which had since occurred. He had himself deemed the resolution to be what some gentlemen had since said it was, as harmless and mild as Peter Pindar's nipperkin of milk; but, had a bottle of aquafortis been thrown in among the gentlemen, it could scarcely have produced more flinching. And, indeed, the conduct of the gentleman from Massachusetts had, at the time, reminded him of the same saying which that gentleman had applied to the behavior of the gentleman from New York: the bird that is hit may be known by its fluttering. But, sir, I shall not go into these questions now, nor follow the gentleman from Massachusetts further in his argument. When the proper time shall arrive, I hope I shall be prepared to engage in that grave and momentous debate in which most of us will be called upon to take a The resolution here proposed two or three simple inquipart. When we assembled here, I had supposed that we rics, founded on a statement of the facts contained in the had all come with a just and patriotic determination to ex-preamble. It expressed no more than a desire to know amine thoroughly every branch of revenue, and to in- what rate per cent. was in fact laid by the law which require, with an impartiality and a spirit entirely national, quires the payment of ad valorem duties on certain dewhat branches of revenue could be dispensed with, and scriptions of goods. Before this could possibly be ascerwhat reduced, without detriment to the public interest. tained, a piece of information was requisite, which was I little supposed, sir, that we were to engage in skirmishes possessed alone by custom-house officers, or by merchants of this character on the threshold of so grave an inquiry. engaged in the importing trade. How could it possibly I had hoped, sir, that we should go into the discussion with be known, unless reference was first had to the bulk and a mutual desire and determination to adjust this great ques- value of the goods, and the charges which were to be tion with a patriotic regard to the interest of the manufac-added to the value before the tax was calculated? For the turer on the one side, and the consumer on the other. Ilaw directed that all those charges, except insurance, were shall not be driven from that course. I shall not vote for first to be added to the prime cost of the article, and then any measure calculated to shock or to annihilate any branch ten per cent. laid upon that gross amount before the rate of industry. Whatever changes are proposed, should be of duty of forty-five, forty, or twenty-five per cent. was gradual. Existing interests should be justly regarded. calculated. What he sought was, a simple, succinct acBut, while these interests are thus respected, it becomes count of the amount of tax the people actually had to pay our duty to inquire whether the enormous duties now imposed upon coarse cottons, coarse woollens, the heavier descriptions of iron, and on brown sugar, may not be gradually reduced without injury to those interested in these on each kind of goods imported; and this was surely a reasonable inquiry. For ought it not to be known what were the duties at present actually paid, before the discretion of Congress could be intelligently exercised as to the de JAN. 17, 1832.] Creek Indians.--Duties on Imports. [H. OF R. gree in which it was proper that the taxes should be re- He concluded by expressing his hope that the House duced or augmented? It was acknowledged on all hands would sanction the resolution in its original form, and not that they should have to act on the general subject during overload it with an amendment, requiring in reply a mass the present session, and it was right that they should pos- of figures so great, that the report when obtained would sess the light which was needed in order to prepare them be too bulky to be read, and would consequently leave to do so. The resolution contained not a word from which the people as ignorant of the true state of things, as they it could be determined whether, in the opinion of its au- were before. thor, the duties ought to be diminished or increased. Mr. BATES, of Maine, said that he had no wish to put It was, indeed, true that the information, in reference an end to this discussion; but as he observed that many to the minimums, might, in one view of it, be obtained gentlemen were taking notes, and probably preparing to by simple calculation; and the inquiry would never have address the House, he would move that the House do been sent to the Committee on Commerce had it stopped now proceed to the orders of the day. This motion was at that point; the mover would have made the calculation lost; and then for himself; but he wanted to ascertain how far goods The House adjourned. which the people stood in need of were in effect prohibited by the force of law. Mr. B. said he would, in a moment, consent to have the resolution referred to the Committee on Manufactures, were it not an absurdity in TUESDAY, JANUARY 17. terms to refer to that committee an inquiry, which, in Mr. BRANCH presented a memorial and remonstrance every view of it, manifestly pertained to the Committee of the special agent, and the chiefs, headmen, and waron Commerce. In answer to a plain, simple inquiry as to riors of the Creek nation of Indians, now in the city of the matter of fact as it actually existed, viz. what duty Washington, remonstrating against the passage of a bill was paid on certain goods in consequence of the tariff reported on the 8th instant, and now pending before this law, and the practice under that law, they were answered House, to carry into effect the fourth section of the treaty here and there, all over the House, with the statement that of the 8th of January, 1821, between the United States no such enormous duty was in fact paid, as those who bore and the Creek nation of Indians, so far as relates to the the burden thought that they paid, because the duty was claims of citizens of Georgia against said Indians, for inin fact avoided by fraud and corruption. Mr. B. said he jury done prior to the passage of the act of Congress rewas the last man in that House who would refuse an inqui-gulating intercourse with Indian tribes, and praying that ry going to investigate the existence or the extent of such an act may be passed, directing the payment to the said frauds as were alleged. But had not the law of 1828 re-nation of the sum of money proposed by said bill, to be ceived the sanction of that House, and of the other branch paid to citizens of Georgia. of the Legislature, he should have felt himself authorized to say, as soon as the law was proposed, that there was embodied in that law itself a spring of corruption that could not fail of furnishing streams that would pervade Mr. SPEIGHT inquired whether his colleague intended every part of the Union. Far be it from him to do aught to move for the printing of the document. Because, which might prevent an inquiry, the result of which if it was to be printed, the time of the House need not would go to show how far the previously honest course of be wasted in listening to the reading, since he conjecour merchants had been corrupted by the baleful effects tured, from its size, that it would occupy an hour, at of that law. No facts that could be produced would sur Mr. B. asked that the memorial might be read. The reading of the document having proceeded for some time, least. pass the conclusions his mind had drawn from the nature Mr. BRANCH replied that it had been his wish to of the law itself. Had the gentlemen opposed to him have it referred to a select committee, and if he could not permitted a very simple inquiry to receive a direct and succeed in such a motion, then to send it to the Committee simple answer, he should have had no objections to their of Claims. The ordinary course of reference would be, he knew, to the Committee on Indian Affairs, but such a adding any other queries tending to elicit and expose existing corruption. But must not this at once be manifest, reference of it he must protest against, inasmuch as that that, although bad men might by false oaths evade the committee had prejudged the question. Mr. BELL, chairman of the Committee on Indian law, they alone reaped the benefit accruing from their crime, while the fair trader obtained that modicum of Affairs, said that he did not know that it was any valid profit only which might remain to him after a just exposi-objection against referring the memorial to the Committee tion and conscientious obedience of the law? Were the differed in opinion from the Creeks on the subject to on Indian Affairs, that a majority of that committee people who in fact bore the burden at all relieved by the which this memorial referred, and preferred the claim of frauds of those who improperly got their goods through the people of Georgia to that of the Creek nation, on the Mr. B. asked whether the information he had sought the subject, and the fairest and most proper reference of fund in question. A bill had already been reported on was not as important to those who asked additional pro- this memorial would be to the same Committee of the tection, as to those who complained of the onerous effect of the duties already laid. He said he had almost under- Whole House which had charge of that bill. stood the remarks of the gentleman from Massachusetts Mr. BRANCH expressing his assent to this arrangement, to contain the insinuation that, in proposing the resolution the memorial was referred accordingly. he had offered, he did not honestly desire a statement of what duties were actually paid; but had acted in consequence of a contrivance with the gentleman from New York [Mr. CAMBRELENG] to fish up some document which had sunk to the bottom of the sea. the custom-house? DUTIES ON IMPORTS. The House resumed the consideration of Mr. BOULDIN'S resolution, with Mr. STEWART'S amendment thereto, when Mr. STEWART withdrew his amendment, and proceeded to deliver his sentiments on the resolution. Mr. DAVIS here interposed to explain, and said that if Mr. S. said the motion he had submitted to change the such had been the gentleman's understanding of his re- reference of the proposed resolution from the Committee marks, he greatly misconceived them. He meant to im-on Commerce to the Committee on Manufactures, did not, pute to him nothing dishonorable. it seemed to him, justify the wide range of debate in Mr. BOULDIN resumed, and said that he could not which gentlemen had thought proper to indulge. But presume that gentleman would have imputed to him any since it had been made the occasion of a general and inthing that was dishonorable. | discriminate attack upon the whole system of protection, H. OF R.] rested. which had been denounced in strong and unmeasured the foreign markets, where the superiority of our goods terms as a system of grinding oppression, of intolerable is ascertained and admitted. Such have been the practitaxation, supporting aristocrats, monopolists, and gam- cal effects of this policy in reference to cotton, the only blers, at the expense of the honest industry of the country, article to which early and adequate protection had been it became the duty of the friends of this policy to repel extended; and had the same degree of protection been those false and unfounded charges. afforded at the same time to woollens, it would have proTaxation and monopoly--monopoly and taxation-was duced the same auspicious results; and now, instead of the beginning and end of all the anti-tariff declamation in sending six or eight millions of dollars a year to England and out of this House. His object was to examine on to purchase woollens, we should be exporting millions of what foundation these charges of taxation and monopoly this article also to foreign countries, bringing back the rich fruits of our enterprise and industry. And why not? The gentleman from New York [Mr. CAMBRELENG] Is not the capacity of this country for the production of tells us that he will be able to demonstrate by figures and wool equal to, nay, greater, than its capacity for the procalculations that the duties on cottons, woollens, and iron, duction of cotton? The growth of cotton is confined to a amount to from seventy-five to one hundred and fifty per few States; but wool, to a great extent, can be produced cent.; he then assumes that these duties operate as taxes, in almost every State in the Union. Why, then, shall a by enhancing the prices of the articles upon which they nation, possessing such immense agricultural capabilities, are levied, and upon this assumption of the very matter import cloth, consisting almost exclusively of agricultural in dispute is raised this deafening cry of oppression and produce from the poor, barren, and densely populated taxation. Let us examine this assumption, and see if it countries of Europe? As to woollens, the protection af be true; if not, the whole superstructure must fall. Ad-forded was recent; it had not yet had time to work out its mit the existence of the duties as stated--do they enhance legitimate and never-failing results: its progress in the the price? That is the question-if they do, then there reduction of prices was, however, onward and rapid. is some ground for this clamor and noise against the tariff; The gentleman from New York had selected flannels as if not, there is none. Now so far from increasing, he af- paying the highest tax, and paid, he says, by the poor! firmed they had diminished prices; such always had been Now for facts, in opposition to theory and assumption; in and always would be the effect of adequate protection; if 1828, the high duties of one hundred per cent. complainthen their effect had been to reduce prices, the opponents ed of, were levied on flannels--have they increased the of the tariff upon their own principles, as advocates of price? No: they have reduced it in two years and a half low prices, were bound to support the tariff policy. What more than thirty per cent., and already we supply the is the practical effect upon prices of these high protecting whole American market. When the tariff was passed in duties? This is the great question which lies at the foun- 1828, the price of flannels was forty-six cents per yard; dation of the whole subject, and must be first settled in 1829, it was reduced to thirty-six cents; in 1830, to before we can proceed a step in the argument. The gen-thirty-two cents; and although wool in this year raised in tleman from New York says the duties on coarse cottons consequence of the great demand seventy-five per cent., are one hundred and fifty per cent., and of course ope- still flannels are furnished at thirty-two cents a yard. Thus rate as a tax of one hundred and fifty per cent. on coarse we are taxed by the American monopolist, who gives our cottons used by the poor. Not so; on the contrary, he farmers better flannels for thirty-two cents, in exchange affirmed that these duties had reduced the taxes levied for wool and breadstuffs, than they formerly got from the upon us by England more than one hundred and fifty per British for forty-six cents in cash; and this is the dreadful cent.; this was a wide difference. How are the facts? taxation and oppression which constitutes the burden of He would state them, and defied contradiction; in 1816, every speech we hear upon this subject. According to the duties on coarse cotton goods were imposed; the pro- the gentleman's logic, the tax is always in an inverse protection was ample-capital was invested--establishments portion to the price--when the price is lowest, the tax is were extensively erected--American industry and skill highest. If coarse cottons, for instance, rose to thirty-five entered the field of competition with British monopoly. cents the square yard, then the tax, according to this What was the effect? Did it increase the price and en- theory, would be only twenty-five per cent.; but if the courage monopoly? No, sir. It reduced the price from price is reduced by American competition and skill to six thirty cents the yard to eight cents! In 1816, the date of cents per yard, why, then, the gentleman's figures prove the cotton tariff, the price paid for cotton sheetings was clearly that the tax rises to one hundred and fifty per cent.; thirty cents; in 1819, it was reduced by competition to that is, three cents more than the whole cost of the article! twenty-one cents; in 1823, to seventeen cents; in 1826, And such are the absurdities upon which all this clamor to thirteen, and in 1829, having supplied our own, the against the protective policy is founded. As to iron, struggle for the foreign market brought it down to eight another article mentioned by the gentleman from New cents. And yet, in the face of these indisputable facts, York, a similar reduction of price had been experienced; we are gravely told that these protecting duties add one in 1828, the duty was increased four dollars and forty hundred and fifty per cent. to the taxes of the poor! that cents on hammered, and seven dollars per ton on rolled is, add ten cents tax on an article which is bought, tax and iron. In that year, the price was one hundred and eighteen all, for eight cents. But the reduction of price is not all; dollars per ton; in 1829, it fell to one hundred and fourthe effect of these high duties has been to save millions of teen dollars, and, in 1830, to ninety-six dollars per ton; yet dollars from being sent abroad to purchase what we now we are told the duty is added to the price, and is, theresupply at home; they had created markets for millions of fore, a tax upon the consumer! agricultural produce, afforded profitable employment to Mr. S. laid it down as a general and sound proposithousands who would otherwise be idle, and we now ac- tion, that duties levied on articles not produced in our tually export this article to a large amount, ($1,278,000 own country operated alone as taxes on consumption; all last year,) meeting our great rival in the foreign market, these he was ready to repeal at once. On the other hand, and overcoming him on equal terms; and were it not for that the duties levied on foreign_articles similar to those the British protecting duties, we could now sell at the produced here, were taxes levied upon and paid into our very doors of the British factories in Manchester and Li-treasury by foreigners, and ought therefore to be increasverpool, a cheaper and better article than they manufac-ed rather than diminished. ture there. They admit our superiority by their own The effect of the American competition was to establish acts--by counterfeiting the American marks, for the pur-an American price. At this price all foreign goods must pose of introducing their inferior fabrics as American in be imported. If, for instance, the American price for JAN. 17, 1832.] Indian Clatm.—Apportionment Bill. [H. OF R. iron is established at ninety-six dollars per ton, and of Mr. FOSTER, of Georgia, spoke in support of the cloth at one dollar per yard--suppose, then, we increase bill, and went into a further explanation of the facts of the duty of ten dollars per ton on iron, and twenty cents the case, and showed that, should Rogers be refused reper yard on cloth, still the foreigner must sell at the es- lief, he would be treated differently from all others who tablished American price, ninety-six dollars per ton, and had been similarly situated. They had been allowed the one dollar per yard--who then pays the duty? The foreign- price of the whole of their six hundred and forty acres of er, undoubtedly. We get the article at the established land, whereas Rogers prayed only to be paid for his imAmerican price, the foreigner paying the duty. This provements. All he asked was one thousand dollars, must be so, or the foreign rival fabric would be excluded while some of the other reservees had received three, altogether. The consumer pays the same; the duty adds six, and seven thousand. nothing to the price; if it did, it would be prohibitory in its effect. The plan proposed, therefore, is to repeal the taxes paid by American citizens on unprotected articles, and collect our revenue from foreigners, by levying it on articles coming in competition with American industry. So much for taxation. Mr. POLK now (the hour having expired) interrupted Mr. STEWART by moving that the House proceed to the business on the Speaker's table, andto the orders of the day. Mr. EVANS raised a question of order, expressing his doubts whether any rule of the House could be so interpreted as to sanction the interruption of a member while speaking. The SPEAKER explained himself as having understood the rule lately adopted by the House as intended expressly to authorize the interruption of a debate at the expiration of the hour allotted to reports and resolutions. Mr. EVANS made no appeal, and the question being put on Mr. POLK's motion, it prevailed. The house having read third time the bill for the relief of John Rogers, being an The question being taken, the bill was passed. APPORTIONMENT BILL. The House, on motion of Mr. POLK, went again into Committee of the Whole on the apportionment bill, Mr. HOFFMAN, of New York, in the chair. The question before the committee being on the motion of Mr. CRAIG to amend the bill by striking out "forty-eight," amended by Mr. STEWART, to insert "forty-six in lieu thereof," Mr. POLK said that, for himself, he was entirely willing to try the motion of the gentleman from Virginia, in the hope to disembarrass the bill from the difficulties under which it had been laboring. He was friendly to the ratio reported; but if another ratio could command a majority of the votes, he was disposed to accede to any experiment by which the fact could be ascertained. Upon the motion to strike out, all the friends of 48,000 would, of course, vote against the motion; if the motion was carried against them, another number could be substituted in its place. He was of opinion that 48,000 was the most acceptable ratio of any. Yet he was willing that all who felt partial to any other number should have ample opportunity of trying it on the fairest grounds. He felt it to be highly Mr. CLAY, of Alabama, said he objected to the bill. important to pass the bill, and that speedily as possible. This man, Rogers, as he understood, resided not in There was not only other important business pressing the Cherokee but in the Creek territory; his improve upon their attention, but the Legislatures of half the ments were said to be not worth the sum allowed him, States in the Union were now in session, who would now and Mr. C. feared, should the bill pass, that it would have it in their power to arrange districts without the delead to similar claims from persons residing on one side of lay and expense of another session. He was not surprised a territorial line, to lands lying on the other, and thus, at the interest that had been manifested. This subject had whenever a treaty altered Indian boundaries, the House would be assailed by claims of this description. INDIAN CLAIM, always excited deep interest, and the law had always been the result of a spirit of compromise and concession, which he had no doubt would be shown on the present occasion. Mr. BURGES inquired whether a motion to reconsider must not be made as early as to-morrow. The CHAIRMAN did not understand, if 48,000 was struck out in committee, that it would affect the bill in the House, unless the amendment was adopted there. Mr. BELI., chairman of the Committee on Indian Affairs, went into a full explanation of the nature of the Mr. CRAIG said he had made the motion in order to claim, and stated the case of Rogers to be one of pecu- put the several numbers proposed for the ratio upon equal liar hardship. Although a white man, Rogers was held footing. If, after his motion was carried, it was found no and considered, under the usage of the country and the other number could demand a majority, he was willing to Government, to be a member of the Cherokee tribe. make the motion to reconsider the vote for striking out On the policy of thus considering whites who resided 48,000. He would vote for 48,000, if, after a fair trial, he with the Indians, Mr. B. said he should make no remark: could not procure one that suited him better inserted. He the committee found such to be the fact, both with re- felt the force of the remarks of the gentleman from Tenspect to the practice of the General Government, and nessee, [Mr. POLK,] and hoped other gentlemen would also the Government of Georgia. At the treaty made in act under the influence of those suggestions. 1813, fifteen or twenty of these whites had been allowed reservations of land, some of them by name. Rogers was similarly situated. He had cleared a part of his land, erected buildings, planted orchards, and was, on the whole, comfortably situated. This reservation had been allowed him on condition that he would consent to become a citizen of Georgia. But, on settling a disputed boundary between the Creeks and Cherokees, it was discovered, contrary to expectation, that his farm lay within the land of another tribe. By a treaty with Georgia, the lands of the Cherokees were ceded to that State, and thus Rogers lost both his lands and improvements. Georgia made no compensation to persons in this situation, and it was manifest the man had an equitable claim to redress somewhere. His only resource was an application to that House; and hence the committee had been induced to report the bill. But if great considerations of public policy forbade the grant, although injustice would certainly be done to an individual, the committee would not insist on the passage of the bill. Mr. POLK had not changed his opinion as to the propriety of adhering to 48,000. All who preferred that number would vote against striking it out. That will settle the naked proposition, whether a majority of the House prefer that ratio absolutely. Mr. BURGES said that every gentleman who wished either for a higher or a lower number would vote against 48,000. He would prefer it to be done by motion to amend. He was afraid, if 48,000 was once struck out, it would never be got back again. Mr. BARRINGER said that gentleman talked of reconsideration as if it was necessary in case 48,000 should be struck out here, and no other number agreed upon. They seemed to suppose themselves in the House. In this committee we strike out and insert what we please. Suppose |