MAY 2, 1832.] General Appropriation Bill.--Internal Improvements. INTERNAL IMPROVEMENTS. [H. OF R. The House, on motion of Mr. WATMOUGH, went into Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union, Mr. E. EVERETT in the chair, and took up the appropriation bill for internal improvements. leng, Carr, Collier, Lewis Condict, Silas Condit, Eleuthe- the road and bridge at Norfolk. And the bill was then ros Cooke, Bates Cooke, Cooper, Corwin, Coulter, Crane, again sent to the Senate. Crawford, Creighton, Daniel, John Davis, Dayan, Denny, Dewart, Dickson, Doddridge, Doubleday, Duncan, Ellsworth, George Evans, Joshua Evans, Edward Everett, Horace Everett, Fitzgerald, Ford, Gaither, Gilmore, Grennell, Hammons, Harper, Hawes, Heister, Hodges, Hogan, Holland, Horn, Hubbard, Hughes, Huntington, Ihrie, Ingersoll, Jarvis, Jewett, Richard M. Johnson, Kavanagh, Kendall, Kennon, Adam King, John King, Kerr, Leavitt, Lecompte, Letcher, Lyon, Mann, Marshall, Maxwell, McCarty, Robert McCoy, McIntire, McKennan, Mercer, Milligan, George E. Mitchell, Muhlenberg, Newton, Pearce, Pierson, Pitcher, Potts, Randolph, John Reed, E. C. Reed, Semmes, Slade, Smith, Soule, Southard, Spence, Stephens, Stewart, Sutherland, Taylor, Philemon Thomas, John Thomson, Tracy, Verplanck, Wardwell, Washington, Watmough, Weeks, Wheeler, Elisha Whittlesey, Frederick Whittlesey, Edward D. White, Wickliffe, Williams, Young.-126. Mr. WICKLIFFE, after remarking that he had been called upon, when this bill was in Committee of the, Whole, to give some explanation in reference to the proposed appropriation for continuing the removal of the obstructions in the Mississippi and Ohio rivers, but had at that time gone only imperfectly into the subject, said that he would now present to the House a brief statement of facts which he trusted would be sufficient to convince every one of the propriety of retaining this item in the bill. Having made a few remarks expressive of his dissent from that construction of the constitution which confined the power of the General Government in the imNAYS.-Messrs. Alexander, Robert Allen, Archer, provement of rivers to the ebb and flow of tide water, Barnwell, Bell, James Blair, John Blair, Bouldin, Chinn, he insisted that if there was any subject over which its Claiborne, Clay, Clayton, Coke, Conner, Craig, Daven-power legitimately extended, and which was free from all port, Warren R. Davis, Drayton, Felder, Foster, Gordon, objections drawn from the locality of its character, it was Griffin, T. H. Hall, W. Hall, Hawkins, Irvin, Charles C. this. No one of the States between which these rivers Johnston, Lamar, Lewis, Mardis, Mason, McDuffie, flowed possessed either the physical ability or the right McKay, Newnan, Nuckolls, Patton, Plummer, Polk, of jurisdiction necessary to the accomplishment of such Roane, Russel, Speight, Stanberry, Standifer, Francis a work. What State had jurisdiction of the Potomac? Thomas, Wiley Thompson, Vance, Wayne, Worthing- Who was it that had placed buoys in that river, and still ton.-48. maintained them? Was it Virginia or Maryland? No. So the bill was passed, and ordered to be sent to the Se- It was the General Government. But all this he supposnate for concurrence. GENERAL APPROPRIATION BILL. The SPEAKER stated that the Senate had insisted on the seventeenth and eighteenth of their amendments, (which have been disagreed to by this House,) viz. the one for the improvements in the mouth of Pascagoula bay, and the other for an improvement of the same nature. Mr. VERPLANCK moved that the House recede from its disagreement to these two amendments. ed was allowable, because these improvements were within the ebb and flow of tide water. But the moment it was proposed to touch those great inland seas which watered the Western States, and which might well be called the Mediterranean of the West, then immediately the constitution contracted its power. To such distinctions he could never subscribe. Mr. W. then went into some details of facts going to show the difficulty and danger encountered by those who navigate these rivers, who, possessing the finest climate and soil on earth, found Mr. McDUFFIE opposed the motion, no information their chief embarrassment to arise from the difficulty of having been received as to the necessity for those appro-reaching any market with their produce. There depriations, and the committee having understood, in rela- scended those rivers annually 4,000 flat bottomed boats, tion to one of them, that the money heretofore appropri- averaging 160 tons, and carrying cargoes amounting in ated had been wasted. value to $4,800,000. There were, besides, 220 steamboats, averaging 175 tons, and worth, with their cargoes, fifteen millions of dollars; forming an aggregate value of the products of the country seeking a market, of upwards of twenty millions of dollars per annum. Mr. VERPLANCK said the items of appropriation were not new: they had been before the House and agreed to, and it was a mere question of form whether they should be introduced into the present, or into another bill. Mr. MERCER thought the practice of inserting such objects in an appropriation bill was liable to great abuse. Individual members might select local or favorite objects in their own districts, and get them introduced into an appropriation bill, and thus avoid the responsibility of voting against a general bill on internal improvements, including those with other kindred objects. Mr. SUTHERLAND, observing that these objects, together with the Delaware breakwater, were in another bill, which would soon, he hoped, be sent to the Senate, thought it preferable that the House should insist, and demand a committee of conference. He then went into an estimate of the extent of water open to steamboat navigation in the Mississippi, and its various tributary streams, the result of which went to show that there were 8,540 miles of such navigation in the West. Was this not an object worthy of a paltry pittance for its preservation? Mr. W. went on to show that the annual expense of the transportation of the products of the Western States to New Orleans amounted to 7,286,000 dollars. The losses incurred were very great, amounting on the value of steamboats to sixteen per cent., while the number of persons actually engaged in this work of transportation amountMr. PLUMMER explained on the subject of the im-ed to not less than 18,000. The whole appropriation provements in question, and produced a letter from General Gratiot, stating that the money intended for these objects had been exhausted on other objects. After some further conversation, in which Mr. SUTHERLAND and Mr. McDUFFIE took part, The question was put on receding, and decided in the negative; and the House, on motion of Mr. SUTHERLAND, agreed to insist on its disagreement to the Senate's amendment. The House insisted on their amendment in reference to which had been made since 1824, amounted to 405,000 dollars. In 1826, the appropriation had been 75,000 dollars, but, owing to the want of experience, that sum had not been very judiciously applied. Since 1827, however, a better system had prevailed, commencing under the superintendence of Mr. McKee, and since his death further improved by Mr. Shreeve. Mr. W. then proceeded to explain the nature of the obstruction from sawyers and planters, and, while on the latter subject, adverted to the melancholy loss of the steamboat Tennessee in H. OF R.] Internal Improvements. [MAY 2, 1832. 1821, when more property was sacrificed in one hour tage of those in the West and the South, was the item of than all the Government had expended in the improve- pensions. There, to be sure, they could hold no compement of those rivers since it commenced to appropriate. tition. Either the Northern men outlived them, or they had He gave some melancholy details of personal suffering had more soldiers in the war, or they were better at proand the loss of life on that occasion. ducing evidence of their claims. The results of the new system were highly beneficial. The snags had been principally removed from an extent of eleven hundred miles on those rivers. He contrasted the former condition of Plum Point, exhibiting a sheet of water two miles in width, rolling with vast rapidity through a forest as thick as any which ever clothed the Western valleys, with its present situation, presenting a smooth expanse, free from all obstruction, and affording a safe and easy navigation. Mr. W. then proceeded to the expenditures on the subject of roads and canals, where he went into the detailed amount expended on those objects in the several States. In this part of his speech Mr. W. was interrupted by frequent appeals from those States which had received least, that he would state the particular amount which had fallen to their share. In reply to Mr. PEARCE, he admitted that Rhode Island had last year got but eighty dollars; and to Mr. McDUFFIE, that South Carolina bad With a view to show that the money appropriated had received nothing. But then he added, as he said, for that not, as his friend from Tennessee [Mr. BELL] seemed to gentleman's consolation, that Carolina had fared as well as suppose, been expended to no purpose, he went into a Kentucky, unless indeed these river improvements were comparative statement of the losses sustained during the to be set down as Kentucky appropriations. To that he five years preceding 1827, and the five years immediate- had no objection. He concluded with some general rely following it. During the former period the loss had marks on the impossibility of making such a system bear been thirty boats per annum, averaging in value 300,000 with perfect equality on all parts of the country, and dollars, besides seventeen steamboats worth 340,000 dol- with a promise that if all the other items of the bill should lars, and their cargoes worth 682,000, making the ave- present as just a claim to favor as that which he had advorage annual loss during those years amount to $1,362,500.cated, they should have his cordial support. Within the latter period, the losses had been five flat bot- Mr. DENNY addressed the House at considerable tomed boats, and seven steamboats, the whole value length in support of the views taken by Mr. WiCKLIFFE, 381,000 dollars, making an annual difference of 981,000 and in favor of the proposed appropriation. Although dollars. And the loss of even these steamboats was not the measure might be defended on stronger ground than so much owing to snags in the river as to their own frail almost any other item in the bill, yet, because it was classand decayed condition. ed as one of the objects of internal improvement, it had Another beneficial result of the improvements had been, met with the steadiest and most determined opposition. that the flat bottomed boats were now able to run all night, The rivers to be improved formed the boundary to six or which had before been impossible. The saving in the seven States of the Union, and passed through a country labor of hands amounted to 24,000 dollars annually, and containing one-fourth of our entire population. They the whole amount expended by the Government, while it formed the great artery of our internal commerce-a produced such important public benefits, had been reim-commerce which was the property of no one State, and bursed more than fourfold in the increased proceeds of which, as it went to supply articles for our foreign exportthe public domain. At the mouth of Red river, 200,000 ation, was strictly of a national character. There was acres of land had been reclaimed, which before was no part of the Union which did not feel, in a greater or worthless, and now commanded a high price, and at a less degree, the effect of the commerce which moved place called Punch's Point, treble that amount had been upon these streams. Commerce might be termed the reclaimed, and some of it now sold at fifteen dollars an favorite interest of the nation, on which millions had been acre. Mr. W. produced a variety of documents contain-expended, yet there was no essential difference in princiing, as he said, abundant evidence of the fidelity and suc-ple between external and internal commerce, which enticess of the present superintendent, and he quoted from a tled the one to protection, while it was denied to the memorial signed by four or five hundred Western mer- other. When our foreign commerce was in danger, no chants and steamboat owners, praying Congress that the money was refused that was required to provide convoys work might be continued. He adverted to the valuable for its protection and defence. Why then should moand successful efforts of Mr. Shreeve in removing the ob-ney be refused to protect the commerce within our own structions at the Grand Chain. limits, and give security to a home trade which emHe abstained from entering on the general topic of the ployed millions where our foreign commerce employed policy of internal improvements, but expressed the strong thousands? Mr. D. then went into a comparison of our hopes of the people of the West, that the administration river commerce with our coasting trade, and argued to which they had brought into power was not going to show that there was no valid reason why the one was not abandon that system. One of the principal items which as well entitled to the care and bounty of the Govern had swelled the expenditure under the present adminis- ment as the other. To illustrate this, he supposed the tration had been the expenditures for internal improve- case when our coasting trade should be interrupted by ment. As to the objection so strongly urged, that the the presence of an enemy. In that case the very prosystem was partial in its operation, drawing money from ducts which would otherwise have gone along the coast one part of the Union to be expended in another, the would now traverse the river: would they thereby lose adversaries of internal improvement would find that their their claim to the protection of Government? Or would argument, when tested by facts, was not so strong as they the trade forfeit its character of nationality? As matters thought it to be. For example: the whole expenditure actually stood, a large amount of foreign commerce aslast year for lighthouses had been 225,000 dollars, of cended and descended these rivers to ports of entry at which 138,000 had been expended in the States opposed Louisville, Cincinnati, Wheeling, and Pittsburg. He to this policy. So in reference to fortifications; out of the might ask for this appropriation as one means of securing gross sum of 948,872 dollars, 206,000 only had been ex- the duties to be there paid on the imported cargoes. pended in the Northern States. All the rest had gone The treasury was now full and overflowing, and there into the States which exclaimed against the partiality of could not be a more favorable time for prosecuting an the system. As to the expenditures on the navy and object so important. Mr. D. closed by offering an army, they must, of course, be made where the navy and amendment, which, however, he shortly after concluded the army were found. The only item on which their for the present to withdraw. brothers on the other side of the Tweed had the advan Mr. BELL had no idea that his remarks in committee would have excited such a debate. He thought it would be better to postpone the discussion until this item should be arrived at in regular course. The argument of the gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. WICKLIFFE] had been wholly aside from the question raised by Mr. B., which referred only to the manner in which last year's appropriation of 200,000 dollars had been expended. His queries on that subject, the gentleman had wholly omitted to answer. Mr. WHITTLESEY made an earnest appeal to the friends of the bill against discussing items which were not opposed. If that course should be adopted, the House, he hoped, would be able to get through the bill this day. If not, the trial of Mr. Houston would recur, and cause its delay. [H. of R. Mr. SUTHERLAND read from the report a statement concerning the improvement of the Kennebunk river. Me. DODDRIDGE objected to the practice of discussing the general power of Government on each particu. lar item, and expressed a wish that gentlemen would vote more and debate less. Mr. BELL said that in his former remarks he had not adverted to the constitutional power, but he would now contend that appropriations for clearing out the great rivers, such as the Mississippi and Ohio, were as constitutional as any appropriation for improving harbors, or the bays or the lakes. All, he thought, that was necessary, was that they should be properly applied. His opinion on this subject was, that a large portion of the $100,000 On motion of Mr. BELL, the House determined to voted last year for that purpose, might as well have been take up the several items of the amendment, seriatim; sunk in the river, considering the manner of its expendiand the first item having been read, proposing a small ap- ture. He proceeded to notice the remarks of the gentlepropriation for the completion of the piers at the mouth man from New York, [Mr. VERPLANCK,] as to the items of Kennebeck river, in Maine, having received the sanction of the department; and arMr. ARCHER stated his inability to vote upon it, inas-gued that the report of an officer, however distinguished much as he was profoundly ignorant of the object pro- for science, was not conclusive against the opinions of posed, and the necessity of the appropriation. He asked practical men. He wished that the benefits should be sefor some information to guide him. cured which were intended by the House in voting apMr. STEWART reminded the gentleman from Vir-propriations for clearing out the rivers, and not that the ginia that this amendment had not come from the Com- money which they were called on to vote should be fruitmittee on Internal Improvements, providing for new items lessly expended. of internal improvement, but from the Committee of Ways and Means, who had for its object to carry into effect existing laws, some of which were of seven or eight years' standing. There was not an item in the bill which had not received the sanction of Congress again and again. There could be no end to the debate, if all the reasons for each item were to be stated and discussed as if the object were now for the first time proposed. Unless the gentleman was prepared to show that the object was an improper one, or that the sum asked was too great, it was to be taken for granted that the appropriation was a proper one. If the gentleman wished the House now Mr. SEVIER entered into statements to show the exto stop and throw away all the money heretofore expend- pediency of the appropriation, and the benefits which ed on these objects, and to leave them incomplete, his have already resulted from former appropriations for the proper course would be to move for a repeal of the law last twelve years. Mr. S. further denied that the snags which directed their completion. They would have been would accumulate again, after being once removed; and all reported by the Committee of Ways and Means, had concluded by declaring his intention at a proper time to not a majority of that committee been opposed in principle include in the improvements of this appropriation the to the doctrine of internal improvement by the General Arkansas river. Government. To those who held the opposite sentiment, this formed no reason against the appropriation. A debate of great animation now arose. Mr. ARCHER asked if the appropriations were founded on the merits of the objects. No, he said, they were continued expenditures in addition to the original appropriations. The Committee of Ways and Means, the organ of the House, had objected to their fitness; and the question was not as to the propriety of selecting the objects at first, but as to the necessity of going on with appropriations for them, without end. Mr. DODDRIDGE here made a few remarks, which the reporter did not distinctly hear. Mr. WILDE observed that some of the items had been rejected by the Committee of Ways and Means, because some that were originated as temporary objects had grown, by repeated appropriations, into permanents. Others were objected to as not having answered the purposes for which they were contemplated; and others again, because their objects were not national, but merely local. Mr. VERPLANCK detailed the views of the minority of the committee in proposing the appropriations. After some remarks on the lake harbors and other works of internal improvement, he observed that, in regard to the Mississippi and Ohio, the President was empowered, by the law of 1824, to direct the improvement of those rivers, and $50,000 annually was voted for that object. The reports on that subject had convinced him of its propriety. Mr. BELL observed, in continuation, that the object of the expenditure of the money ought not to be to make experiments in particular parts of the river; not to be the clearing out of certain channels, the obstructions to which are renewed by every freshet, but some certain and permanent improvement. He could have no interest in opposing the appropriation; indeed, the interest of the whole West was connected with the improvement of its waters; all that he was solicitous about was, he repeated, that the money granted for objects of great public good should be properly disbursed. Mr. ASHLEY bore testimony to the great improvements which had been made in the navigation of the river from the former outlays for that purpose. The first item of this was agreed to--yeas 80, nays 30. The next item was $250 for the Piscataqua river; carried-yeas 78, nays 129. For Deer island, Boston harbor, $6,000; agreed to. For completing the pier and mole at Oswego harbor, Mr. McDUFFIE asked for information on this subject. He should be constrained to oppose it, unless he was better informed than he was in the Committee of Ways and Means. Mr. SUTHERLAND read from the report of the department on the subject, and the item was agreed to. For completing the pier at the mouth of Buffalo harbor, $10,500. Mr. McDUFFIE asked how much had been already voted for this. Mr. VERPLANCK said $62,000. Mr. McDUFFIE asked why these places required so large a sum. Some of them were inconsiderable hamlets, containing scarcely a dozen houses. H. OF R.] Internal Improvements. [MAY 2, 1832. Mr. WATMOUGH and Mr. SUTHERLAND explain-credit to be reposed in officers of the Government aced the object of the appropriation; which was agreed to. cording to their respective ranks; ministers, colonels, or Upon the grant, for Ocracock inlet, of $22,000, subalterns. Mr. SPEIGHT said he was prepared to give any explanation which might be deemed necessary, in order to show the importance of the work. Agreed to--yeas 80, nays 29. Mr. HALL, of North Carolina, moved an amendment, the terms of which were perfectly inaudible to the reporter. Mr. ARCHER regretted the mode in which the House was now disposing of the public money. They were voting away large sums upon the faith of the surveys and reports made by a lieutenant. Mr. VERPLANCK stated that the surveys on the Atlantic had been made by one of the most experienced and scientific officers in the service, Colonel Totten. The estimates had been made out by the department, and had received the sanction of the Secretary of the Treasury. Mr. ARCHER said he reiterated the assertion, with the single admission that he was wrong in supposing the estimates to have been made by a lieutenant. It appeared that they had proved from a colonel. Mr. SUTHERLAND vindicated the course adopted in obtaining the reports of competent officers of the Government, who made these surveys, and formed their judgments of the practicability and expediency of public works, without any bias or prejudice in favor of or against their location. He contended that the House was not voting on faith, but upon the authority of estimates prepared and furnished by the proper and responsible authority. He had always voted, and he always should vote, on such estimates, unless a case should be made out, showing that they were ill-grounded or otherwise improper. He asked the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. ARCHER] to revert to his own conduct, and to recollect that but a few days ago he had told the House it was their duty to vote for an item in the appropriation bill, which, to some gentlemen, appeared objectionable, on the ground that it was based on an estimate. He [Mr. S.] had voted for that gentleman's $30,000 for foreign contingencies, because he had confidence in the report which asked for it. That gentleman also might recollect that he had voted for the salary of a public officer abroad, when he had stated that if he had been in the place of that officer, he would not have received it. But it seemed that he could rely upon the estimates of one officer of the Government who happened to be a minister abroad, whilst he talked of voting on faith when they had to act upon the report of another officer of the Government who was only a colonel. He asked by what authority that gentleman drew his distinction between the citizens of a free country; and whether he would venture to say to the American people that he relied upon the reports of a minister in preference to those of a colonel, a captain, or even an humble lieutenant. He [Mr. S.] apprehended that the American people would express some surprise at such an avowal. Mr. INGERSOLL said, we were no more called on to vote on faith in these appropriations, than in those made on the statements of our foreign ministers. Mr. I. went into an eulogium on the character of Colonel Totten as a man of science and of integrity. Mr. HALL, of N. C., entered into some explanations as to the nature of the improvement intended in his amend ment. Mr. ADAMS said, it was not in his power to vote for this amendment, though he had voted for the others. He felt himself implicated in the charge made by the member from Virginia, [Mr. ARCHER,] but he would tell that gentleman that he could not vote for this amendment, because he had not the information respecting it which he bad had as to others. He had been much surprised at the statement of that gentleman, that he would vote for this amendment on the mere word of the member from North Carolina. He [Mr. A.] could not do so; but if the usual steps were taken, if it should come through the department, and undergo the examination of a committee of that House, he would then vote for it with as much pleasure as for any other amendment of a like kind. Mr. A. said he had felt bound to make these few remarks, in consequence of the observations which had fallen from the gentleman from Virginia. Mr. ALEXANDER followed, in opposition to these appropriations, on the same ground with his colleague, [Mr. ARCHER,] that they were called upon to vote away the public money on mere faith, without any voucher as to the necessity of the works, or the manner in which they would be conducted. Mr. HALL explained. Mr. WHITTLESEY said, the honorable gentleman from Virginia [Mr. ARCHER] seemed to suppose that there was no degree of accuracy in the estimates for these works. It was not so: they came as near to accuracy as it was possible estimate could. The reason why they could not be made more so, was this, that they could not ascertain to what depth the pier would sink before it settled in the clay. Mr. W. further vindicated the economy with which the works upon the lakes were carried on. Mr. ARCHER explained. He should be satisfied if he had as good vouchers as to other works, as those which the honorable member from Ohio had given for the works he alluded to. The question was then put, and the amendment was negatived. The item for the improvement of the navigation of the Ohio and Mississippi was then taken up. Mr. BELL offered a proviso, confining the improvements to such works as should be thought expedient by the Secretary of War. Mr. B. said he had inserted the Secretary of War, not because he thought that officer had more knowledge on the subject than any other person, but because he wished to have some responsible person to answer for the proper expenditure and application of the money. Mr. B. said he had not asserted, as had been supposed by some gentlemen, that no benefit had been done by former appro Mr. ARCHER shortly replied. The gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. S.] had said that he had voted for the foreign contingencies, and voted on faith. If he had voted on faith, he [Mr. ARCHER] was glad that there was a difference between them with respect to the cause of voting. He [Mr. A.] had not voted, and never should vote, a sin-priations, but that not so much good had been done as gle dollar on faith in any individual. might have been. He then proceeded to detail the origin Mr. SUTHERLAND begged to set the gentleman right. of the various obstructions to which the river is subject, Mr. S. had not said that he voted on faith. He had said, and in relation to the mode of their effective removal; and and he now said again, that he had voted in a spirit of con-expressed himself averse to the unlimited discretion herefidence in the report emanating from the proper authority. He had done so, not because the functionary who sanctioned the estimates was a Secretary, but because he was an officer of the Government, whose duty it was to lay these estimates before them. He left it to the gentleman from Virginia to distinguish between the degree of tofore vested in the superintendent. In saying this, he disclaimed all intention of imputing wrong or misconduct to that officer; he was actuated only by a conviction that the great objects of the appropriation would be best attained by following the course proposed in the amendment. After some remarks from Mr. MERCER and Mr. WICK MAY 3, 1832.] Breach of Privilege.-Internal Improvements. LIFFE, and from Mr. BELL in reply, the question was taken, and the amendment was negatived. [H. OF R. mained unexpended of appropriations heretofore made for improvements of the same character, and then stated facts to show that the loss that had occurred in valuable steamboats at a single spot in the Mississippi exceeded in amount the whole sum that would be needed for the ob A further amendment, proposed by Mr. SEVIER, for an appropriation to improve the Arkansas river, and one offered by Mr. ASHLEY, to extend the act of 1824 so as to embrace certain portions of the Missouri, were several-ject he proposed. It had not cost $4,000 to remove from ly negatived. The committee then rose, reported progress, and THURSDAY, MAY 3. Mr. E. EVERETT expressed, on behalf of the minority of the select committee, an intention to present hereafter, in a counter report, their views on those parts of the report from which they dissented. that place a quantity of snags, which had occasioned the loss of property worth $100,000. He then described the rapid settlement of the country on the banks of the Missouri, and the still more rapid increase of trade upon its waters. Mr. A. said he had a few days ago received a Mr. POLK, from the select committee to whom the newspaper, published at St. Louis, wherein seventeen amendments of the Senate to the apportionment bill had steamboats were advertised, on the same day, for their been referred, made a report thereon, [for which see Ap-departure on that day and in the course of a few days pendix,] which he moved to have printed, and made the thereafter, of which eight were bound up the Missouri special order for Monday next. Agreed to. and Mississippi rivers. He had, in the course of the last summer, witnessed, with great pleasure, the difficulty exfrom its being in a great degree covered with the products perienced in passing along Water street, in St. Louis, of the Missouri and Upper Mississippi; and, on expressing he was informed, by a merchant of the city, that, in the his surprise at the quantity of tobacco then on the wharf, course of a short time previous, one thousand and four hogsheads of tobacco had been landed at that place. Mr. A. estimated the amount of goods annually transported up the Missouri, including those intended for the Indian and Santa Fe trade, at a million of dollars. The amount intended for the latter trade, in 1831, was about $230,000. Mr. A. further said that the snag boat had been emtween the mouths of the Ohio and Missouri, forty-five days, and had removed in that time five hundred and fifty-nine Mr. POLK moved to suspend the rule in order to move for the printing of an extra number of the report of the bank committee. On that motion, Mr. FOSTER moved for the yeas and nays. They were ordered, and, being taken, stood as follows: yeas 110, nays 67. So the House refused to suspend the rule, (two-thirds of the votes being required for that purpose.) BREACH OF PRIVILEGE. The House then proceeded to the further hearing of ployed in improving the navigation of the Mississippi, bethe case of Samuel Houston. The accused was placed at the bar, and Mr. KEY, his counsel, resumed, and concluded the argu-snags from the most dangerous parts of that river. The whole ment in his defence. Mr. Houston then requested leave of the House to address it in person, which was immediately granted. He then further requested that the further progress of the trial should be postponed until the next day, promising to be ready at whatever hour the House might appoint. expense attending the operations did not exceed eightythree dollars per day, making a gross amount of $3,735. At one place, sixty miles below St. Louis, Mr. A. had seen in one view, and within the distance of one mile, wrecks of four large steamboats, which had been destroy. ed by running against snags. Their value previous to Mr. DODDRIDGE reminded the House that to-morrow their being wrecked was not less than $100,000, and, since had been set apart for the consideration of business relat-the operations of the snag boat, no accident of the kind ing exclusively to the District of Columbia, and moved had occurred. that the trial be postponed until Monday next. Mr. HUNTINGTON, though willing to accord every reasonable indulgence to the accused, which might be consistent with the state of business claiming the attention of the House, was opposed to the postponement, and wished the accused now to proceed and present such observations as he wished to offer to the House. Mr. BURGES thought differently, and was in favor of granting the request of the respondent in the form he himself should most prefer. Mr. DODDRIDGE further insisted on his motion for postponement, and it was then agreed to. On motion of Mr. PATTON, all the witnesses in the cause were discharged. INTERNAL IMPROVEMENTS. Sixteen millions of pounds of lead, he said, had been made in one year at Galena, Illinois. Freights from that place to St. Louis varied according to the stage of water over the rapids of Desmoine and Rock rivers; from eigh teen to fifty cents per one hundred pounds, and in some instances sixty-two and a half cents had been given. It is probable that eight of the sixteen millions was freighted after the water had become low, at fifty cents per hundred pounds, making a difference of $24,000 in the transportation of that quantity. With respect to the Mississippi river, there existed but one serious obstruction in its whole course, from the Balize to the Falls of St. Anthony, and that consisted in the shoal opposite the mouth of Rock river and the river Desmoine. Here the obstruction consisted, not of snags, but of rocks exactly similar to the obstruction in the Ohio The House then went into Committee of the Whole on river at the Grand Chain, and which had so successfully the state of the Union, Mr. TAYLOR in the chair, and re- been removed by Mr. Shreeve. The removal of the obsumed the consideration of the appropriation bill for in-stacle would produce a saving to the Government in a sinternal improvements-the question being on an amend-gle year of $48,000 in the freight of lead alone. This ment proposed by Mr. ASHLEY, of Missouri, proposing to appropriate $50,000 to clearing out the obstructions in the Missouri river, from its mouth to a place about three hundred miles up, and also to the removal of a shoal in the Mississippi river, a considerable distance above St. Louis. Mr. ASHLEY addressed the House at length in support of the amendment. After adverting to the national character of the improvement he proposed, and apologizing for detaining the House by the details of the subject, he went into a statistical statement, showing what balance reVOL. VIII.-171 was the point where, the Indians rallied in case of a war with the United States, and where they had made their most murderous assaults upon our troops in the last war. Mr. A. gave an impressive description of the Indian attack upon our boats after they had been enticed above these falls, and stated in what manner this same obstruction had occasioned the surrender of our post at Prairie du Chien, and the consequent loss of all the upper country. He expressed his surprise that the improvement had never been made. Mr. DUNCAN here interposed to explain, and stated |