« AnteriorContinuar »
The amendments of the committee were then concurred in, and the bill was reported to the Senate; when Mr. KING of Georgia moved to amend it by striking out the appropriation of $20,000 for the documentary history of the revolution now in progress by Matthew St. Clair Clarke and Peter Force. Mr. BENTON hoped that the motion to strike out this appropriation would prevail. He was rejoiced to see the Senator from Georgia persisting in the good work, and he would enlist with him for the war. They had already paid $20,000 for this work, without seeing a page of it; and that, he thought, was enough to break up this improper contract. . He thought that this work was stopped two years ago; but now it seemed that more money was asked for it. His attention had been called to some remarks made in relation to this work the other day in the House of Representatives, which he would now read for the benefit of the Senate. [Here Mr. B. read some remarks made by Mr. Johnson of Tennessee.] That gentleman stated in his place that there was a bill brought in to print this work at $8 per volume, and that it was rejected by the House on account of the price; yet, at the succeeding session, another bill was brought in, which was hurried through almost without notice, at the heels of the session, giving $13 50 for this same work. The gentleman further informed him, that, on searching among the files of the House for this manuscript bill that had been thus rejected, they found the bills immediately before and after it; but that bill could not now be found. All this showed that the contract had been obtained in an improper manner. I am to receive (said Mr. B.) $262 worth of this work; while the gentleman from New Jersey, [Mr. Wall,] who sits on my right, is to receive nothing. At least one-half of those who were now members of Congress would get no copies, while those who were members of the 22d Congress would get them; or, if they should not now be delivered, they would be given to their executors. Two years ago, (said Mr. B.,) we struck out this thing, and the next morning it was reinstated. This session it was struck out in the House of Representatives, and the next morning it was in like manner reinstated. Night work, sir, night work, (said Mr. B. :) what was done in the morning was undone at night. #. extent to which this work was carried was a great abuse. The contract was got through for a work professing to be a documentary history of the revolution, and they had got matter as far back as the settlement of the pilgrims; while they had to pay double as much as the work could be printed for anywhere else. He hoped the appropriation would be struck out. Every thing that these gentlemen had been compiling would be found in the library of Congress or in the library of the Department of State; so that the compilers had not been put to much trouble in making their collections. He was for putting a stop at once to the work; and if the compilers could show that they were damnified, he would readily agree to pay them, and pay them liberally. Mr. SOUTHARD said, that when a contract had been made, and the work commenced under it, it then would be a violation of the principles of justice in refusing to go on with it. This was an appropriation bill for items allowed by law, and, while the contract stood, it did not seem to him to be honest to withhold payment. If there was any thing wrong in the matter, the proper way would be to let a resolution of inquiry be offered, and a committee of investigation appointed. But when a contract was made for a work to be published, they could not refuse an appropriation to complete it. The Senator from Missouri had made charges upon mere allegations.
[Mr. BENTON said he had based his charges upon what a member had said in his place on the floor of Congress.] The Senator, then, (said Mr. S.,) rests his charges upon the allegation of what a member of the other House had said in his place, although the House of Representatives had passed the bill in the face of the statement of that member. He would be unwilling, for his part, to proceed in any case on such evidence alone. He would first ask for the evidence, before he could do what he was here asked to do. Did it, he asked, dissolve them from the contract, because the work was worthless? The inquiry whether the work was worth the continuation of its publication, would be proper enough. But when the Secretary of State made the contract, it was in the power of Congress either to confirm or reject; but they confirmed it. He gave no opinion of the value of the work at present. He spoke of the importance of preserving the records of the early history of our country, and to which he cared nothing about the expense. He was not willing that the Senate, at a single jump, should violate the rights of parties; but, with the Senator from Massachu. setts, [Mr. Webster, he was willing that a committee should be appointed to inquire into the matter. [At the close of Mr. South Ann's remarks, a sample of the work under discussion was handed to several of the Senators.] Mr. HILL said he did not wish to consume the time of the Senate, to throw any obstacle in the way of the passage of the appropriation bill; but to prevent an improvident contract being fastened upon the nation, it was indispensable that the item of twenty thousand dollars towards the publication of the work of Messrs. Clarke & Force should be stricken out; if that item was retained, we would hereafter have no hope that an immense expenditure would be avoided. The Senator from Missouri had said that the original bill which authorized this expenditure had passed without the attention of anybody. The Senator was under a mistake; and he (Mr. H.) would refer to the Senate Journal of 1833, to prove the fact. On the 27th of February, three days before the close of the session, three propositions of immense jobs of printing were brought up at the same time. Each of these propositions, as were many others of a like tenor, was reported and recommended by the Library Committee, who had always been exclusively of one political party. Reports from that committee had usually been made in whispers, in so low a tone of voice, that it had been impossible for him [Mr. Hill.] to hear them when they were made; but all three of these propositions for printing had attracted his attention when they came up for a third reading. The first proposition was for a continuation of Gales & Seaton's compilation of State Papers, extending that work eight volumes, and involving an expense to the Treasury of $63,000. Mr. Foot, the late Senator from Connecticut, was then in the chair; and I called for the ayes and noes to be taken on the question. The attention of so few was called to the subject, and the question was so hurried by the Chair, that one-fifth of the Senate failed to respond to the call I then made. Then, almost in the same breath, came up for consideration the bill to provide for the publication of a stereotype edition of the laws of the United States by Duff Green. Although his proposition was nearly double the price at which the same work had been offered by several other printers, it was passed by a vote of twenty-five to seven. On this proposition, which involved an expenditure of at least $125,000, I was able to obtain the ayes and noes, and six other Senators voted with me against the bill. Then succeeded immediately the bill making provision for the publication of the documentary history of the revolution by Messrs. Clarke & Force; and on the ques
tion of its passage, my call for the ayes and noes was not sustained by one-fifth of the Senators present: the occupant of the chair hurrying the decision, and evincing little disposition to gratify my wish to ascertain who was in favor and who against this extravagant expenditure for public printing. This third resolution, at the minimum calculation, involved an expenditure of about $500,000—it may amount to two or four millions; nay, there is no limit to it. The publication may include every thing connected with the time of the revolution. It is worthy of remark, continued Mr. H., that all these extravagant projects for printing have been in favor of one side of the question exclusively. The three propositions to which I have adverted embraced each branch of the opposition. Gales & Seaton were to have a fat job, and Duff Green's friends insisted that he should have one also. When the proposition came to be considered in the House of Representatives on the last night of the session, Gales & Seaton's and Clarke & Force's bills passed—both belonging to and including one branch of the opposition. Duff Green’s proposition to stereotype the laws and treaties failed; they disappointing the other branch of the opposition. But this disappointment was made up at the beginning of the next session, (1834,) by a resolution of a late Senator from Mississippi, (Mr. Poindexter,) authorizing the publication of land documents, which also passed without attracting sufficient attention of the Senators to call for a division of the question—probably when not half a dozen Senators heard the resolution read. The execution of this measure has involved an expenditure of $57,327 to be paid from the contingent fund of the Senate; and the result is, the publication of five folio volumes, sixteen hundred copies each--or eight thousand volumes in the whole—a lumber, which has been proved to be of no use to every nine hundred and ninety-nine in a thousand of the people of the United States--a publication so useless, as really not to be worth the price of transport for members carrying it home, and which now encumbers the rooms of the Capitol. Three of these folios were but a reprint of the very documents published by Gales & Seaton; and they were twice printed, in the same year, at the public expense. The price of the proposed publication is said to be $13 62 per volume--about twice as much as the price of Congress printing; and this Congress printing is much higher than the prices of printing in all our principal towns. This matter of printing is alleged to be a small affair, not worthy of the attention of Senators. Although it is a subject of little interest here, it may be interesting elsewhere, to look into the expenditures for public printing at this point. From a report of the Secretary of the Senate, made at the commencement of the present session, I have taken the footings of the
several years of the public printing, which I will present:
Printing of the Senate and House from 1817 to 1835.
Years. Senate. House.
1817, $4,837 69 $8,561 99
[SENATE. Years. Senate. House. 1829, $10,385 73 $25,623 81 1830, 11,391 96 34,939 67 1831, 6,882 19 31, 120 82 1832, 18,391 52 67,776 89 1833, 14,757 57 31,329 63 1834, 20,412 50 89,290 64 1835, 85,342 22
By this statement, it will be seen that the expense of printing for the Senate has been multiplied twenty times, and that of the House ten times! The Senator from Kentucky [Mr. CLAy] had reproached the administration for its “utter and reckless extravagance,” and taunted it with its failure in making “retrenchment and reform.” The extravagant expenditures by the Senate and House, of millions for public printing, could not be charged on the administration, or its friends; the Fxecutive certainly is not responsible for them. From the Secretary’s report, I have gathered the facts that Gales & Seaton, during sixteen years, from 1820 to 1835, have received from the Treasury $651,723 84, or an average of more than $40,000 a year; Duff Green, for nine years, from 1827 to 1835, $443,144 78, or nearly $50,000 per annum; and Francis P. Blair, for five years, from 1831 to 1835, has received $19,479 54, or about $3,900 per annum. These persons are editors of the three daily political papers which have been published at the seat of Government.
The first two are inveterate opponents; the latter is friendly to the administration. These expenditures show in what channel the patronage of the public press has been directed under the present administration. Before it was drawn into this temptation, the National Intelligencer was the faithful organ of the public voice; all who could remember as far back as the year 1812, could remember what the Intelligencer was. What is that paper—whose organ is it now? The other opposition paper, the Telegraph, had pretended friendship for the administration until it had procured the printing; but it had instinctively turned to the party which always paid best. Here is a million of dollars paid to two printers, (a large portion of it since the present administration came into power,) whose newspapers have been constantly employed to batter down the administration.
How happens it (said Mr. H.) that all resolutions for extra jobs of printing have been on one side of the political question? Is it because the Committee on the Library have had no political predilections? That committee, I repeat, has for several years been exclusively of one political party; and the administration has not had so much as one poor representative in this body upon it. This Clarke & Force's is not less a political business than the other contracts. The persons employed in it are of one side; if it is carried through the Senate at this time, it will be carried as an opposition measure. The Senator from New Jersey [Mr. South Ann] says it will not be bonest now to refuse to carry into effect this contract. There surely can be no injustice, no dishonesty, in stopping this wasteful expenditure, if Congress shall indemnify Clarke & Force for the expenditures they have already made. Twenty thousand dollars have already been advanced to them; more will be paid, if more has been expended. There can be no hesitation in saying that Congress had been deceived and cheated into this measure, whether the publishers had or had not intended it. Mr. Livingston, the late Secretary of State, to whom the business of contracting had been referred, had been imposed on: he knew nothing of the nature of the contract himself; and it is now said the person who happened to be the agent to make a bargain with Clarke & Force was a person in direct interest with them.
General Appropriation Bill.
[MAY 5, 1836.
Hence may we account for the raising of the price from eight dollars per volume, as first proposed by the publishers themselves, to thirteen dollars sixty-two cents, as prescribed in the contract. It is very evident we have been imposed on in some way. It now seems, as a matter of grace, that these contractors are willing to limit the expenditure to somewhere about half a million of dollars. There is yet no limit to this matter; if it proceeds, the present generation may not see the end to it. I have never consented to this contract, and never will consent to it. The work, when it is printed, is to be distributed among the members of Congress of 1833, who voted for the bill, and to members who have not been in Congress for two years. There surely is great impropriety in this part of the law. It cannot be said that injustice is done to these publishers if Congress remunerates them for their expenses until this time, and the work shall henceforth cease and be discontinued. Mr. BENTON said, as he understood it, the House did believe what Mr. Johnson said; for they struck out the appropriation by a large majority; and that appropriation was reinstated next morning, after operating on the members the over night. He would now offer a resolution, which he hoped would be received by general consent, to appoint a committee to examine into the progress of this work, and to report to the Senate what ought to be paid to the compilers for what they had done. Mr. KING of Georgia said that the resolution was unnecessary, as nothing could be due on the work. It was impossible that the sum $20,000, appropriated last year, had been expended in collecting materials for this work; so tha', in fact, nothing could be due on the contract. His proposition was to strike out the appropriation of $20,000. Mr. WEBSTER observed that it would be unjust to suppose that these contractors would print anything not authorized by Congress. It was well known that they had offered to submit the selection of the matter to be printed to an agent appointed by Congress; and it was also well known that they had agreed to an important modification of the contract. The contract might be broken up; but the question was not now whether they should pay the money or not. The contract had been made—whether improvidently or not, it was not now for him to say; and they were as much bound to make the appropriation, as to appropriate money for the pay of salaried officers. He hoped that the progress of the bill would not be interrupted by the consideration of the resolution offered by the Senator from Missouri, [Mr. BEN to N.3 In regard to the contract, the parties had a right to their pay under an act of Congress; and this was only appropriating the amount to be paid. He hoped no new principle would therefore be involved in this bill; and he would demand the yeas and nays, to ascertain whether the Senate would sanction such new principle. [As the resolution of Mr. BENTon could only be received by unanimous consent, the objection by Mr. Websten prevented its being received.] Mr. MANGUM, in reply to Mr. Hill, observed that the contract for this publication had been placed on party grounds; and this extravagant and improvident contract had been charged against the opponents of the administration. Now, was this just? Who was the first to make objections to this measure? He himself was the first that called the attention of the Senate to it two years ago; and he expressed the same opinion then that he held now—that the contract would lead to an extravagant and useless expenditure of money. It was said by the Senator from New Hampshire, that the yeas and nays were not taken on the adoption of this measure; and this circumstance showed that it was not a party
vote; for when such was the case, there were always enough ready to order them. At all events, the resolution passed at the close of the session, authorizing the publication of a documentary history of the revolution; and the contract was to be made by the highest officer under this administration, (Mr. Livingston.) Now, if there was nothing else than this improvident and extravagant contract, that would, of itself, be enough to show that Mr. Livingston was utterly unqualified for the situation he held. The contract was not only to pay double for the printing, but was for the printing of an indefinite number of volumes; so that the contractors might draw millions from the Treasury. If this was a party measure, (said Mr. M.,) put the saddle on the right horse. As to this contract, he would be glad to get rid of it in any form. He would be willing to raise a committee to rescind it; but he would say that he would take it upon himself to abrogate it at once. He was ready, however, to do the parties full justice, and would pay them liberally; nay, he would even pay them more than they were entitled to. Taunts about this contract were wholly useless. For his part, he believed that no party was censurable for it. Mr. Livingston managed it, as he had done other matters, with great improvidence, though he meant not to impugn that gentleman's integrity. As to the distribution to members, he had always opposed it. There was a degree of indelicacy in voting books to themselves, which he could not approve of. Mr. KING of Alabama regretted very much the course which this discussion had taken. He did not believe that this was ever considered a party measure. He believed that they were divided two years ago, not on account of doubts of the improvidence of the contract, but because they differed as to the mode of getting rid of it. The simple question then before them was, whether they were to go on making appropriations without seeing where they were to stop. If they could see the end of it, or if they could know what they were paying for, they might with more reason be called on to make the appropriation. It was not necessary that they should now appropriate it; they had already appropriated $20,000, and there was no reason why they should appropriate more, without knowing whether a sufficient amount of work had been done to justify it. They had no evidence before them of what had been done, other than a single sheet of the work. He thought that the proper course would be to strike out the appropriation now, and appoint a committee to examine what had been done, and to report to the Senate the best way of stopping the work, and the amount that ought to be paid to the contractors. If they made the appropriation now, it would be at once sanctioning the continuance of the work; they would be called on to make the same appropriation the next year, and there was no knowing where they would stop. Mr. BENTON merely wished to say, in justice to the Senator from North Carolina, [Mr. MANGUM, ) that that gentleman was the first that ever called his attention to these abuses; and it appears from the Journal, Mr. B. said, that he has voted with us in regard to these matters ever since. Mr. PRESTON wished the matter to be regulated to the satisfaction of the parties. They were not bound to proceed unless the other party had proceeded. . . He wished to know of the chairman whether any considerable progress had been made in the work. Mr. CALHOUN hoped the Senate would agree to strike out the section, and allow the publishers liberal compensation for what they had done, and stop its further progress. They had made a most improvident contract. And, besides, he had strong constitutional doubts as to the power of Congress to contract for such a work; and
May 6, 1836.]
if they had, there were few, in his opinion, who were qualified to perform a work of so sacred a character. Mr. WEBSTER suggested that it would be but just to these contractors to give them an opportunity of showing what progress they had made in the work. It was now late in the day, and he would therefore move that the Senate adjourn, which he hoped would be agreed to; and the Secretary could then signify to these persons that it would be necessary for them to make a communication to the Senate next morning. The Senate then adjourned.
Mr. EWING of Ohio moved that one thousand extra copies of the report of the Secretary of the Treasury, in reply to the call of Mr. Ewing for an account of the amount of money received in the western States for public lands, transferred to eastern banks, be printed for the use of the Senate.
On making his motion, Mr. E. said: Mr. President, some days ago you received from the Secretary of the Treasury an answer in part to a resolution of the Senate, relative to the transfers of the public money from the western deposite banks to the eastern cities. There were of that partial answer some extra copies—I think one thousand–-ordered to be printed on the motion of the Senator from New Hampshire over the way [Mr. HubB And..] Day before yesterday the residue of the answer to that call was received, and a motion to print the same namber of extra copies offered by the same Senator; but it was withdrawn at my request, and I now renew the motion, and ask that 1,000 extra copies of the report be printed.
But, before I resume my seat, said Mr. E., I hope the Senate will indulge me in saying a few words on the matters set forth in this report. It will be recollected that when the resolution of inquiry was pending before the Senate, I caused to be read a circular from the Clinton Bank of Columbus, one of the depositories of the public money; in which that bank informs the other banks of the State that it had directed the receivers of the several land offices who made deposites in that bank to receive none of the notes of the Ohio banks in payment for lands, without further orders; and that those orders would not be issued in favor of any banks except those who would agree to redeem their notes in drafts on some of the Atlantic cities at thirty days’ date. And it alleges, as a reason for imposing such harsh conditions, that that bank had necessarily to transfer to those eastern cities nearly all the public money which it received. The resolution offered by myself, and adopted by the Senate, directs the Secretary of the Treasury to state whether the deposite banks possessed the power to direct what funds should and what should not be receivable for public lands; and what amount of money, so received
by the deposite banks in the west, was by his order so transferred. The part of his answer which came in first, and which has been printed and laid upon our tables, goes to the power of the deposite banks in the several States over the currency; and I understand the Secretary to say (for he is not very explicit in his statement) that they have the power which they claim. I look upon this as a most unfortunate state of things, and wholly unjustifiable and improper, as it regards the Government itself and the great business community. The Secretary urges as a reason for vesting these banks with this enormous power over the currency of the country, that they are responsible to the United States for all that they receive, and bound to pay it, if required, in gold and silver; that they, therefore, ought not to be compelled to receive anything that is not equivalent to gold and silver. But this does not meet the case presented; it does not apply to the state of things which has made the subject a matter of inquiry: it is not gold and silver, or any thing that is equal, and only equal, to gold and silver, that they require. All the banks in Ohio pay gold and silver for their notes on their counters, and will be able to do it, unless a wreck take place in another quarter, and the sinking masses drag down every thing in their vortex. Those banks are richly stored with specie, and will hold out to the last. But specie will not do this deposite bank. Drafts on the eastern cities are worth one and a half per cent. more than gold and silver, and they require drafts in exchange; and the bank that will not pay this premium for the privilege of letting its notes be current for the revenue, must submit to the discredit, and the public must submit to the inconvenience of having them refused. I find, too, (said Mr. E.,) to my utter astonishment, if the report of the Secretary be rect—as of course it must be—that the pretext set forth in the circular of the Clinton Bank, for this unusual and oppressive exaction, is unsustained by the fact. The circular represents that neally all the money of the United States received in that bank has necessarily to be transmitted to the eastern cities. The Secretary says in his report, that no more than $45,000 of that received in the whole State of Ohio has been so transmitted since the 1st day of June last; and, if I recollect his figures right, he makes it 1-253d part--or one dollar transmitted out of 253 dollars received. I can say no more upon this branch of the subject than this; that justice requires that it should be distinctly noticed by me; that the incorrect statement contained in that circular, which I implicitly credited, led me, when I first addressed the Senate, to suggest a censure on the Secretary of the Treasury for withdrawing from the State of Ohio funds which I find, in his report, he has not in fact withdrawn. But it now remains for him to determine whether he will permit his fiscal agents, on representations such as this, to establish a brokerage upon the funds of the United States, and while they must themselves in fact inflict upon the community all the mischief which would arise from an actual transmission and abstraction of the public funds. One other thing I wish to notice. It is, that the Secretary of the Treasury says in this report, that exchange still continues easy; that it has never been more favorable. This is the idea; I have not his words. I do not propose to contradict this. I merely call the attention of the business public to the statement, that they may see what the Secretary of the Treasury says to Congress about the exchanges. Every business man in every portion of the United States knows whether this is or is not the fact. Mr. HUBBARD remarked that he tendered his thanks to the Senator from Ohio for having renewed the motion which he presented a few days past to the Senate, (the consideration of which was postponed upon the Senator's SENATE.]
Choctaw Lands---appropriation Bill.
[MAY 6, 1836.
motion,) to have printed a thousand extra copies of the report of the Secretary of the Treasury, which was communicated to the Senate in answer to the resolution which that Senator had offered, requiring the Secretary to inform the Senate “what amount of moneys of the United States, received for public lands in the States of Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, and Missouri, and the Michigan Territory, had been, in pursuance of his instructions, transferred to banks in the eastern cities, since the 30th of June, 1835, and that he designate the banks from and to which such transfers had been made.” It will be recollected that when the first part of the Secretary’s report came in, in part answer to this resolution of the Senator from Ohio, he had moved that a thousand extra copies should be printed; and when the report now under consideration was communicated, he had made a similar motion. In making these motions, he was principally governed by a desire to give early information to the public; so that if the Secretary of the Treasury had been in fault, in relation to this matter, it should be known as extensively, at least, as these reports should be circulated; and that, if no blame was chargeable upon him, he might stand acquitted from something more than a mere insinuation, which, in the progress of this affair, had been, in his judgment, cast upon that officer. He therefore tendered to the Senator his thanks for having renewed the motion; and if he had rightly understood the remarks which had just been made by the Senator from Ohio, he had not undertaken to gainsay any part of the report itself, or to complain of the Secretary for the manner in which he had answered his resolution. He was not disposed to engage himself in any matter in controversy between the deposite banks in Ohio and the other banks in that State. Whatever the Senator had been pleased to say as to the course and conduct of the State banks having the public money in deposite, with reference to the other banks of that State, did not seem to require any notice from him. He was disposed to let these banks manage their own affairs in their own way; it was merely his purpose to show that the course and the conduct of the Secretary of the Treasury upon the subject of the public money in deposite in Ohio, and in the other States mentioned in the resolution of the Senator, were wholly unexceptionable; that he had pursued towards the banks of those States, as far as he had authority to interpose, the same liberal, just, and impartial course which he had pursued towards the banks in the other States. It certainly was known to the Senate that the bills of State banks are not by law receivable for the public lands. Nothing but gold and silver, and bills of the Bank of the United States, are by law receivable; and whatever regulations are made between the banks who have the public money in deposite, and who are to be called upon to transfer, or in any way to disburse it, and other banking institutions, upon the subject of their own paper currency, is matter exclusively for them, and with which the Secretary can have, and should have, nothing to do. The deposite banks are liable, in pursuance of the contract between the Government and them, to pay out the deposites in specie; to transfer their funds, without charge, to any section of the country where they may be wanted for expenditure, or where they may be preserved in greater security. It must be, therefore, wholly a regulation between the banks themselves—a regulation for their convenience—-entered into for their accommodation and the accommodation of the public, and which will be observed so long as, and no longer than, it will be conducive to their interest. Mr. H. remarked that, although he had very curiously looked through the report of the Secretary of the Treasury in manuscript, yet he was not disposed to discuss that report at this time. The report, when published,
would speak for itself; it would show the principles upon which the transfers of public money are made from one point to another. The report will clearly show that they are made to a given point, when a greater expenditure is there demanded than the ordinary collections at that given point will meet the requirements of the Government. This report will show that these transfers are sometimes made, very properly, with a regard to the safety and security of the public money. But never have these transfers been ordered by the present head of the Treasury Department, unless for some such just and meritorious consideration which I have mentioned. Never have they been ordered with a view to prejudice, to weaken, to embarrass the section, or the money market at the point from which these transfers have been made. The Secretary of the Treasury is incapable of being influenced by any such blameworthy considerations.
Mr. H. said all he desired was, that the report might be published, and that all judgments upon its merits or demerits might be suspended until it shall have been printed, read, and considered. He thought he hazarded little in saying that, when well examined, it would give to the Senator from Ohio, himself, satisfaction; that it would afford entire satisfaction to the Senate, and to the whole community. It would show, most conclusively, that the Secretary of the Treasury was not, in relation to this matter, in the least degree liable to censure. He would merely add that, unless he was greatly mistaken, the report would show, so far from pursuing an oppressive course, that no more money had been transferred from those points of collection than a proper regard to public convenience and economy demanded; that it will be found that there were left in deposite within the limits of Ohio, at the latest returns, millions more than were in deposite in that State in June, 1835, and more than, in all probability, will be required for public expenditures within that State for the whole of the current year; and the same remark will apply to the other States, and to the Territory named in the resolution of the Senator. It will be found that more of the public money was, at the last returns, in deposite in Ohio alone than in all the New England States, Massachusetts excepted. He did not, however, wish to pursue this subject further. He hoped that the motion of the Senator would prevail; that the thousand copies would be published, and would be distributed with as little delay as possible.
Mr. EWING, of Ohio, replied, that the report of the Secretary did not show that any unreasonable amount had been transferred from Ohio. The Senator was mistaken in supposing that there had been no transfer, for the Secretary said to the contrary, though the amount was too small to warrant the deposite banks in saying that they had to transmit all the money they collected to the East.
The motion to print was then adopted.
On motion of Mr. BLACK, the Senate took up for consideration a joint resolution, from the House, to suspend the sales of the Choctaw lands, acquired under the treaty of Dancing Rabbit creek.
The joint resolution, as it came from the House, provides that the suspension shall be “until the further order of Congress.” The committee reported an amendment, striking out these words, and substituting the words, “from the first day of June to the first day of December.” The amendment was agreed to.
The resolution, as amended, was ordered to a third reading.
APPROPRIATION BILL. The Senate resumed the consideration of the bill ma