SENATE.] Fortification Bill. the Maine side of the river, may possibly, be occupied From the Portsmouth Advertiser, of September 25, 1828. harbor: Ships. Falkland, 54. Bedford, 32 1696 America, 50 1749 Raleigh, 32 1776 Ranger, 18 1777 America, 74 1782 Crescent, 32 Scammell, 14 Portsmouth, 24 Congress, 36 Washington, 74 Porpoise, 14 Concord, 18 Alabama, 74 Santee, 44} Not launched. 1797 1544 [MAY 24, 1836. country, under the agency of that true patriot, the honThe America, the first ship of the line built in our orable John Langdon, was in 1782 presented by ConThe Ranger, another vessel built at that navy yard, is gress to our distinguished ally, the King of France. identified, with its intrepid commander, with some of the glorious achievements of our Revolution. This naval station is approachable by vessels of any size; it is situa defended by works erected for that purpose upon any ted on an island of less than sixty acres, and is easily of the commanding heights by which it is surrounded. by bridges, that in case of fire it may be readily defendThis navy yard is now so connected with the main shore, try; and it is believed that insurance of the public proed by the citizens of Portsmouth and the adjacent counperty on that island, by reason of the facilities of communication, is reduced at least one per cent., and is less advantage which this yard possesses over other yards, than at any other naval depot upon our coast. Another is, that it is located in the midst of ship carpenters building can be procured at a less rate than elsewhere; and builders, at a point where all the materials for shipwhere every description of labor costs less than it does at the yard at Charlestown, Massachusetts, at Gosport, or at any other yard in our country. "Here ship carpentained upon an emergency for repairing or building. ters, in any number usually wanted, can be readily obAt Gosport, nearly one-third of all the expenditures in the United States is made for the repairs of our public proachable. During this very last winter, if I am not vessels; and at certain seasons of the year, it is not approach the yard. A heavy loaded seventy-four would mistaken, it has not been possible at all times to apfind it difficult, without lessening her cargo, to reach that point in twenty-five feet of water, the usual depth in full tide; while at Portsmouth, at the lowest ebb, near feet." the yard, you have always a depth of at least forty-five less at this, than at the stations further south. Again: "the deterioration in the hull of ships is far ence of twenty-five per cent. in this respect may be A differcalculated on; an important and serious consideration, ry.' when vessels of war are for a long time laid up in ordinahaving a dry dock established at this naval station; and, This single fact shows the all-importance of with reference to this very subject, Congress passed an act on the 3d of March, 1827, authorizing the President to cause the navy yards of the United States to be thoroughly examined, and plans to be prepared and sanctioned by the President, for the improvement of the same, and the preservation of the public property therein. And by the same act the President is authorized to plan, for the use of the navy of the United States; the have constructed two dry docks on the most approved south, and the other to the north of the Potomac river. one of the said docks to be erected at some point to the 'Commodores Chauncey, Bainbridge, and Morris were appointed commissioners by the President, to carry this act into effect. The high opinion they entertained of this yard, is plainly made manifest by the improvements they recommended, and the dimensions of the ground, plans of which are here subjoined. "One dry dock: commandant's house, 50 feet square, with out-buildings extending 80 feet in length; houses for five officers; one, 32 feet in front, the other four 30 1797 feet, including out-buildings extending 85 feet to the porter's house, 30 feet by 25; two ship-houses, each 240 feet by 120, to be located one each side of the 1799 bridge: smithery, 150 feet by 60: one timber shed, 300 feet by 65: two ditto, 200 feet by 65: one do. 175 feet by 65: one saw shed, 70 feet by 25: one ditto, 70 feet by 20: one timber dock, 440 feet by 200: one storehouse, 125 feet by 50: one mast and boat shed, 250 feet by 70: 1814 1821 one rigging and sail loft, 175 feet by 70: pile wharf, 150 feet by 60: armory, tinman's and coppersmith's shop, 65 feet by 25: quay walls, additional wharves, building slip, road, anchor and gun wharf, and coal-house. "When these improvements are carried into effect, the yard will probably by levelled, the wooden buildings all taken down, except the two ship-houses, and the new buildings be constructed of brick and stone." It would be difficult to present any piece of evidence of higher authority than this report of the commissioners-which goes most clearly to establish the extent and importance of this navy yard; and which also recommends the establishment of a "dry dock" to be connected with this station. I would state, Mr. President, as further evidence of the extent of the public property at this naval depot, that there was, in 1829, ship timber depos ited for use in the timber dock, and in sheds, to the value of three hundred and eighty-two thousand dollars; and that the material for ship-building has more than doubled since at that yard. Again: it is a fact, and worthy of consideration, that any given vessel of any size can be built, and is ordinarily built, at Portsmouth, from 12 to 20 per cent. less than at any other yard in the country; it results from this fact, that materials can there be procured at a cheaper rate than they can at other yards. Labor is cheaper also, and can, and does, accomplish more. Commodore Bain bridge, in his report to the Secretary of the Navy in 1827, shows the sum total of the whole cost of building each vessel at each yard, when any other vessel of a like size has been built at any other yard, and exhibits the whole cost of building the sloops Lexington and Boston, (vessels of the same size,) and the schooners Porpoise and Alligator. It will distinctly appear that a vessel built at New York costs 15 per cent, more than one of the same size built at Boston; and a vessel built at Boston costs 10 per cent. more than one of the same size built at Portsmouth. The Lexington, a sloop, was built in New York, and cost $112,080 89. The Boston, a sloop, built in Boston, cost $96,938 40; making a difference of more than 15 per cent. in the cost of building between New York and Boston, and in favor of the latter. The Porpoise, a schooner, was built at Portsmouth, and cost $20,408 75. The Alligator, a schooner, was built at Boston, and cost $22,745 65; making a difference of more than 10 per cent. in the cost of building between Portsmouth and Boston, and in favor of the former; and hence it follows, that the difference in the cost of building between New York and Portsmouth, is more than 25 per cent., and in favor of Portsmouth. I have stated, Mr. President, all that I wish to state with reference to the navy yard at Portsmouth, and with reference to the public property ordinarily at that yard. I would, then, close this part of my argument, by adding that fortifications at the mouth of the Piscataqua would afford ample protection and security to this naval station, and to the public property there deposited. It is also necessary to fortify the harbor of Portsmouth, with a view to the better security and protection, in time of war, of the population of Portsmouth and of the adjacent country. The amount of population which would derive an immediate benefit in time of war by the erection of a permanent fortification at the mouth of the Piscataqua, would fall but little short of thirty thousand inhabitants, comprising as patriotic, as enterprising, and as industrious a portion of the community, as can be found within the limits of the republic. They have strong and unanswerable claims upon the Government for protection and security. No State did more, in proportion to her means, for the achievement of American independence, than New Hampshire; she was one of the pioneers of the Revolution. No State has done more to maintain inviolate that independence; no State has received less favor at the [SENATE. hands of the Government. It is due, then, to New Hampshire, that her commercial capital-the only seaport town of her State-should be well fortified, and rendered impregnable to the attacks of her and her country's enemies. A fortification is necessary for the proper protection and security of private property. As I have before remarked, Portsmouth is situated about three miles from the mouth of the Piscataqua. It has a population of nearly ten thousand inhabitants; it has a large shipping interest, employed principally in the carrying trade; an interest, to a very considerable extent, in the South Sea whale fishery. She has also a large interest in the West India trade, and a very extensive coasting trade. It is not my purpose, Mr. President, to enter into any comparison between the tonnage of Portsmouth and the tonnage of other ports, or between the exports and imports of New Hampshire with the exports and imports of other States. I hold such calculations and comparisons wholly unnecessary and superfluous. It is on the ground of affording a just protection to the population, and adequate security to public and private property, that I rest our claim in favor of the measure. It is on these grounds that I place my reliance for the vote of the Senate for this particular appropriation. The Piscataqua divides into five branches above Portsmouth. The most easterly branch is called Salmon Falls river. The tide flows up this river to South Berwick, a flourishing and populous town in Maine. Upon this branch is also situated Somerset, in New Hampshire, a large manufacturing village, with a population exceeding three thousand inhabitants, and giving employment to a capital in manufactures of nearly two millions of dollars. The next westerly branch of the Piscataqua is the Cocheco river; the tide extending up this river to Dover, a distance of thirteen miles at least from the mouth of the Piscataqua. This town now contains nearly seven thousand inhabitants, and has an extensive trade. Dover is second to no town in New England, save Lowell, in the excellence and extent of its manufacturing establishments, employing a capital of three millions of dollars. This place has also a large shipping interest. There are annually built, both at Dover and at South Berwick, many private vessels. Still further west, you strike the Durham river; at the head of tide waters stands Durham, a flourishing ship-building town. Another branch of the Piscataqua is Lamprey river; at the head of the tide waters of which is situated Newmarket, also an extensive manufacturing town, having not less than a million of dollars entirely employed in that business, and possessing a population of upwards of two thousand inhabitants. The fifth and last branch leads to Exeter, containing a population of three thousand inhabitants; a town of great wealth, and possessing also an interest in manufactures. If the Piscataqua consisted of but one branch from the head of tide water to the ocear, and upon it were concentrated, in one town, all the population and all the business of the various towns on its branches, the importance, the necessity of protecting the entrance of this river, would be better understood. But I cannot doubt, Mr. President, that enough has been shown to prove the necessity of fortifying the harbor at Portsmouth. The project of erecting a fortification at the mouth of the Piscataqua has not a recent origin. This point has been more or less protected and defended for nearly a century. Before the period, and during the period, of the Revolution, the British Government had erected a fort for its defence and protection; and, from the adop tion of the constitution to this period, appropriations have been made (sparingly, I admit) for the repairs of this fortress. In speaking of Fort Constitution, Mr. Jefferson says, that it is the remains of an ancient for SENATE.] GALES & SEATON'S REGISTER tification, which has been repaired at different periods, As further evidence that the Government considered There can be, Mr. President, no doubt of the practicability of the measure: it is inferrible from the facts which have already been stated; from the antiquity of the fortress, and the repairs that have from time to time been made by the Government. as to the location of the contemplated fortification. ObThere is as little doubt servation, experience, common sentiment, have decided on its necessity, its practicability, as well as upon its locality. tance. 1548 [MAY 24, 1856 difficult for them, having fixed its size and its number of guns, to have calculated, with a great degree of accuracy, what would be its cost? It is worthy of remark, that the contemplated works at Penobscot at $100,000; and it will be found, by looking into the survey and estimate this same board of engineers then estimated the cost of after a most minute, particular, and detailed computamade since, with reference to the cost of the same work, expense of the labor, that the aggregate of the cost extion of the expense of the requisite materials, and of the ceeds the estimate made by the board of engineers only any detailed estimate of the cost of the contemplated one thousand dollars. And such will be the result of liable to great fluctuations; the cost of labor is very work at Portsmouth. nearly the same, one season with another; and whoever The value of the material is not sees the work completed will find that the expenditure: has not exceeded the estimates. cost. The sentiments of the Senator from South Carolina upon that point deserve much consideration. Every commencing any public work, should first compute the wise man, who is about to build for himself a house, first computes the cost; and every wise Government, before But, Mr. President, all this will be done. The Secretary of War will decide upon its form, its location, and have an accurate estimate made of its cost, before a He would do all this, in the faithful discharge of his official duty. He would do this with reference to his single dollar shall be expended under this appropriation. own reputation. Another idea has been suggested, here that is, it would prevent a distribution of the public moand elsewhere, and by way of objection to this bill, and neys among the States, to the amount of the appropriations. I shall be slow to believe that any such consideration can influence the action of this body. What works ted. I am free, however, to say that the following exare necessary, I trust will be established; and what money can be judiciously expended, I trust will be appropriader consideration will be passed. tract from the speech of a member of Congress, has in some measure weakened my faith that the bill now un Another point remains to be examined, and that is, would its erection be necessarily attended with a large and unreasonable expenditure of the public money? or, in other words, can different works of defence be devised costing less, which will accomplish the same gen eral object? This will not, and cannot, be alleged. It will not be pretended that the expense can be dispro- sented; a motive which would have its influence on him portionate to its importance; that it will cost more than "A new and strong motive for economy is now preit is worth. For one, I verily believe that the honorable Senator from South Carolina [Mr. CALHOUN] would give of the proceeds of the public lands, in effect, of the surin regard to every expenditure. He looked forward to me his vote if he were certain that its actual cost would plus revenue, among the States. the passage of a bill now in progress for the distribution quadruple the estimate. opposed? Its importance will not be questioned-its On what ground, then, is it would pass the present session." He trusted the bill practicability cannot be questioned; nor will it be pretended that its cost can be disproportionate to its impor- in his judgment, is necessarily connected with the genThe Senator from South Carolina says that he will vote for every measure, for every appropriation, which, It is opposed for the single reason that we have eral defence and permanent protection of the country, not, accompanying the Secretary's report, a map and survey, giving all the localities, and an actual detailed estimate giving the amount in the aggregate of the ex- dicious, whatever the exigency of the country shall deand that he will go no farther. Just so far will I go, and penditure which will be required, and the particulars mand, with reference to general defence, I stand ready, no farther. What shall be necessary, what shall be ju which go to make up the general aggregate. The ob, with the Senator from South Carolina, to appropriate; jection is not well taken; for we have a map giving all and I trust that no Senator in this body, whether the the localities, which has been in the possession of the committee; and the facts already narrated go most clearly to show where this fortification must be erected; friend or the foe of the administration, would wish to do less, or could be induced to do more. and we are not without book, we are not without author- country requires in relation to public defence, to genthe state of our affairs, whatever the condition of our Whatever ity, upon the cost and necessary expense for this work. By the report of General Bernard, made in February, honestly differ, in sentiment, with reference to this ques1821, the cost of fortifying the harbor of Portsmouth eral security, is matter of opinion. Men may differ, and was estimated at $500,000. That is now the estimate. This is not mere conjecture. This is not, as has been all profess, and I trust sincerely profess, a willingness to tion; but whatever is required, whatever is clearly nestated, "guess work." The estimate was not made in grant. This, then, should be the subject, the exclusive cessary for the accomplishment of these great objects, 1821, nor is it now made, without calculation. They subject, for our investigation. We should enter upon had certain principles-known data-upon which to base their estimate. The size was determined; the number its consideration with minds free from local jealousy, of guns was fixed; the ground had been carefully in-cal and party excitement which may tend to mislead and spected by the board of engineers in 1821; and was it misguide our better judgment. There is great danger from sectional feeling; we should lay aside every politi that we shall bring into this debate too ardent a temperament for a fair discussion and judicious determination of the whole matter. I have said, sir, that no Senator would wish to go further than the Senator from South Carolina professes himself willing to go in making appropriations for this branch of the public defence. There can be no disposition wastefully, extravagantly, with no regard to economy, to appropriate the public money for fortifications. We have light upon this subject sufficient for our guidance. We have no occasion, at this day, to engage in unprofitable experiment, whatever may have been the injudicious application of the public money upon fortifications at certain points heretofore. From actual surveys, from the most careful and scientific examinations, we have now shed upon this whole subject the most ample and satisfactory information. The proper location of the public fortresses, for general defence and permanent protection, the kind of fortifications expedient and necessary, are matters settled by approved authority. The documental history with which we have been furnished, clearly shows at what points upon our seaboard, upon our extended maritime frontier, further defences are required. In connexion with this subject, the surplus revenue is constantly presented to our consideration. That subject is arrayed before us in the most imposing form. The Senator from South Carolina says that all the projects embraced in this bill, and all the projects in contemplation connected with the general defence, cannot by any possibility reduce the revenue to the wants of the Government. Be it so. I shall rejoice if the predictions of the Senator shall become history. But shall our course be governed by the miserable and sordid policy, that the amount of appropriations for public defence is to be regulated by the effect to be produced upon the surplus fund? That we are to withhold appropriations, if that fund should thereby be lessened, so as to render it unimportant to make distribution of the remainder among the States? I protest against any such policy. What, sir, have we to do with the state of the Treasury, any further than to ascertain whether its condition will bear the appropriation contemplated? What have we to do with the surplus money, in deciding where, and how, and when a fortification shall be erected for the purpose of permanent and public defence? Sir, whether the passage of this bill, and whether the adoption of all the projects proposed by the chairman of the Committee on Military Affairs should have the effect mentioned by the Senator from South Carolina, or whether it should have the effect to exhaust every dollar in the Treasury, save what might be necessary for the support of the Government, would be to me wholly immaterial. I would go on steadily and perseveringly to appropriate and expend for these great objects as fast as I could, in the exercise of a sound discretion, and with a proper regard to economy, until our chain of fortresses shall be perfected upon our maritime frontier. This would be my policy; and I shall endeavor to exercise my best judgment where fortifications are necessary, with a view to defence and security. And there, sir, I would erect them, and of such materials that the lapse of time can have no effect upon their durability, be the cost, the charge, the consequent expenses ever so large. I know of no better principle to guide us in our action upon this bill, than to suppose that our country, after a lapse of five years, will be inevitably and unalterably involved in a war with the most powerful nation in Christendom. What, then, Mr. President, would be our action upon this bill? What would be the voice of wisdom, of prudence? What would a proper regard to public and private security, to general and individual protection, demand at our hands? Precisely, sir, what [SENATE. the same general considerations now require. What would then be the dictate of good sense, of sound discretion, would now be suggested under the influence of the same safe principles. If we were certain that, after the expiration of five years, war, with all its evils, were to visit our land, there is no man who loves his country, there is no patriot, who would not exert all his exergies to be prepared for the calamity; to strengthen our weakness, to fortify every vulnerable point, to render impreg nable our seacoast and our lake frontiers, to put in perfect defence our whole country: this would be the course of every patriot. And, Mr. President, just this course should be observed now, with reference to this subject. Mr. WEBSTER admitted the great importance of Portsmouth harbor, and expressed his entire willingness to vote for the original appropriation; but he must vote against the amendment. The question was then taken on the amendment, and decided as follows: YEAS-Messrs. Benton, Brown, Buchanan, Cuthbert, Ewing of Illinois, Grundy, Hill, Hubbard, King of Alabama, Linn, Rives, Robinson, Ruggles, Shepley, Tallmadge, Walker, Wright-17. NAYS-Messrs. Black, Calhoun, Crittenden, Davis, Ewing of Ohio, Goldsborough, King of Georgia, Leigh, Mangum, Naudain, Prentiss, Preston, Robbins, Tomlinson, Webster, White-16. Mr. PRESTON then moved to strike out the appropriation for Portsmouth, on the ground that there were no estimates and surveys for fortifications at that harbor. Mr. CALHOUN said this question involved so important a principle, that, without plans or estimates, he was not willing to trust it even to the discretion of the Secretary of War, and must, therefore, oppose it. Mr. HUBBARD had addressed the Senate on this subject, the other day, at some length. He was so well satisfied of the course of the Senator from South Carolina, heretofore, in relation to this subject, that he had expected he would have voted for this provision of the bill. Mr. H. exhibited to the Senate, in detail, the great necessity and importance of this fortification, as a means of commercial protection, as well as defence against invasion. Mr. BENTON referred to a report, in detail, made by the proper department in 1821, in which every thing that was necessary for the information of Senators on this subject, was contained. In regard to these fortifications, there were two questions involved: one was of a political character, and the other professional. The political question was, as to whether the point of location was worth defence; and the professional question was, as to the plan and estimates, which, when made, no statesman would undertake to question. Mr. B. adverted to the period, in 1794, when the first act of Congress was passed in relation to forts generally, and the recommendation of General Washington, in which this one was named. The conjectural estimate of its cost was $500,000, and 100 guns would be required to arm it. He spoke of the uncertainty of estimates. A slight error, he said, in the basis of a calculation, led to a large one in its result. It was like two travellers separating at a diverging point of a road. When they began to separate, you could scarcely see them dividing; but after they had progressed a considerable distance, they were a great way apart. Mr. CALHOUN said that in detailed estimates the quantity of materials of each kind was minutely put down, and, when the cost of construction greatly exceeded the estimates, they knew who was to blame. But, he asked, upon whom did the responsibility rest in the case of conjectural estimates? They did not do their duty in regard to the trust reposed in them by Fortification Bill. acting in this general way, and there was something Mr. HUBBARD had been utterly astonished that Mr. BENTON, after referring to a late estimate, said that, in regard to plans, so many guns were placed on one side of a fort and so many on another; and there was not a Senator there, if he had the plan before him, would presume to say a single gun should be changed in its location. Mr. CALHOUN asked why the Senate should act before the surveys and estimates were made, when the Secretary of War himself would think it unwise to proceed without them? They were in no danger of a war at this time with any European Power; and why the necessity of acting at this time with such precipitation? Mr. BENTON asked how it came that the whole stress of the opposition was laid on the want of estimate? There were some ten or eleven cases in which there were estimates, and nobody asked to use them. But here was one case in which there was none, and in it they were called for. It would be perfect ridicule for Senators to criticise on one of these estimates. cases where the cost exceeded the estimates, it was In asked where was the responsibility, and who was to blame? As an evidence of how little reliance was to be placed on estimates, he adverted to a case of a fort in Virginia, where the cost exceeded the detailed estimate as two to one. Mr. CALHOUN said if Congress should make a call on the engineer in the case of a detailed estimate, he could explain where the fault was, and who was to blame. He stated the reason of the excess of cost in the case of Fort Calhoun, which was owing to its being built on a sand-bar. Mr. CRITTENDEN inferred that $200,000 would not be sufficient for this work, as in all probability it would cost over $500,000; and how much over that amount, it was not known. ↑ per cent. Mr. PRESTON said the arguments of gentlemen went to show that no estimates were to be relied on. Heretofore the cost exceeded the estimates about thirty But notwithstanding that variation, they still opened up the way to some information, some approximation to the amount necessary to be appropriated. He had gone to the Department, and found estimates on file, which he had examined, and the examination only satisfied him that the Department had done its duty. He would not pretend to say that conjectural estimates were not to be relied on, as well as those detailed ones that were made so long since. Mr. HUBBARD believed the estimate was made as high as it could be; and he was of the opinion that when the work should be completed, the cost would be found to come within the amount of them. After some remarks from Mr. PORTER, the question was then taken on the amendment: Yeas 10, nays 25. Mr. BENTON then moved to amend the bill by striking out "for fortifications at Salem, Massachusetts, $75,000," and inserting "$75,000 per annum.” [MAY 24, 1836. Mr. DAVIS said it was late in the day; and though the Senate seemed to be exhausted, literally worn out cupied much of the session, he hoped they would bear with this subject, as in one form and another it had ocwith him a short time, while he explained the principles which would guide him in all the votes he should give. for a fort at Salem, from seventy-five to one hundred The proposition now is to increase the appropriation the two coming years. and fifty thousand dollars, and to divide it equally for that, as this fortification is in Massachusetts, I shall It seems to be understood precedented form. not have the courage to oppose it, even in this ungreatly mistaken; for I ask no indulgence for that In this gentlemen are mistaken-State beyond what I am willing to concede to others. I hope no sound rule of policy will be violated, no unnecessary or wasteful expenditure of the public money will be proposed, with an expectation that I shall vote for it, or that the people of that State will approve harbors. No, sir; gentlemen need not flatter themof it, because the money is to be disbursed in one of its selves with success in any such schemes, for they will themselves and maintained their liberties without fortifinot triumph by mercenary appeals to a people that have at all times, and under all circumstances, defended timid, such as seek protection behind stone and mortar, cations. You may make such appeals to the weak, the will be treated with scorn by those who have the manly and the bristling bayonets of a trained soldiery; but it courage and patriotism to meet fearlessly whatever crisis may come, and to trust in their own strong arms and stout hearts, instead of the embattled hosts of this Government. Sir, this is called a fortification bill to enlarge the defence of the country by the erection of new works. This purports to be the object, upon the face of it; but, application to the Departments to ascertain the greatest if one may be allowed to judge from all he sees and hears in this chamber, from the repeated and urgent sum that can be expended, from the reiterated prophecies that there will be no surplus found in the Treasury, yond fortifying the country, some ulterior purpose, from an apparent determination to make appropriations two or three years in advance, there is some object bedently desired. When extraordinary measures are urgwhich is not openly avowed, while it is secretly and armotives; and what motive is there for lavish appropriaed upon us, we have a right to look for extraordinary tions at this moment?--for appropriations two and three years in advance? It seems to me that one object is to plus to go to the people; another, to secure the use of squander the public money, lest there should be a surthem to speculate upon, while it is thus gradually wastit to the deposite banks as loans, without interest, for ing. Who does not perceive that, if a million and a half of dollars is appropriated by this bill for 1837, it will be left in these banks, and that they will have the use of years hence? Who cannot understand that, at the lowit till drawn out, a year to eighteen months, and two est estimate, this would amount to 100,000, or 120,000 about forty millions, which gives them a clear income dollars, as a clear gratuity? These banks now hold or gift of more than two and a half millions of dollars annually, under any the most unfavorable view of the matter, to secure the allegiance and fidelity of the stockholders to this Government. The effect of this upon petuate it, either under pretence of defending the country, or in any other way; for we have no right thus to the mercenary is fearful; and I shall give no vote to perbestow the use of the public money upon individuals, to the exclusion of the people. I will not detain the Senate with this view of the matter, but will consider the measure as it purports to be→ |