not an article in all nature upon which there was a more unanimous opinion that the duty ought to be repealed, setting aside the question of duty. It was, therefore, essentially a question of protection, and not of duty.

Mr. McKEON said that the city he came from was deeply interested in this question. At this very moment, while we were debating the question of protection, the poor throughout this nation were suffering from this policy of protection. He was anxious the repeal should be made this session, and, to whatever committee it might be sent, that we should have a report and a decision of this House. The city of New York had for years petitioned on this subject, and yet nothing has been done to relieve them from this oppressive tax. The subject had been referred to the Committee of Ways and Means; it likewise had been in the charge of the committee; but yet, sir, nothing has been done. What I desire is, that some action should be had; that this matter shall not be tossed about from year to year, from committee to committee, without any result. The people, the suffering people, demand a decision. I am willing that it should be committed to the Ways and Means; it properly belongs to that body. If the position assumed by the distinguished gentleman from Massachusetts be correct, he will drag within the extended circle of his jurisdiction every matter in the tariff. The proposition on the reduction of the duty on bread stuffs, introduced by the gentleman from Pennsylvania, should be sent to the Committee on Manufactures. This was not a question of protection, but of revenue. It was a question of taxation; whether exclusive legislation for the benefit of the few, at the sacrifice of the rights and comforts of the many, shall be continued; and, in that point of view, he wished the subject to be sent to the Committee of Ways and Means. We have millions overflowing our Treasury, and it became that committee, not the committee on protecting manufactures, to inquire how one could be reduced. The poor of the country were on the one side, and those to be protected on the other; and, for one, he wished to relieve the consumers from this tax.

Mr. HARPER was understood to say that he did not agree with the gentleman from New York, that this was altogether a question of revenue. Mr. H. alluded to the immense amounts of money which had been invested in this branch of domestic industry, (the coal mining,) under the belief that the protection which had been promised would be faithfully carried out. If the country was laboring under any evil from the want of an adequate supply of this necessary article, it was not because there was not an abundance of it in the country, provided the necessary time were given. Up to the year 1834, a sufficient number of purchasers could not be found to take up the supply which had been furnished. A single company alone, in Pennsylvania, had had great quantities lying over for want of purchasers.

From that time to the present, the demand had greatly increased, but, even during the last year, a great number of vessels had been employed in carrying coal to find a market. And if this market were thrown open to foreign competition, all these persons would be thrown out of occupation. To what committee, then, could the petition be so appropriately referred as to the Committee on Manufactures? From the Committee of Ways and Means (said Mr. H.) we can look for nothing but an adverse report. He hoped the subject would go, where it properly belonged, to the Committee on Mauufactures. They would take into consideration the immense sums invested, as well as the labor of the vast number of hands employed in the trade. He saw no reason why this branch of domestic industry should alone be singled out, and he hoped that each branch would be made to bear its proportion of any reduction which might be considered requisite.

[DEC. 19, 1836.

Mr. GIDEON LEE said it appeared to him imma terial to which committee the petition was referred; because the Committee of Ways and Means had certain duties to perform, and those duties involved this very question. To the Committee on Manufactures had been specially referred that portion of the President's message which related to protective duties, and in that portion of the message this article of fuel had been specially men tioned. But, as an apology to the Committee on Manufactures for the vote he was about to give, he would say that, at the last session of Congress, he had offered a resolution for the repeal of duties on foreign coal. He had moved its reference to the Committee of Ways and Means, but it was referred to the Committee, on Manufactures, which committee did him the courtesy to discuss that resolution; and, if he remembered right, there were seven against a repeal of the duty; there was one qualified vote, and one vote for a repeal. In reference to his constituents, who consumed one and a half mil lions of dollars worth of this necessary article, no less necessary than bread, he would say this was a most important subject. He voted for the reference to the Com. mittee of Ways and Means, because he expected from them a more rational, humane, and just report.

Mr. REED said that the object to be attained by the reference of these petitions was, to refer them to that committee, whichever it might be, who would furnish the House with more minute information than the members were supposed to possess. He took it for granted that they were all in favor of repealing the duty on for eign coal, wholly or in part, if it could be done without injuring any of the great interests of the country. The question presents itself: was the House prepared to re peal it? In what way would it affect the interest of the country? And this question he considered the Commit tee of Ways and Means were not prepared to examine. We were bound to refer all subjects to a committee that had charge of the particular interest to which they refer red. He presumed there was no gentleman in that House who would pass a law which would destroy our coal mines.

He was desirous to have all the information which could be procured; and to whom should they look for it? The Committee of Ways and Means were prepared to show that the revenue of the country was abundant, without the duty on foreign coal. But was the House prepared to repeal it? It was necessary, before they ad vanced a step towards that measure, that they should as certain what would be its effect on the great interest of the producer; and, to accomplish that object, the petition ought to be referred to the Committee on Manufactures, or some committee that would examine the subject ful ly, in all its bearings.

Mr. CHAMBERS, of Pennsylvania, said that if the rules of the House, defining the duties and powers of the committees, were to govern them, then he should say it was the duty of the House to determine this ques tion by them. That which he termed the appropriate duty of the Committee of Ways and Means was to con sider the ways and means of raising revenue. It had not been pretended that this question was to be consider. ed at all with any reference to the raising of revenue. The revenue was more than abundant. Those who presented themselves to the consideration of this House asked for a reduction of duty. They asked not for the raising of revenue, but for its diminution. How, then, did the case present itself to the House? The gen tleman from Massachusetts had asked a reference of the petition to the Committee on Manufactures; but it had been objected to that reference, that it should go from the committee having charge of the subject to the Committee of Ways and Means. He (Mr. C.) would say that the Committee on Manufactures was the appropri

The

ate committee; for the only question for the consideration of the committee was one of protection--of manufacturing interest; for coal was a manufacturing interest. value of coal in the mine was but a secondary considera. tion; the value and the labor employed in digging and transporting it to market were the great objects of consideration. It was, therefore, a part of our manufacturing interest, and the question was to be considered in reference to that.

The duty now existing was not a duty for revenue, but of protection; and he trusted that the House, if it regarded its own rules, if it regarded the very interest represented in that memorial, would send it to the Committee on Manufactures, as the appropriate committee.

Mr. DAVIS said that it was he who had moved the postponement of the consideration of the memorial to the present day; and the object which he had in doing so had not, he regretted to say, been yet obtained. He was anxious that the States and Territories might be called for petitions and resolutions; the new States, west of the mountains, had not yet been called for resolutions; and although he did not wish to procrastinate the action of the House on this memorial, yet he must move a further postponement.

89.

The new States, although in a minority, were yet entitled to rights in that House; and if they were put off until the end of the session, by the discussion of mere questions of reference, which were of no kind of impor tance now, because the subject had been already referred, they would not have an opportunity to bring any subject before the House. He hoped that the old States would act in a more liberal manner, and would give the new States a chance to be heard. He moved to postpone the further consideration of the subject until Monday next. And the question on the motion to postpone was taken, and decided in the negative: Yeas 72, nays So the motion to postpone was rejected. The question then recurring on the motion to refer, Mr. CAMBRELENG addressed the House in reply to the remarks of Mr. REED, and proceeded to contend that the memorial was one which properly came under the jurisdiction of the Committee of Ways and Means. Mr. C. alluded to the great amount of informa tion which was at present in the possession of that com mittee; an amount, he said, which would astonish the House when laid before it. The importation of coal had trebled within three years, and the increase in its consumption had been immense. He held in his hand a petition, signed by 8,000 persons in the city of New York, asking for a reduction of the duty on coal; and it was because that duty was not wanted for revenue that its reduction was asked. He hoped that the petition of these poor shivering people, who were suffering from the inclemency of the season, would be taken care of by the member from Massachusetts, [Mr. ADAMS.]

Mr. DENNY said that the gentleman from New York, [Mr. CAMBRELENG,] with a view to give such a direction to the memorial as he desired, wished the House to believe that the Committee of Ways and Means were in possession of information such as was not in the knowledge of any other members of the House. Now, although that gentleman might be in possession of information relative to the importation and consumption of coal in the city of New York, there was other information, equally important, in possession of the Committee on Manufactures, which was not in the possession of the Committee of Ways and Means. He believed that these memorials were not the spontaneous call for a repeal by our citizens, but that they were set on foot by the emissaries of foreign monopolists, the owners of the Nova Scotia coal mines, &c., which were owned in great part by citizens of New York. He wished to have all the information that could be procured. He did not wish this

[H. of R.

House to be troubled with memorials, got up by foreign nations. He did not say that these memorials now before the House had such an origin; but he knew that such agents had been instrumental in bringing this subject before Congress some years past. In all that the chairman of the Committee of Ways and Means had said, he was influenced by his constituents; and it was his (Mr. D's) wish that the memorial should be referred to the committee which had heretofore taken charge of questions of protection. That committee was the Committee on Manufactures.

Mr. INGERSOLL said that there seemed to be peculiar circumstances connected with the proposed reduction of the duty on coal, which it was proper to bring before the consideration of the House, and which, he believed, had not as yet been brought before it. He believed that the Committee on Manufactures was the proper committee. The evil which was complained of, and which it was alleged ought to lead to the reduction of duty on foreign coal, was a temporary evil. It was not generally known, and yet it was true, that there had heretofore been a redundancy of coal from the mines of Pennsylvania; and that, in consequence of that redundancy, the article had sold particularly low. This was the first time that there had been a deficiency, and this it was that bad occasioned the high price in market. The House then was legislating on an emergency, which might contribute to erroneous legislation, if all the circumstances were not taken into account. This was one consideration which should operate in the settlement of this question of reference. The coal capitalists were sufferers, and not gainers, by the present state of things. They had sold their coal; and now, when it was at high prices, they (that was to say, the manufacturer or developer of the coal) must suffer. They had supplied the community with coal at the former prices, whilst those who had received them in Boston, New York, or elsewhere, had put their own prices on the article. This would show that the whole subject required particular investigation, and that it would not be proper to decide upon it without referring it to a committee who would look to it in all its aspects as a question of general reduction.

On another day it had been remarked by a gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. PICKENS] that the compromise which had been made here a few years ago was to be honorably preserved; and he (Mr. 1.) believed that no one desired to interfere with it. How could a proper knowledge be acquired of the redundancy or deficiency of revenue? How was the fact to be ascertained? In the first place, by the Committee of Ways and Means, who had the subject referred to them; and let the general subject of reduction be considered and reported on by them. But when you come to particular articles, when you come to ascertain whether the article of sugar in Louisiana will bear a reduction without sacrificing the interests of that State, where should such a subject be referred? Where can the particular information, which is requisite to proper legislation, be procured, except from those who are conversant with the particular article under consideration? Mr. I. applied this argument to the articles of iron, salt, bread stuffs, &c.

In conclusion, Mr. I. said that the committee which possessed the best information was the committee most competent to take charge of the memorial. With this view, he was in favor of reference to the Committee on Manufactures.

Mr. BOON said that if this was a subject of protection, he would vote with the gentleman from Massachusetts; but this was the first time he had ever heard that coal was an article of manufacture. He had always thought that it was given by the bounty of the God of nature, as the water that flows from the Alleghany to the Mississippi; and if this monopoly was to be kept up,

H. OF R.]

by continuing to raise a revenue on coal, loss must fall on the manufacturers of the country, for their operations were mostly carried on by coal. No evil could result to them, even to say nothing about the poor. But how were they suffering? Look at the poor of Washington; wood six dollars a cord, and coal proportionably high. The duty on coal constitutes a monopoly. He was in favor of reference to the Committee of Ways and Means; and when the question should come up he would vote to take off the duty as well from coal as from salt.

The question was then taken on the motion of Mr. ADAMS, to refer the memorial to the Committee on Manufactures; on which motion the yeas and nays were ta ken, and were: Yeas 88, nays 124.

So the motion of Mr. ADAMs was negatived.

And the question was then taken on the motion of Mr. PATTON, to refer the memorial to the Committee of Ways and Means, and was decided in the affirmative. STEAMBOAT ACCIDENTS.

Mr. STORER offered the following resolution: Resolved, That the Committee on the Judiciary be instructed to inquire what legal enactments are necessary by Congress to prevent accidents on board of vessels navigating the waters of the United States by steam, and for the punishment of the commanders, pilots, and engineers of such vessels, who may be guilty of wilful misconduct or neglect in the navigation thereof.

Mr. HANNEGAN said, if he understood the English language at all, his resolution covered every possible case which might arise; at least he intended it to do so. He was aware that the Committee on the Judiciary might be the most appropriate standing committee of the House to which to refer the subject; but he was aware, at the same time, that, from the great mass of business before that committee, it perhaps would not be able to pay so much attention to the subject as a select committee would; and for that reason, and that alone, he had asked for a select committee. If the resolution of the gentleman from Ohio should be adopted, Mr. H's resolution would be nullified. He had no disposition to place himself in a more conspicuous position, but he thought the resolution he had submitted would cover every case. He therefore hoped the gentleman would withdraw his resolution.

Mr. STORER only wished to bring the subject before the committee in some tangible form. He wished the examination to extend not only to the bursting of boilers of steamboats, but to accidents from racing, and all accidents from the carelessness of pilots. He then modified his resolution, so as to refer the subject to the select committee, instead of the Committee on the Judiciary; and, so modified, the resolution was agreed to.

WEST POINT ACADEMY.

The following resolution having been moved by Mr.

HANNEGAN-

Resolved, That the select committee appointed to investigate the affairs of the West Point Academy be authorized, by themselves or a sub-committee, to visit the Academy, for the purposes mentioned in the resolution under which they were appointed.

[Dec. 19, 1836.

ces, he did not see the necessity for the visit, but would give way if any such could be made to appear.

Mr. HAWES said that, at the very first meeting, he believed, which the committee had held, when all the members save one were present, it had been unanimous. ly agreed that, in their opinion, it was necessary to pursue this course. Take it on what ground you please, on the score of economy, or any other ground that the imagination could conceive, this, according to his notion, was the proper course. He said thus much as the organ of the committee, and left the House to determine the propriety of the measure.

Mr. D. J. PEARCE said that he felt sorry, after the gentleman's explanation, that he must still vote against the resolution. It was nothing to him (Mr. P.) whether the committee were unanimous or not. He had not yet heard a reason for the visit, and the House certainly must have some reason to act upon.

Mr. LANE was in favor of the adoption of the resolu tion, because he thought that if the committee visited the institution they would return with the conviction that it constituted one of the brightest ornaments of our country.

Mr. JARVIS thought the House had had enough of travelling committees. With a view to avoid loss of time in a useless discussion, he moved to lay the resolution on the table.

Mr. GRENNELL asked for the yeas and nays on that motion; which the House refused to order. And the question was then taken, and decided in the affirmative: Yeas 87, nays 54.

So the resolution was laid on the table.
ABOLITION MEMORIALS.

Mr. DAVIS offered the following resolution: Resolved, That all petitions, memorials, remonstrances, or other papers, which may be offered during the pres ent session, in any manner relating to the abolition of slavery, or the slave trade, in the District of Columbia, or any of the Territories of the United States, shall, on presentation, be laid upon the table, without reading, without being ordered to be printed, and without debate.

Mr. REED did hope this resolution would not be agreed to, for he thought it better to allow these memo rials to take the usual course. It was better for the purpose of allaying the excitement on this subject; bet

ter for the North as well as for the South.

Mr. CALHOUN, of Massachusetts, moved to lay the resolution on the table; which was agreed to without a

count.

WESTERN HOSPITALS.

Mr. REYNOLDS, of Illinois, submitted the following: Resolved, That a select committee be appointed, to take into consideration the subject of establishing commercial hospitals on the Western waters.

Mr. WHITTLESEY, of Ohio, inquired if this subject had not been already referred to the standing Committee on Commerce; and if they had not at this time the matter under consideration, the better course would be to send this resolution to that committee.

Mr. REYNOLDS remarked that he could scarcely expect to succeed against the motion made by his friend from Ohio, [Mr. WHITTLESEY.]

[Mr. WHITTLESEY stated that he made no motion, but only suggested as above.]

DEC. 20, 21, 1836.]

but nothing was done on the subject. He hoped something would be done this session. Hospitals in proper places in the West would do great service to a very worthy class of citizens.

Mr. GILLET replied that a bill had been reported from the Committee on Commerce at the last session, embracing the object contemplated in the resolution, but had not been acted upon.

After a few words from Messrs. REYNOLDS, LANE, BRIGGS, and VINTON, on motion of the last gentleman, the resolution was referred to the same committee which had the bill in charge, viz: the Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union, by a vote of 73 ayes, noes not counted.

A great number of resolutions were submitted to-day, by different gentlemen, all of which, were appropriate. ly referred.

And then the House adjourned.

TUESDAY, DECEMBER 20.

PROPERTY LOST IN THE MILITARY SERVICE. After the reception and disposition of sundry resolutions,

On motion of Mr. E. WHITTLESEY, the House suspended the rule for the purpose of taking up the bill which had passed through Committee of the Whole on Friday last, entitled a bill to provide for the payment of horses and other property lost or destroyed in the military service of the United States. The question being on its final passage,

Mr. A. MANN rose to inquire whether the bill embraced, or was intended to embrace, all the cases of horses or other property lost in the military service of the United States, from the day of the declaration of independence up to that time; or whether its operation was confined to any particular period. It could not be unknown that a vast number of claims had been presented to the United States for horses destroyed, and which had been adjudicated favorably or unfavorably; a large number unfavorably, from the want of proper evidence to support them. He wished to inquire whether it was intended to open all these cases anew? He would admit that the principle of the bill was correct; but if its operation was not limited to some particular period, he would be under the necessity of voting against it.

Mr. E. WHITTLESEY said that, in reply to the gen. tleman from New York, he would remark that, when the Committee of Claims presented the bill, its operation extended only so far back as the year 1822. The last act which had been passed on the subject was in reference to horses destroyed during the Seminole war, and it was thought proper by the Committee of Claims to embrace all other claims, from the date of that act to the passage of this.

The gentleman from Kentucky, [Mr. HARDIN,] when in Committee of the Whole, moved to amend the bill by striking out the act of 1822, and inserting the act of June, 1812. This amendment was agreed to by the committee, and subsequently concurred in by the House; so that the operation of the act, as it at present stood, extended back to June, 1812.

So far as related to the other inquiries made by the gentleman from New York, whether it was intended to embrace cases already passed upon, he (Mr. W.) would answer, that the bill embraced only that class of cases which had either been heretofore embraced in general laws, or had been heretofore recognised by general legislation. There was not a single new case embraced in the bill; but the object was to transfer to the proper accounting officers of the Department that labor which had heretofore been performed by committees; by which VOL. XIII-71

[H. OF R

means, the parties applying for redress would obtain it without the slow process of the legislation of Congress.

Mr. W. thought that if the gentleman would read the bill with care, he would be satisfied that there was no one case contemplated in the bill which would not merit that gentleman's support, if brought singly before the House.

Mr. MANN said that if the chairman of the Committee of Claims [Mr. E. WHITTLESEY] was satisfied that the bill had reference only to such cases as ought to be embraced, and as it was usual to bring before that committee, he (Mr. M.) had no objection to vote in favor of it.

And the question "Shall the bill pass?" was then put, and decided in the affirmative.

So the bill was passed.

Numerous petitions and resolutions were offered today; after which, the House, in pursuance of its order of yesterday, went into the election of

CHAPLAIN.

When, on the third ballot, the Rev. Mr. Comstock received 103 votes, (102 being necessary for a choice;) and the Rev. Mr. Slicer received 89 votes.

So Mr. Comstock was declared duly elected chaplain.
And, on motion of Mr. GRENNELL,
The House adjourned.

WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 21.

TENNESSEE LAND BILL.

Mr. DUNLAP asked the consent of the House to go into Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union, on the "bill to amend the act to authorize the State of Tennessee to issue grants of land in certain cases,' (commonly called the "Tennessee land bill.") He would barely remark that he hoped he should get the assent of the House to this motion, since the bill in question had received the favorable report of a committee of that House as long ago as the year 1825, and it had been before the House from that time to the present. Mr. HARDIN objecting,

Mr. DUNLAP moved a suspension of the rule; but the motion was lost, without a division.

SURPLUS REVENUE.

To the honorable the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States in Congress assembled: The undersigned, citizens of the first congressional district in the State of North Carolina, have for years past been accustomed to regard the action of the Federal Government with great anxiety. Your petitioners have forborne to urge their just claims for such appropriations for public works in their immediate neighborhood as fall within the peculiar province of the General Government, trusting to the tardy justice of Congress. They have regretted to see appropriations of the public money not equally distributed with a view to the general benefit.

Your petitioners have viewed with great satisfaction the bill of the last session regulating the deposites of the public money among the several States. They regard this measure as the safest disposition of the national treasure, as best calculated to avoid all unjust, unconstitutional and partial appropriations of the common fund. They therefore pray that provisions similar to that contained in the deposite bill of the last session may become the law of the Union for several succeeding years.

Mr. W. B. SHEPARD, on presenting the above petition, made the following remarks:

Mr. S. said the petition was signed by very respectable individuals in the district which he had the honor to represent, and he was desirous of adding his testimony