Imagens das páginas
PDF
ePub
[blocks in formation]

MONDAY, JAN. 5, 1829. ARKANSAS TERRITORY.

[SENATE.

The bill, as received from the House of Representatives, was in the following words:

Mr. TAZEWELL. They are not changed, but cut. So early as 1789, a drawback of one cent was allowed on sugar, which was increased from time to time. There The bill" to authorize the citizens of Arkansas Terwas then no internal tax on the article. In 1794, an ex-ritory to elect certain officers," was taken up for concise of four cents was laid on refined sugar, with the un- sideration, together with the amendments reported by derstanding, that, if exported, the amount of the excise the Committee on the Judiciary should be drawn back. But the drawback was allowed solely on account of the excise-there was no other reason assigned for it. So true was this, that both were repealed together, in the year 1818. He rose merely for information. If correct in his ideas, the drawback was never allowed on the cost of the brown sugar, but solely on account of the excise. He entirely concurred with the gentleman from New Jersey, that, if the subject was to be commenced anew, the drawback system would be abandoned altogether.

Mr. SMITH said, the first excise was laid in 1794. The same law authorized a drawback of the excise. In 1800, another excise was laid by law, with the same provision as to drawback. This law was repealed in 1817, and with it was repealed the drawback, though this was not intended: for the excise alone was what Congress meant to repeal. In 1818, finding that they had repealed the drawback with the excise, another law was passed on the subject, by which a drawback was allowed of two pound raw for one of refined sugar.

Mr. WOODBURY replied to Mr. TAZEWELL, and assured him that the drawback did not originate with the excise. In 1797, the Legislature proceeded to allow a drawback, on sugar refined, [extracts from which law Mr. W. read] and one cent was allowed as an additional drawback on account of the increased duty on sugar exacted by that law. The system began on the theory that the drawback should be equal to the duty, and had been followed up to this time. He did not believe in the fraud on spirits the law allowing its exportation with benefit of drawback was abolished on account of misapprehension, and he wished to set the merchants of the country right on this subject. Mr. W. then proceeded to reply to some of the arguments of Mr. BENTON; denied that the refiners would receive the large profit which he had named; explained in what their capital did really consist; and denied that their profit was more than two per cent.

He then alluded to the advantages of the drawback system; the great desire there was for the passage of the bill, that our merchants might compete with foreigners to advantage in the South American and Chinese markets, and alleged as a reason that these were the only markets now left us, on account of the liberal policy pursued by France, England, &c. Though the exportation was small at present, he had no doubt of its increase to the amount stated by the Senator from Maryland. He denied and repelled the statements and arguments of the Senator from New Jersey, and accused him of bottoming his calculations on the duties exacted by former tariffs, and not by the tariff law of the last session.

The amendment submitted by Mr. CHANDLER was then agreed to; and the amendment was ordered to be engrossed, and the bill read a third time, by the following vote: YEAS.-Messrs. Barton, Bell, Bouligny, Burnet, Chandler, Chase, Foot, Knight, Marks, McKinley, McLane, Noble, Ridgely, Robbins, Ruggles, Sanford, Seymour, Silsbee, Smith, of Maryland, Thomas, Willey, Woodbury.-22.

NAYS.-Messrs. Barnard, Benton, Berrien, Dickerson, Hayne, Hendricks, Iredell, Johnson of Kentucky, Kane, Prince, Rowan, Tazewell, Tyler, White, Williams.-15.

[blocks in formation]

"A BILL to authorize the citizens of Arkansas Territory to elect certain officers.

"Be it enacted, &c. That the citizens of the Territory of Arkansas, qualified to vote, shall and may, at such time and place, and under such rules and regulations as the Legislature of said Territory may prescribe, elect their officers, civil and military, except such as. by the laws of Congress, now in force, are to be appointed by the President of the United States; and except, also, Justices of the Peace, Auditor and Treasurer for said Territory, who shall be chosen by joint vote of both Houses of the Legislature, at such time, and for such term of service, as the said Legislature shall prescribe.

"Section 2. And be it further enacted, That the term of service, and the duties and powers, fees, and emoluments, of the officers, civil and military, so chosen by the citizens, shall be prescribed by the Legislature, and they shall be commissioned by the Governor of the Territory, and subject to be removed from office in such mode, and for such cause, as the Legislature shall declare, by law. All laws now in force, inconsistent with the provisions of this act, are hereby re pealed. This act shall take effect from and after the first day of December, one thousand eight hundred and twenty-nine."

Mr. BERRIEN explained the object of the amendments. The first amendment, he said, had for its object simply to place the Territory on the same footing as the other Territories, by taking from the Governor the power to annul, by his veto, the proceedings of the Legislative body, and giving it the power to pass again bills to which he may have refused his signature, with certain restrictions, as in other States and Territories.

The second amendment was merely an addition to the act giving to the People of the Territory the right to elect their own officers, both civil and military, many of which are now appointed by the President of the United States, and, in this respect, placing them upon a footing with the inhabitants of other Territories.

The amendment to the third section of the bill referred to the Territory of Florida, altering and equalizing the representation of the Territory in its own Legislative Council. Florida was originally divided into three divisions, the Eastern, the Middle, and the Western. The Legislative Council was composed of thirteen members, six of whom were from the Eastern Division, five from the Western, and two from the Middle. When this allotment of the Representatives was made, the middle county was in the possession of the Indians; but, four or five years since, the Indians had been removed, and the middle division had now become the most populous one in the Territory, and the seat of Government. Yet it remained with only two Representatives, while one of the others, with less inhabitants, had six, and another five. From the Eastern District had been taken off a Southern Judicial District, the District of Key West, making it still smaller. This inequality of representation it was desirable to correct. Congress had, at one time, passed an act giving to the Legislative Council the authority to arrange the Districts so as to equalize the representation. But they were acted upon by local feelings, and were interAt ested in the result, and had done nothing about it. the last session of Congress another act was passed, making it the duty of the Governor and Legislative Council to alter and arrange the Districts. But another session of their Council had passed without any thing being done, and in this emergency they had resorted again to Congress: and with a view to remedy the difficulty, the Committee had reported an amendment to the present bill equalizing the representation. It did not propose to take from the Districts, as they now stand, any of their members, but to give to the Council three additional members, to come from the Middle District, making the Council, which is now composed of thirteen members, to consist of sixteen

SENATE.]

Sinking Fund, &c.

members, which, as it would equalise the representation from all parts of the Territory, and produce no additional expense to the Government, he presumed there could be no objection to it. Lest any misapprehension or difficulty should arise about the representation, the amendment to the sixth section provided that the Governor and Legislative Council might, at any time, alter or arrange the Districts, in such manner as to secure an equality. In relation to the amendment to the seventh section, he observed, that a general law of the Legislative Council of Florida provided that the Justices should fix the site of the public buildings in each county. The Justices of the Inferior Court of Jackson county did fix the sites of their public buildings, agreeably to such provisions, but some dissatisfaction having arisen about it, it was decided that the people should fix the sites at an election. An election accordingly was had in the county of Jackson, and the result was, that the people selected the same sites previously selected by the Justices. Subsequently, the Justices had reversed this decision, and fixed the public buildings in some other place, and consequently the people had applied to Congress for relief. The amendment annulled the act of the Council fixing the seat of justice of Jackson county, and provided that the people and local authorities should have the privilege of selecting their county seat.

Mr. SMITH, of Maryland, made no objection to the amendments, but asked for some farther explanation of the amendment to the sixth section; which, being given by Mr. BERRIEN, and a verbal amendment, offered by Mr. B. to substitute the word "within" for the word for, in the 17th line of the printed copy, being agreed to, the amendments were then ordered to be engrossed, and the bill to be read a third time.

TUESDAY, JAN. 6, 1829.

THE SINKING FUND, &c. The Senate proceeded to the consideration of the following resolutions, heretofore submitted by Mr. BENTON, and which had been made the special order for today:

"Resolved, That the 5th section of the Sinking Fund act, of 1817, ought to be so amended as to authorize the Commissioners of that Fund to make purchase of the public debt, at its current market price, whenever, in their opinion, such purchases can be made beneficially for the interest of the United States, and consistently with existing engagements.

2. That the 4th section of the same act, which authorizes a retention of two millions of surplus revenue in the Treasury, ought to be repealed; and that the first section of the Sinking Fund act of 1790, which directs the whole of the surplus money in the Treasury to be applied to the payment of the public debt, ought to be revived and continued in force.

"3. That the Bank of the United States ought to be required to make a compensation to the People of the United States, for the use of the balances of public money on its hands.

4. That a public debt is a public burthen, and that the present debt of the United States is a burthen on the People of the United States to the amount of more than fifteen millions of dollars per annum; from which they ought to be relieved as soon as possible, and may be relieved in four years, by a timely" and "judicious" application of

the means within the power of Congress.

5. That an abolition of duties, to the amount of the ten millions of dollars now annually levied on account of the public debt, ought to be made as soon as that debt is paid, and may be made, according to the present indications of the revenue, without diminishing the protection due to any branch of domestic manufactures, and with manifest advantage to the agriculture and commerce of the country. 6. That the Committee on Finance be directed to prepare and bring in a bill to carry into effect the objects of the first and second of these resolutions."

The resolutions having been read, Mr. BENTON explained their nature and object, and advocated their adoption, in a speech of about two hours, in which he entered very fully into the consideration of each resolution, separately, and enforced the necessity and advantage of agreeing to them all.

The first resolution, he said, related to the 5th section of the Sinking Fund act of 1817, and proposed an amendment to it. This proposal implied a defect in the section as it now stood, and such was the fact. The section, in

[JAN. 6, 1829.

its present form, confers a limited authority upon the commissioners of that fund to make purchases of the public debt at certain fixed rates, the three per cents. at 65 per cent. and other stocks at par; the amendment would give a discretionary authority to the commissioners to make purchases of the same debt at its current market price, whenever, in their opinion, such purchases could be made beneficially for the public interest, and without prejudice to existing engagements. The evil, or mischief, of the section, as it now stood, was, that the three per cent. stock (about 13 millions) could never be paid off; and that about eight millions of other stocks, for the payment of which the money would be lying in the Treasury in 1831-32, could not be paid off until 1834-35. Mr. B. verified these statements by references to laws and facts, and took it upon himself to affirm, that there was no way to prevent an accumulation of near twenty millions of dollars in the Treasury, in the years 1832-33, to lie there idle, or what was still worse, to be diverted to some subordinate object, while public debt to that amount was unpaid and drawing interest, but to make the amendment which he proposed. The advantage of paying our debt, when we had the money on hand, was too obvious to be insisted upon Another advantage would be in reducing the price of the three per cent. stock to something nearer the true value of money than what it now bore.

The act of 1817 fixed the value of this stock at 65 per cent., which seems high enough for stock worth but 3 per cent. ; but it now ranges at from 80 to 85, with no prospect of falling, while it preserves the character of perpetuity which it now has. This character is abhorrent to American notions of public debt, but it is a favorite with money lenders and stock dealers, and while it continues, the price of the stock will continue out of all fair proportion to the interest and common uses of money. Destroy this character of perpetuity, by adopting the amendment, and this stock will immediately fall, not to 65, at least to something considerably below 85; and a portion of the public debt, which is now counted at 13 millions, but which can be purchased in market for about 11 millions, will fall to about 9 millions, and save to the public the difference between that sum and eleven millions. Mr. B. could see no possible objection to an amendment fraught with such manifest advantage, except in the apprehension that the Commissioners of the Sinking Fund could not be safely trusted with the discretionary power which it gives them. This he considered as amounting to no objection at all. The discretion was but little, and it was to be vested in a board of eminent men.

It was a discretion to purchase, or not to purchase, about twenty millions of debt, at the current market price. It was a discretion to apply some public money to the payment of the public debt, rather than to let the money lie idle, or be wasted, and the debt run on, carrying interest. This, he thought, vested but little discretion, and such as might be trusted, without danger, to our Commissioners. Who were these Commissioners? Men of the first distinction, and obliged to be of the first distinction, of any in the Union. They were Commissioners by virtue of their offices, and these offices among the highest in the country,-the Vice President of the United States, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, the Secretary of the Treasury, and the Attorney General. A discretion to purchase the public debt at its market price has always belonged to the Commissioners of the British Sinking Fund, and has never been abused by them. They have exercised it for an hundred years, and over a debt, growing up in that time, from about the present size of our own, to above four thousand millions of dollars; and if this power could be exercised by them so long, and over an amount of debt so vast, and still without abuse, can it be seriously apprehended that there is

[blocks in formation]

danger in trusting the like power to our Commissioners for the four brief years which the debt has to last, and over the little remnant of it to which their power would be applicable?

Mr. B. then took up his second resolution, which proposes to repeal the fourth section of the Sinking Fund Act of 1818, and to revive the first section of the Sinking Fund Act of 1790. He stated the defect of the act of 1817 to be in the authority, as it had been construed at the Treasury, to retain two millions of dollars over and above the unapplied balances of appropriations on hand, and the virtue of the act of 1790, in directing all the surplus money on hand, over and above the appropriations, to be applied to the payment of the public debt. The advantage of the section to be revived over the one to be repealed, was clear and indisputable. The argument was contained in the stating of the proposition, and the resolution would have seemed to be free from the possibility of objection if it had not been objected to when he offered it at the last session. The objection then made was founded upon the supposed necessity of keeping a reserve of two millions on hand to meet the deficiencies of revenue which might arise from disasters to the commerce from which it was derived. This objection is plausible, and respectably supported; but it is unfounded and unsolid, and vanishes upon examination, In the first place, there is no necessity for this reserve of two millions, because there is always an unapplied balance of several millions in the Treasury. These balances are seldom less than three, often as high as six millions. They were stated, in the last Treasury Report, at $5,120,000, on the first day of the present year. These balances result from the nature of daily receipts and daily expenditures, the receipts always preceding the expenditures, by some months. They keep several millions perpetually on hand; then why authorize a retention of two millions more ? The Secretary of the Treasury says it has not been retained; I answer, this proves that there is no necessity for an authority to retain it. He says, the authority is discretionary. I answer there is no necessity for the discretion; that is an authority which cannot be used for the benefit of the public; and may be used to their prejudice. An authority to retain two millions of surplus money in the Treasury, is an authority to make a gratuitous loan of it to the Bank which has the keeping of it, and where it may be used in creating an interest in elections, or at the renewal of a charter adverse to the interests of the people. As a precaution against deficiencies of revenue occasioned by disasters to commerce, the objection is authoritatively condemned by the voice of experience, and the history of our own country for seven and twenty years. These twenty seven years cover a period of unexampled disasters to commerce-from 1790 to 1817; during which the act of 1790 was in force, and that of 1817, with its precautionary reserve, was unheard of; and during which there was no complaint for want of these two millions. These twenty-seven years covered the period of the mad attacks of the French Revolutionary Governments on commerce; the period of the British Orders in Council; of the ruinous decrees of Berlin and Milan; the period of our own embargo, and of our war with England. Such a period of commercial disaster can never be expected again; yet we went through it without this precautionary reserve, and we can certainly make out in future without it. The fact is, the construction at the Treasury is erroneous; instead of authorizing a retention of two millions over and above the unapplied balances, it was intended to limit the money kept to meet these balances to two millions of dollars.

The third resolution was next taken up by Mr. B. and read by him. It imported that the Bank of the United States ought to make a compensation to the people of the United States, for the use of the balances of public money

[ocr errors]

[SENATE.

on its hands. Before entering upon the consideration of the main question presented in this resolution, Mr. B. said there were two preliminary inquiries necessary to be answered, namely, first, whether, in point of fact, there were any such balances in the Bank, and secondly, whether, in point of law, the People of the United States have a right to require compensation from the Bank for the use of them? Mr. B. held the affirmative of both these inquiries, and would prove his answer to the first of them, by referring to the treasury report of the last session, made on his own call, showing an average annual amount of public money in the hands of the Bank, from 1817 to the date of the report, of $3,554,756 50; and he would prove his answer to the second of them by reading, as he did read, the 16th section of the Bank charter, the first clause of which directed the Secretary of the Treasury to make deposites of the public money in this Bank; and the second authorized him to remove them at any time that he thought proper. This was decisive. The right to remove the deposites at pleasure, included the right to make terms for letting them remain; and this was precisely what the resolution proposed to do.

Mr. B. then spoke at considerable length in favor of the fairness, the equity, and the reasonableness of his proposi tion; and rested the public claim for the compensation he required, on the following prominent facts and powerful considerations.

1. That these balances in Bank were great, being an annual average amount of above three and a half millions of dollars.

2. That they were permanent, having remained in Bank twelve years, and likely to remain there the eight years longer which the charter had to run.

3. That they were virtually Bank capital, and available, as such, for loans or issues of notes.

4. That they required no idle reserve of gold and silver to be kept in Bank to meet them, being themselves payable in the notes of the Bank, though deposited in gold and silver.

5. That the profit to the Bank from their use must have been great, and may have been equal to the highest rate of Bank interest upon the greatest amount of notes issuable upon a capital of three and a half millions of dollars

6. That the loss to the People of the United States, while paying interest on the public debt, and receiving no interest for the use of these balances in Bank, has been six per cent. per annum, for twelve years, on $3,554,756 50, and may be at the same rate for eight years more, if this resolution is not adopted.

Upon these great facts and considerations, Mr. B. rested his argument of reason, justice, and equity. But he had another argument of authority, example, and precedent; and as this kind of argument always had the greatest weight against the rights and liberties of the people, he would now try the virtue of one in favor of the people. He alluded to what had been done in England, where the Bank, after baffling Mr. Burke for twenty years, was at last brought to terms by Mr. Pitt, and compelled to make compensation for the use of the Government deposites.

For the sake of accuracy in his statements, Mr. B. now had recourse to his books, and took up some volumes of British Parliamentary debates, and read extracts from a report of the Finance Committee of the House of Commons, on the subject of Government balances in the Bank of England; also extracts from the correspondence of the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Governor of the Bank, in relation to these balances; also extracts from a debate in the House of Commons, upon the ratification of the arrangement to which that correspondence led. From these extracts it appeared that the committee of the House ascertained that the average annual amount of Government balances in the hands of the Bank, was about ten millions sterling; that the Bank derived great profit from them;

SENATE.]

Sinking Fund, &c.

and the Committee held it to be right and reasonable that some part of these profits ought to go to the public, to whom the capital belonged, which produced them. The House of Commons was of the same opinion; the Chancellor of the Exchequer also; and of the terms offered by the Bank, either to pay about seven hundred and fifty thousand dollars annually for the use of these balances, or to make a loan of about fifteen millions of dollars without interest, the latter was accepted by the Chancellor, and finally ratified by Parliament, after a debate, in which the sole point was the inadequacy of the compensation. Mr. B. admitted that there was discouragement, as well as encouragement, for him in this example. He was discouraged by seeing that Mr. Burke was baffled for twenty years, and died before the Bank was brought to terms; but he was encouraged by seeing that she was brought to terms at last, though it took a Chancellor of the Exchequer and Prime Minister of England-a Pitt, and the son of a Pitt-to bring her to.

Mr. B. took up his fourth resolution, and read it: "That a public debt is a public burthen; that the present debt of the United States is a burthen upon the People of the United States, to the amount of more than fifteen millions of dollars per annum; that the people ought to be relieved from this burthen as soon as possible, and might be relieved from it in four years, by a timely and judicious application of the means in the power of Congress."

He would not waste time upon the general proposition with which the resolution set out, although he knew there were many who disputed that proposition: he would go to the clause which asserted the annual amount of burthen which this debt imposed upon the people to exceed fifteen millions of dollars, and prove it by a statement as brief as it would be plain and intelligible. The annual amount paid on the debt for the last four years averaged about twelve millions of dollars, and he hoped that the payment for the next four would rather exceed than fall short of the same average. This would be admitted to be a burthen to the amount of twelve millions per annum, by all who admitted that taxes were burthens. In the next place, these twelve millions were levied upon the consumption of foreign goods, the averaged duty on which was now fifty per cent., upon which fifty the retail merchant had his profit, as well as upon the cost of the article. It was all cost to him. This profit might average 33 per cent., especially where the article went through the hands of several sellers. This advance on twelve millions would be four millions, which, together, made sixteen millions, and sustains the words of the resolution. But this is not all. A farther expense attends the collection of these duties, to the amount of about nine hundred thousand dollars per annum more, in salaries, fees, and commissions to the revenue officers. This also comes out of the pockets of the people, and contributes to swell far above the statement in the resolution, the annual burthen which the people bear on account of the public debt.

That this debt can be paid off in four years by a "timely" and "judicious" application of the means in the power of Congress, was a proposition susceptible of the clearest demonstration. Its nominal amount was fifty-eight millions, its real amount about forty-nine millions, after deducting seven millions for stock in the United States' Bank, and two millions more for the difference between the nominal amount, and the market price of the three per cent. stock. The adoption of the first resolution offered by Mr. B. would probably sink the market price of this stock one or two millions lower by destroying its character of perpetuity, and then the actual debt would be but forty-seven millions. But, even at forty-three millions, it can be paid off in four years, by applying the twelve millions which will go to the principal and interest, to the principal alone, and raising the interest from accelerated sales of the public lands. This was what was intended by a timely" and

[ocr errors]

JAN. 6, 1829.

"judicious" application of the means in the power of Congress; words which were borrowed from the first message of President Washington to Congress, and enforced by the first and ablest of all the Secretaries of the Treasury, but which had never yet been acted upon by Congress. At this part of his argument Mr. B. took the following bold positions:

1. That one hundred millions of acres of land sold, near forty years ago, at an average of twenty cents per acre, as recommended by General Hamilton, would have been worth sixty millions of dollars to the people, by extinguishing twenty millions of debt, and stopping the payment of forty millions in interest.

2. That all the land sold by the Federal Government has not been worth one cent to the people, the amount received from sales being swallowed up in expenses, or lost in interest upon the capital of land unsold, while paying interest upon the capital of the debt unpaid.

3. That the sale of the eighty millions of land to which his graduation bill was applicable, would raise, at an average of twenty-five cents per acre, twenty millions of dollars in four years, the one half of which would pay the interest on the public debt, and the other half would give to all the neglected States their proportionate shares of the amount expended in the favored States on works of internal improvement.

Mr. B.'s fifth resolution related to the abolition of duties, and imported that duties to the amount of the ten millions of dollars now annually levied on account of the public debt, ought to be abolished as soon as that debt was paid, and might be abolished, according to the present indications of the revenue, without diminishing the protection due to any branch of domestic industry, and with great advantage to the agriculture and commerce of the country.

Mr. B. went on to say, that this resolution presented a great question to the consideration of the Senate and American people. It was a question in the decision of which, above all others, the vote of the representative ought to be governed by the will of the constituent. It was a question to the consideration of which the attention of the people ought to be worked up, and worked up in time to know what their representatives were about, before a final decision might be made to their prejudice. With this view he had brought forward the question at the last session of Congress; with this view he brought it forward now; and for the same purpose he should bring it forward at the next session, if this resolution was not adopted at the present one.

The first clause of the resolution asserts that duties ought to be abolished to the amount of ten millions of dollars, the instant the public debt is paid of. I know there are many who think differently, who are of opinion that the duties ought to be kept up, and the amount expended by Congress in works of internal improvement; and my mind is clear and decisive in favor of the abolition. There will be enough for internal improvement without these ten millions, which now go, not to that object, but to the public debt. I am for the abolition, because I am opposed to all taxation not required for the necessary support of the Government. I am against raising money by taxes, either for accumulation in the vaults of the Treasury or for repartition among the people. What is attempted to be kept in the Treasury would be wasted; a partition could never be fairly made; a majority of the payers would never get back their own. The pockets of the people are the best treasuries which the Government can have for its spare revenues. They are the safest; for every citizen is the keeper of his own. They are the cheapest, for these koepers have no salaries; they are the most beneficial, for they are the only treasuries of which the keeper may always use the contents without blame, and with profit to himself and the country.

I am for the abolition, because the sum is great in itself,

[blocks in formation]

and raised at still greater expense to the people. The levy of ten millions for the Government cost upwards of fifteen millions to the people. It is a mistake of the present day, founded upon what was fact thirty years ago, to suppose that taxation by duties is the cheapest way of levying money from the people. This was true when the average duties were seven and a half per cent. and when the addition of that amount to the value of the article made no sensible addition to its cost. But all this is now changed. The average duties are now 50 per cent. and this adds one half to the cost of the article ; the merchant's profit is thirty-three and a third per cent. on this duty of 50, and that adds a third more to it. Fees, salaries, and commissions, are then paid besides to the revenue officers to the annual amount of near nine hundred thousand dollars more. The effect of all these per cents. fees, and salaries, is, that it now costs the people nearly two dollars to raise one dollar for the Government, and this load is increased upon some, by the fact that smugglers, and dealers with smugglers, pay nothing. A levy of twelve millions for the public debt, now occasions a levy of more than fifteen, and nearly twenty millions upon the people; a rate of expense for collection out of all proportion to the revenue raised, exceeded in no country upon earth but in England, and from which the people, in the language of the resolution, ought to be relieved as soon as possible,

SENATE.

ten millions of dollars would fill this Union with discord
and violence. The division of money and property is
the fruitful source of discord throughout the world. It
is the bane of partnerships, the rock on which the peace
of families is split, and the signal for strife and contention
amongst confederates and conquerors. So sung the poet
of nature :
"Friends now fast sworn,
Whose double bosoms seem but one heart to bear,
Who twine, as 'twere, in love inseparable,
Shall, within this hour, upon dissension of a doit,
Break out to bitterest enmity."

Yes, break out to bitterest enmity upon dissension of a farthing! With how much greater bitterness, then, when the dissension is for millions, when the parties are whole communities, their passions inflamed by association, no common superior to decide between them, an individual shame lost in the mass of undistinguished multitudes! The last thing that any friend to the peace, the harmony, the stability of the Union, would wish to see, would be an annual scramble on the floor of Congress for ten millions of dollars. We shall have heart-burnings enough in distributing the two or three millions of surplus revenue which will remain without these ten millions, and in scrambling for the countless millions of the public land.

ing any other; and thus an angry question will drop from our discussion, and every cloud of discontent will vanish from our horizon.

I am for the abolition, because it will be the means of I am for the abolition, because the wielding of ten mil- restoring the harmony of this Union, now greatly impaired lions of surplus revenue would dangerously increase the by a tariff, which sits hard upon the navigating and plantpatronage of the Federal Government This sum is now ing interests of the country. An abolition of ten milmortgaged to the payment of the public debt, and its ap-lions of duties will relieve these interests, without injurplication to that object being fixed and regular, involves the exercise of but little patronage. Released from that mortgage, it would be applicable to innumerable objects, and subject to the annual appropriation by Congress. Its distribution would attract all eyes, and excite universal cupidity. It would draw deputations from cities, towns, and villages, from companies and corporations, from counties, States, and districts, to the feet of the Federal Government, all clamorous for their share of the spoil, or neglecting their own business to obtain it, and all becoming less independent in proportion as they received it-like the degenerate Romans, who ceased to be free when they began to look upon the public granaries, instead of their own cribs, for a supply of corn.

I am for the abolition, because an annual scramble on the floors of Congress for ten millions of dollars, would fill our halls with bargains, combinations, intrigue, and corruption. The effect would be inevitable. Help my State to half a million, and I will help yours to another half. A majority of the members might meet beforehand, and divide the whole among their own States. They might do worse. They might insert appropriations for roads and canals, in States whose representatives denied the constitutionality of such appropriations, and thus subject them to the censure of their constituents, for not taking a share while it was going. In this way, the delegation of a State might be rendered obnoxious to their constituents, and broken down at home by a manœuvre here. Is this fancy, or is it fact? exclaimed Mr. B. It is fact, and the history of our legislation proves it. Within the last three years the manoeuvre was tried. A bill came up from the House of Representatives with appropriations for internal improvement for a majority of the States, including some whose delegations could not vote for such objects. The bill passed through this chamber, and became a law; but the design against the members failed. A kindly feeling prevailed. The yeas and nays were not called. The bill went through without noise, and the obnoxious voters were not pointed out to their constituents. This may be attempted again, upon a greater scale, and with a more determined intent, if ten millions are to be annually divided out.

I am for the abolition, because the annual division of

The last branch of this resolution declares, that this abolition may be made, according to present indications of the revenue, without detriment to domestic industry, and with great advantage to agriculture and commerce. On this point my remarks will be few and brief. They are abridged, and almost superseded by the labors of the last session. This subject, upon a resolution of my own, was referred to the Committee of Finance twelve months ago. That Committee reported a list of thirty-two articles, estimated to yield a revenue of seven and a quarter millions, on which the duties might be repealed without injury to domestic industry; seven other articles, whose product could not be then ascertained, and six more on which the drawback for the last year exceeded the revenue, but which, in a run of several years, yield a considerable sum. This makes forty-five articles, and to these I think about fifteen more might be added. But I omit these fifteen. I take the forty-five reported by the Committee, and say that they will yield the ten millions in four years from this time. They yield a million and a half more now than was estimated by the Committee. Three of them alone exceed that estimate by eight hundred and thirty thousand dollars. But this is a detail, and a subordinate inquiry. If we agree in the great principle of abolition, there will be no balk about a few articles. or a few thousand of dollars more or less. The benefit to agriculture and commerce would be great and immediate from this abolition. Free trade is their delight and element, and this abolition of duties would set the half of our trade free. A few examples will illustrate its benefit. We have a growing trade with France, of which the chief articles on our part are cotton and tobacco; on her part, silks and wines. She took from us last year seventy millions of pounds of cotton, and thirty thousand hogsheads of to

Salt, coffee, teas, linens, wines, silks, cocoa, almonds, currants, prunes, figs, raisins, mace, cloves, nutmegs, cinnamon, cassia, pepper, pimento, bristles, Spanish brown, ochre, camphor, Cayenne pepper, ginger, olive oil, olives, alum, corks. quicksilver, opium, capers, worsted stuffs, nankeens, bolting cloths, quills, black bottles, demijohns, thread and silk lace, cambrics, lawns, Cashmere shawls

gauze, ribbons, straw mats, and Canton crape.

« AnteriorContinuar »