Imagens das páginas
PDF
ePub

JAN. 22 to 28, 1829.]

School Lands.-Louisville and Portland Canal.

THURSDAY, JANUARY 22, 1829.

The Senate was wholly engaged this day on private bills and Executive business. Adjourned to Monday.

MONDAY, JANUARY 26, 1829.

[SENATE.

the stockholders that the stock would be good; and while, in a pecuniary point of view, the Government would not lose, he hoped the bill would pass without objection.

Mr BRANCH wished his friend from Kentucky would suffer this bill to lie over, until the great question could be settled; it was known that there was a bill before the

There was no business transacted this day to give rise Senate providing for the distribution of the public money,

to debate.

TUESDAY, JANUARY 27, 1829.

doing justice to the country, and preventing the application, by Government, of money to purposes merely local.

The Senate was this day engaged on private bills and This bill went further than any bill that had ever been Executive business.

WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 28, 1829.

SCHOOL LANDS.

The bill "authorizing the relinquishment of the sixteenth section in each township, granted for the use of schools in Louisiana, and the entry of other lands in lieu thereof," then came up for consideration.

Mr. SANFORD said, he presumed this bill was similar in its provisions to the bill in relation to Alabama, which had already passed the Senate. His principal objection to it was, that it depended upon the parties concerned to say what lands were barren and unproductive, and he thought some United States' officer should have power to examine the lands. Subsequently, Mr. SANFORD moved an amendment, providing that the bill should have the same operation, "whenever the Commissioner of the General Land Office should determine from evidence, satisfactory to himself, that said sixteenth section is barren and unproductive;" which amendment was agreed to.

Mr. BARTON said, he thought there should be a provision introduced into the bill for all States simi larly situated; but as he had not the bill before him, he could not move any amendment. Upon motion of Mr. B., the bill was then laid upon the table.

A similar bill, in relation to the State of Mississippi, was also laid upon the table.

LOUISVILLE AND PORTLAND CANAL. The bill "authorizing a subscription on the part of the United States to the stock of the Louisville and Portland Canal," was next taken up.

Mr. CHANDLER said, he should like to have some reason assigned why the bill should pass.

Mr. ROWAN said, it was easy enough to give the reasons why this bill should pass. The canal could not be completed without the aid of the Government. Unfortunately the calculation of the Engineer employed to survey the route, and estimate the expenses, proved erroneous, and after the work was far progressed, it was found that the expense would far exceed the estimate. The canal was two miles and something less than a quarter in length, and cut out of the solid rock; much had been done; the locks were nearly completed; the excavated stone had been removed, and about two-thirds of the work was completed. Being thus delayed, the stock was below par, and many shares had been forfeited, in consequence of the non-payment of the amount called for. This forfeited stock could not be sold to individuals at par. The present bill provided that the Government should take it, and unless the Government did take it, the work could not be completed. The expenditures had already amounted to between two and three hundred thousand dollars; and it was calculated that the amount provided for in this bill would be sufficient to complete it. For this purpose, the Legislature of Kentucky had extended the time in which it was to be finished for the term of two years longer. It had proved to be a very great work, much greater than was ever anticipated by any body who had inquired into the subject. He was not going into the question of the principle; it was merely a question upon the expediency of taking so much of the stock. It was still believed by

[ocr errors]

presented; by passing this bill, they were about to make good the insolvencies and bankruptcies of the State of Kentucky. And were gentlemen prepared to take this step? He trusted not: he hoped the bill would lie over. He was determined, in the general scramble for the public treasure, to get what belonged to North Carolina-nothing more; he did not want any thing more than her share. If there was any objection to this, he should like to have half a dozen members of the Senate cast the first stonethose who live in houses of glass," &c., says the proverb. There was no gentleman in the Senate who had not, at some time or other, made similar applications. His State, in common with others, had instructed him to demand what belonged to her; and what was he to do? Was it not his duty to obey his instructions? And yet he thought it was wrong, and he wished to arrest this method of applying the public money. If we have a sum to dispose of, let us do it equally and impartially. He regretted to hear the reasons given for that grant; and he regretted to hear the equal distribution of the revenue opposed upon constitutional grounds. By whom was this just method opposed? Was it by those who had uniformly opposed the distribution of money? No; but it was by men who were always in favor of appropriating money for local objects. He did not censure the gentleman for asking for this grant, for it was no more than almost every member of the Senate had done The constitutional question had been overlooked, and precedent after precedent had been established, until it was almost impossible to prevent it, or refuse the applicants. Let us, said Mr. B., in conclusion, check this system of legislation, which should make every member of the Senate blush when he looks it full in the face. A new era is approaching, and let us make the basis of the new Administration upon equitable grounds. He hoped the bill would lie upon the table until the bill reported by the gentleman from New Jersey, providing for the equal distribution of the surplus revenue, should pass, and the question be settled.

Mr. JOHNSON, of Kentucky, supported the bill, and, in reply to the remarks of Mr. BRANCH, assured the gentleman that, should any thing be found necessary for North Carolina, his vote should not be wanting. He was sorry they had been obliged to make this demand; he regretted as much as the gentleman from North Carolina did, the necessity of making it. The work was commenced, no fraud had been committed, all the proceedings were fair and honorable, and, the enterprise had proved to be unlucky. The work was not one altogether local in its interests; the stockholders were not confined to Kentucky; they were to be found in the Western States, in the Atlantic States, and, he presumed, even in the State of North Carolina. He was satisfied that there would be no loss to the Government of the United States, either in principal or interest; the work was two-thirds done, and now they were checked by unforeseen consequences, and they appealed to Congress. If it was the first application of a similar kind, he would pause; but it was not; and would he pause, after what had been done, if the State of North Carolina, similarly situated, had made this demand? He would not. He, however, now took the ground that the Senate might reject it, and ought to reject it, if they considered it altogether as a local object. But, could that be called local in which the whole Western country was in

[blocks in formation]

terested, which was important to more than four millions of people-more than fought the battles of our Revolution? If this was local, he wished gentlemen would tell him what was general. This was the only manner in which this Government could distribute money in the Western country for, of the twenty-five millions which were annually paid into the Treasury, for what legitimate object could it be expended in the West? There was none; and he was sufficiently latitudinarian in his construction of the constitution, to vote for similar bills. Mr. J. offered a statement of the affairs of the Company, which was laid upon the table.

M. BRANCH then rejoined, and reiterated his objections.

Mr. CHANDLER said, the Government had already made one subscription to the stock of this canal; and when that other grant was made, they were hurried into it, without knowing the circumstances of the corporation. Now, it appeared the Government had engaged in it, and, like other gamblers, they must play on, to regain some portion of what they had lost. He wished to have some further understanding upon the subject, and therefore moved that it be made the order of the day for Tuesday next, and the report offered by the gentleman from Kentucky be printed.

Mr. NOBLE then addressed the Senate, in support of the bill.

Mr. SMITH, of Maryland, also went into an argument to prove the general nature and importance of the work; he cited the precedents of other similar acts, and showed that even North Carolina had not been without similar aid from the Government. He opposed the postponement, and advocated the immediate passage of the bill.

Mr. CHANDLER said, he had supposed that there would be no objection to a postponement, that gentlemen might obtain information; but he had another reason for the postponement; he wished to offer an amendment to the bill, the object of which was, to incorporate authority for the subscription to certain other stock; and he would state, that, should the amendment be adopted, it would not change his vote upon the passage of the bill.

Mr. ROWAN replied, that he had no objection; that the gentleman might obtain information, but he was already in possession of all the information he could obtain on the subject, and the report would give him no more; it was not worth printing. He certainly should not agree to any postponement for the amendment, nor should he agree to the amendment. If the gentleman wanted a canal in Maine, let his proposition stand upon its own basis; he presumed the gentleman would not wish to mingle the bland air of Kentucky with the more rigorous atmosphere of Maine; neither did he wish to mingle the two States in this proposition. Such was that gentleman's habit of opposing all grants of money-and he gave him credit for his perseverance and his motive-that he believed the gentleman had saved an amount equal to his weight in gold, every session since he had been in Congress He denied the local nature of the work, for it was not local in the interests of the stockholders, but a very few of whom belonged to Kentucky, and they were scattered all over the country; all objects must be local in some measure, for all generals were composed of particulars. This was as general as any thing of the kind could be; here was a fall of about twenty-eight feet, in the course of two miles, in one of the greatest and most navigable rivers in America, down which river must pass all the travel, all the goods, and all the munitions of war, intended for the West. It was general to all the valley of the Mississippi; it was general in relation to national defence, if the West should ever again become the theatre of war. He wished to do away the idea that it was to make up the bankruptcies of Kentucky. It was, as he said before, a mere question of expediency. The State of Kentucky has been

[JAN. 28, 1829.

very much divided as to the benefit of this measure to that State; and many believed that it would give a benefit to other States, trading through this river at the expense of Kentucky. It would make very little sensation at home if the representatives should vote against the bill, in consequence of this very division. The slave States paid more than the other States into the Treasury, because more dutiable articles were consumed in those States than in the States which manufactured for themselves.

It was a general principle that you should circulate most among those who paid the most. The circulation of money in the body politic should be like that of the fluids in the animal body-equal over the whole. The only sum ever expended in Kentucky, was $100,000, appropriated to this object. He hoped that the bill would not be postponed: for if the work was delayed, the Ohio river was rising, there were deposites, and it would cost an immense sum to clear the canal when operations should be again commenced. In regard to internal improvements, and to the tariff, he had always voted under instructions from his Legislature. He had his own opinions, but he was not allowed to be influenced by them. In conclusion, he said it was not a local question, but a mere question of expediency, and he hoped it would not be postponed.

Mr. BRANCH replied, that he had opposed this bill, as he had all similar ones, because he wished to have a settled policy upon the subject. He represented a State too high-minded to come here as mendicants; they were embarrassed, it was true, and the gentleman from Kentucky had an awful responsibility to answer, for entertaining different opinions, and at the same time voting for the very measures which had ground down the inhabitants of the State he represented. He should not have mentioned this subject had not the gentleman from Kentucky himself alluded to it.

Mr. McLANE followed, in favor of the bill; he had been opposed to it in the committee, because he doubted whether it could effect the object proposed. Mr. MCLANE then read an extract from the report of the Secretary of War in 1824, showing that the work was considered not only as a national, but one of the most important national objects, and that it was not local.

Mr. CHANDLER did not wish the postponement from any opposition to the canal; he supposed the report referred to would give some information as to the expenditures heretofore made, but it appeared that it did not contain any such exposition. He supposed that no member of the Senate would vote for an expenditure of money, without having in his possession all the necessary information; but, if it was otherwise, he had nothing farther to say about it.

At the suggestion of Mr. ROWAN, Mr. CHANDLER then accepted Friday, instead of Tuesday, as the day.

Mr. JOHNSTON, of Louisiana, said he was satisfied of the necessity of the work, and, from an examination of the report, he was satisfied that the affairs had been properly managed, and the money properly expended. He believed the work would be a profitable one: the increase of trade in that section of the country was inconceivable. There was no place in the country in which so large a portion of the country was connected by so short a canal. A reason for the immediate passage of the bill was, that the waters will soon rise, and obstruct the work. They were already in possession of all the information they could have; and unless the bill passed immediately, it could not pass the other House; and consequently the whole work would be postponed for another twelve months. The work, said Mr. J., will be completed within the amount contemplated in the act of incorporation. The resources of the company, including capital, property, &c., were fully adequate to the completion of the canal. He had taken some pains to ascertain the amount of

JAN. 29, 1829.]

Judiciary.-School Lands.

[SENATE.

trade passing through the Ohio river, and found it to be sion of the report suggested several modes in which the as follows:

[blocks in formation]

And the tonnage for 1828 might be estimated at fifty thousand tons, all of which would pass this canal.

Mr. BENTON supported the bill on the grounds of its importance; that it was not a new application; and that it would not be any loss to the United States.

The question was then taken upon the motion to postpone till Friday, and lost.

Mr. HOLMES moved to lay the bill on the table till tomorrow; which was lost.

The question then recurred on ordering to a third reading; and it was decided in the affirmative-yeas 24,

nays 18.

Mr. BRANCH called for the yeas and nays, which were as follows:

YEAS. Messrs. Barton, Benton, Bouligny, Burnet, Chase, Chambers, Eaton, Hendricks, Johnson of Kentucky, Johnston of Louisiana, Kane, McKinley, McLean, Marks, Noble, Ridgely, Robbins, Rowan, Ruggles, Seymour, Silsbee, Smith of Md., Webster, Williams.-24.

NAYS.-Messrs. Bell, Berrien, Branch, Chandler, Dickerson, Foot, Hayne, Holmes, Iredell, Knight, Prince, Sanford, Smith of South Carolina, Tazewell, Tyler, White, Willey, Woodbury.-18.

THURSDAY, JANUARY 29, 1829.

THE JUDICIARY.

The report of the Committee on the Judiciary on the resolution, instructing them to consider the expediency of amending the Judicial System of the United States so as to equalize the distribution of justice, and place all the States on a similar footing, was considered.

Mr. BERRIEN said, the resolution was upon a subject of great magnitude and importance; it had excited great interest in the National Legislature, both now and at other times. The committee were instructed to inquire into the expediency of amending certain alleged inequalities in the present organization, and suggest such measures as in their opinion would remedy the difficulty. So far as regarded the present Judicial System, no diversity of opinion was entertained in the committee; all agreed that there was an inequality, which should be removed; but when the committee came to inquire what was the remedy, they found it impossible to report any specific plan. The result had been, that, in their report, they had gone into a historical account of the Judicial System, showing the inequalities, and stated their inability to concur in any specific plan. Their object had been to present the subject to the consideration of the Senate in such a manner that it should be open to the members of the Senate, whether belonging to the Committee or not, to suggest any specific plan for the removal of this evil. It was, perhaps, a subject of too much importance to be discharged at the present moment, and it appeared to him to be a more appropriate treatment of the subject to lay it upon the table, that it might be called up at some future time. Accordingly, he moved to lay the report upon the table.

Mr. WEBSTER added, very briefly, that the concluVOL. V.-7

inequalities might be removed; and the subject had become one of so much importance, that he wished to have it brought before the Senate. If it could be made the order of the day for some early day hereafter, he should prefer it to having it laid upon the table; but he was willing to agree in any measure thought most expedient.

Mr. BERRIEN said, he was willing to have it made the order of the day, if, when that arrived, the Senate would be prepared to act upon it. But they probably would not; if it was laid upon the table, it could be called up at any moment, and discussed. Therefore, he renewed his motion, and the bill was laid upon the table.

SCHOOL LANDS.

On motion of Mr. BARTON, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill allowing the relinquishment of the sixteenth sections appropriated for schools in the State of Mississippi, and the entry of other lands in lieu thereof. sippi," and insert" any township in any State or territory of the United States;" which was agreed to. On motion of Mr. WILLIAMS,

Mr. BARTON moved to strike out the word "Missis

The amendment offered yesterday by Mr. SANFORD to a similar bill for the State of Louisiana was incorporated with this bill.

Mr. EATON moved to insert the words " in all cases," which was agreed to.

The question then arising on the passage of the billMr.BRANCH said, he could view these grants of the public lands in no other light than as pure donations, without any equivalent at all. He would ask the gentlemen, when they were giving the lands away, why they would not give to the old States? He appealed to their liberality. He wished the bill to be amended to that effect. He believed he should get at his object more readily by the recommitment of the bill, and he therefore made the motion, for the express object of making some provision for the old States.

Mr. KANE explained the bill. In the settlement of the terms upon which the new States were admitted, the sixteenth section in each township was reserved for the use of schools; in many cases this sixteenth section had proved to be barren and unproductive, and the bill provided that, in such cases, the town should be allowed to select good land, in order that the original intention might be carried into effect. Now, said Mr. K., if North Carolina is laboring under the disadvantage of having bad school lands granted to her, she is already provided for by the amendment of the gentleman from Missouri. If North Carolina has no such lands, she has no interest in the bill. If the gentleman wished for a new grant, he would suggest whether it was proper to incorporate it with the present bill, which was for another purpose?

Mr. BRANCH said, he was not in Congress at the time, but he remembered perfectly well, some ten or fifteen years ago, when new States were admitted, when this provision was made, that the old States made a claim for a similar grant, which was resisted on the ground that this was not to be considered as a donation, because the Government would receive an equivalent in the enhanced value of its own lands situated adjacent to such school lands. He would ask how they received an equivalent when such lands were worth nothing? If they received no equivalent, then it was a donation.

Mr. BENTON then took the floor in opposition to the recommitment, and recapitulated the terms upon which the States were admitted, and the reservations made; and concluded by saying as he had a thousand times before said, that the new States did not consider this grant of a section for the benefit of schools as a donation, for the government received an equivalent in the privileges granted.

Mr. HENDRICKS said, that the proposition of the Se

[blocks in formation]

nator from North Carolina opened a wide field, and embraced principles which he had not expected would be drawn into argument in this incidental way. He alluded to the compacts, the principles on which the new States were entitled to admission into the Union, and the principles on which they were admitted. The Senator from Missouri (Mr. BENTON) had said, that the new States had been greatly prejudiced by the compacts. In that opinion he fully concurred. It was his opinion that the new States would be benefited by annulling those compacts, and he had heretofore expressed that opinion to the Senate. He repelled the idea that the compacts had been made for the benefit of the States; said they had been enacted by law, and originally imposed on the States, rather than asked for by them; said their validity had been questioned, and might well be questioned, on various grounds; referred to the resolutions of Louisiana, and to the proceedings of the Legislature of Indiana, on the subject of the public lands, and to the proximate attitude of Alabama, Illinois, and Missouri, on the same subject. The doctrine, that any political community may transfer to another political community its sovereignty, or a portion of it, might well be questioned, and the doctrine of the perpetual obligation of those compacts, was surely very objectionable. It was in derogation of a principle at the basis of our institutions-the principle which asserted the right of every free people to change and modify their constitution and laws, from time to time, as their condition may require. He would strictly observe the faith of compacts, but it was surely allowable to suggest every objection to them. He denied the power of the States to transfer the right of their own soil to the Federal Government, and the power of the Government to accept such transfer; and said, that, for this opinion, there was the highest authority. He referred to the construction of the constitution given by Mr. Monroe, in his veto on the Gate bill, and to a recent argument in the other House, on the same subject; he would not enter further into the argument, but disclaimed the allegation that the compacts were made for the benefit of the new States. If the Senator from North Carolina had, in his State, vacant lands, and wished to appropriate them to the purposes of education, he would not object, but he did object to an appropriation of the soil within the limits of the State he had the honor to represent, for those purposes in North Carolina.

Mr. BARTON said, if it was true that there was no validity in the compact, as it was called, although he considered it no compact, but merely an arrangement between owners of property for the best disposal of that property, on the supposition that the individuals, when making the contract for their descendants were but as minors, then the gentleman from North Carolina was manifestly right in his proposition to admit the old States. He did not himself consider these compacts invalid; he considered them merely arrangements between all the owners of a common property to dispose of that property. He could not discover any objection to the claims of the old States that had school lands. He thought the new States were entitled to such lands as were granted to them for the use of schools without the old States coming in. He did not see that there was any invalidity on the ground of minority, and believed the whole argument wrong; for it was. an arrangement made between parties fully competent.

Mr. HENDRICKS replied, that the Senator from Missouri (Mr. BARTON) had said, in reference to his former remarks, that if the compacts were of no validity, then certainly the proposition of the Senator from North Carolina was correct-for then the public lands, unembarrassed by all restrictions, would belong to the Union, and might fairly be distributed among the States. He wished to be correctly understood. Perhaps the word validity would not so well express his meaning as some

JAN. 30 to FEB. 5, 1829.

other word. He cared not for terms, but thought it was absolutely certain that the Congress of the United States, in passing laws requiring these compacts, understood the subject very differently from the Senator from Missouri. Congress had required the new States to stipulate that they would not interfere with the primary disposal of the soil, and that they would not tax the lands for a specified period after their sale. Now if the Congress of that day believed that the States, without these compacts, after their admission into the Union, would have no such power, why was it thought necessary to restrict them by compacts? It is evident that Congress believed the power would exist in the States, or they would have taken no measures to restrain its exercise-would not have imposed the compacts. He would respect the compacts while they had the form of existence, but it would surely be permitted to the new States, even at this late day, to say, that they had hard bargains, and that Congress ought not to retain the advantages they gained. Mr. H. spoke of the political balance which had originally adjusted the powers of government between the States and the Union, and said that, if this balance were destroyed by cessions, on the part of the States to the Federal Government, whether of abstract political power, or the object of its exercise, that their system was destroyed.

Mr. NOBLE next addressed the Senate in opposition to the recommitment of the bill.

Mr. BERRIEN said he had given a notice yesterday, and, for the purpose of redeeming his pledge, he moved to say the bill upon the table, and that the Senate proceed to the consideration of Executive business; which motion prevailed.

FRIDAY, JAN. 30, 1829.

After the consideration of Executive business, the Senate adjourned to Monday.

MONDAY, FEB. 2, 1829.

The Senate was chiefly occupied this day in the consideration of Executive business.

TUESDAY, FEB. 3, 1829.

The Senate was principally occupied in the consideration of Executive business.

WEDNESDAY, FEB. 4, 1829.

The Senate was engaged in the consideration of Executive business for near three hours this day.

THURSDAY, FEB. 5, 1829.

EXPLORING EXPEDITION.

The following resolution, yesterday submitted by Mr. HAYNE, was taken up for consideration:

[ocr errors]

Resolved, That the President of the United States be requested to cause to be laid before the Senate a detailed statement of the expenses incurred in fitting out and preparing an expedition for exploring the Pacific Ocean and will be necessary to cover all the expenses of such an exSouth Seas; together with the additional amounts which pedition. And that he be also requested to cause to be submitted a detailed statement, showing the several amounts transferred from the different heads of appropriations for the support of the navy to this object, and the authority by which such transfers have been made." In explanation of the object of the resolution—

Mr. HAYNE said it had been submitted by him under the direction of the Committee on Naval Affairs. A bill from the House of Representatives, appropriating 50,000 dollars for the purpose of exploring the Pacific Ocean and

FEB. 5, 1829.]

Exploring Expedition.

SENATE.

seas, for that purpose; and that he be requested to afford such facilities as may be within the reach of the Navy Department, to attain the object proposed: Provided it can be effected without prejudice to the general interest of the naval service; and provided it may be done without further appropriations during the present year."

South Seas, had been referred to that Committee, in consequence of which their Chairman had been directed to address a letter to the Secretary of the Navy, requiring of him an explanation of the views of the Department as to the objects of the expedition, and a statement of the expenses already incurred, with an estimate of the further expense that would be incurred in fitting it out. An an- These resolutions were never sent to the Senate for swer had been received from the Secretary, which was their concurrence, and consequently could not be consinot altogether satisfactory to the Committee. He had dered as sanctioned by Congress. Nevertheless, the Segiven an explanation of the plan of the expedition, and cretary of the Navy had acted upon the subject, in the what had already been done in furtherance of it; stated same manner as he would have done, not only if the resosome of the expenses which had been incurred, but did lutions had passed both Houses, but as if the original bill not give all the information required. The want of the had become a law. The specific appropriations made for accounts was the reason alleged why the desired informa- the general purposes of the navy had been applied, at tion had not been afforded. In the examination of the sub-pleasure, towards this object; and now this bill is sent ject by the Committee, some circumstances had occurred, to us for our approbation, going to sanction what had alwhich induced them to submit this call. In order to pre-ready been done by the Secretary. This was its object. sent to the Senate the views which influenced the Committee, he would give a brief history of this exploring expedition, and state what had already been done in reference to this subject.

At the last session of Congress, the projector of the expedition came to Washington, bringing with him several memorials, signed by persons of respectability, praying that Congress would either fit out an expedition for the purpose of making explorations at the South Pole, or that they would aid in fitting out such an expedition. The memorials were referred to the Committee of Naval Affairs in the other House, who communicated with the Head of the Navy Department on the subject; and he held in his hand the letter of the Secretary of the Navy to that Committee, from which he would read a few extracts for the information of the Senate. [Here Mr. H. read from the letter of the Secretary as follows:]

6

"The expedition ought not to be large nor expensive. Other nations have erred on this point. It seems to be the desire of the memorialist that Congress should afford aid, not furnish the whole expense. If this mode be preferred by the Committee, all that the bill need provide is, that the sum of dollars be appropriated to aid in fitting out an expedition to explore the Pacific Ocean and South Seas.' If it be the intention that the whole expense should be borne by Government, the bill ought to provide, That the President of the United States be, and he is hereby authorized, to cause to be fitted out an expedition to explore the Pacific Ocean and South Seas; and that the sum of

It appeared to the Committee as of the last importance that this matter should be carefully looked into. The Senate was a co-ordinate branch of the Legislature, and no appropriation could legally be made for a public object without their concurrence. Whether appropriations made by law for particular objects should be suffered to be transferred to those which were not authorized by law, was a question which it was desirable to bring to the view of the public. The resolution (Mr. H. said) furnished no authority for what had been done in this case. And he quoted that clause of the constitution which provided that "every order, resolution, or vote," to be obligatory, must have the sanction of both Houses, and be approved by the President. An appropriation bill had no effect, unless passed by both Houses, and approved by the President; and the rule was the same as to resolutions requiring the appropriation of money, or which related to any matter of But if these resolutions of the House of public concern.

Representatives could be considered as an authority, they had not been pursued.

Mr. H. then commented on the resolutions passed by the other House, and explained their object. They provided for sending out one of our small vessels, provided it could be done without injury to the public service, and without any increase of expenditure: in other words, that one of our small cruising vessels might be detached on this service.

But the measures pursued by the Secretary were the same as if the law now before the Senate had been passed during the last session. It seemed, the Sedollars be, and the same is here-cretary had considered the resolution in the light of a by appropriated for that object.' The blank ought to be filled with 45,000 or 50,000 dollars."

On the receipt of this communication from the Secretary (said Mr. H.), the Committee reported a bill, similar, he believed, in all its provisions, to that now before the Senate, taking the whole matter into the hands of the Government, authorizing the President to cause the expedition to be fitted out, and appropriating 50,000 dollars for that object. The Committee reported the bill some time in March, but it was not acted on-Congress being either unwilling to act upon the subject at all, or not having time to do so. Congress having omitted to pass the law, there was, of course, an end of the matter. Within a few days of the close of the session, however, viz. on the 19th of May, a member of the House submitted the following resolutions, which, on the 21st of the same month, were considered and agreed to by that House, viz:

"Resolved, That it is expedient that one of our small public vessels be sent to the Pacific Ocean and South Seas, to examine the coasts, islands, harbors, shoals, and reefs, in those seas, and to ascertain their true situation and description.

"Resolved, That the President of the United States be requested to send one of our small public ships into those

law, giving him an unlimited discretion. What had been done? Why, the Peacock had been rebuilt, at an expense probably exceeding the construction of a sloop of war; she had been double timbered, and otherwise fitted for this particular service. A brig had been purchased, at an expense of ten thousand dollars, (with the understanding, it was true, that, if the expedition was not sent out, she should be taken back by her owners.) A schooner was also to be procured, to serve as a provision ship. An agent had been employed to procure information, at an expense of from five hundred to one thousand dollars; and, in addition to the naval officers selected for the service, a scientific corps had been organized: five or six persons, such as an astronomer, a naturalist, draughtsman, and surveyors, had also been engaged, together with an historiographer. One of these was to make observations on our commerce, another was to write the history of the expedition, &c.

The salaries of these officers, we are informed, would each average about 1,600 dollars per annum-some considerably more, and some less. The mathematical instruments had cost about 2,000 dollars; in addition to which, extra supplies and provisions were to be procured. These were some of the expenditures already contracted for, and incurred, which had been drawn without any lawful authority from the appropriations for the navy. It was

« AnteriorContinuar »