the honorable gentleman in his retrospect. Is it not a little singular, that, while the gentleman was telling us of the amount of debt which had been paid off, and the expenses which had been met by the Government, as evidence of its economy, it did not occur to him that he ought to have told us something of the means which had been put at its disposal, for the accomplishment of these objects Economy, sir, is a relative thing; it depends on the proportion between the results which have been accomplished, and the resources which have been furnished for accomplishing them. (FEB. 5, 1828. general revenue of the State, the county levies, the parish rates, and numerous other public exactions of one sort or another, which have been estimated by a most able statist, as well as statesman, [Col. BENTON, of the Senate,] at a round sum of twenty millions of dollars more. We have thus a grand total of fifty millions of dollars, instead of twenty-odd millions, for the amount of public contributions levied upon the People of this country which, deducting from our population, two millions for slaves who pay nothing, makes a charge upon the residue, of five, instead of two dollars a head. Now, Sir, this does appear to me to be an enormous load of taxation, even for a much older People than we are; and, accordworld, the celebrated Talleyrand, (as has been stated elsewhere by the gentleman to whom I have already alluded,) in graduating the actual taxation of different countries, has placed us upon the scale in a middle posi tion between Great Britain, the most heavily taxed, and France, the next most heavily taxed country, (but for the exception he makes of us,) in the world. But, Sir, the comparison which the gentleman from Pennsylvania made between this country and Great Britain, for the purpose of showing the relative moderation of our public burthens, is obviously unfair, in many res pects. The British Government is now nearly eight centuries old, and during that time has been engaged in a The average annual receipts of the Government, dur-long succession of wars, foreign or domestic, which have ing this period, amounted to more than 25 millions. We accumulated upon it an immense mass of public debt. will suppose that about 10 millions were annually appli- To pay the interest of this debt, and whatever portion of ed to the principal and interest of the public debt. The its principal it may, and at the same time to support the ordinary current expenses of the Government may have cumbrous and expensive establishments which result from amounted to about another sum of 10 millions annually; its political organization, it must impose upon its subjects and there then remained a sum of 5 millions to be ex- a weight of taxation equal to their utmost capacity to pended ad libitum. How the honorable gentleman can bear. But our situation is altogether different. Our nadeduce, from these facts, an evidence of the economy of tional existence hardly extends beyond half a century, the Government, I cannot conceive. and the simplicity of our republican institutions neither requires nor tolerates the costly appendages which belong to other Governments. The public debt of Great Britain amounts, at this moment, between three and four thousand millions of dollars; an amount more than fifty times greater than our national debt. Now, as the burthens imposed by every Government, must be in propor tion to the charges existing upon it, I would ask, with what propriety a comparison can be made between Great Britain and this country, under these widely different circumstances, with a view to test the economy of our Government? Now, sir, what were the resources of the Government during those twelve years, from which the honorable gentleman has collected the results he so fondly display-ingly one of the most profound politicians of the old ed to the admiration of the House? Why, sir, more than 300 millions of dollars. During several years of the period included in the honorable gentleman's retrospect, we had direct taxes, and a system of internal revenue; and from those sources, added to the customs, the sales of public lands, and the bank bonus and dividends, the whole revenue which flowed into the public Treasury, from 1815 to 1827, considerably exceeded 300 millions of dollars! Now, sir, with such a fund as this at its disposal, is it proof, either of extraordinary frugality, or of consummate financial skill in the Government, to have paid off 70 millions of the debt, and defrayed its current expenses? But, sir, the gentleman from Pennsylvania exhibited another view of this subject, for the purpose of showing us how lightly we are taxed for the support of our institutions. He told us that the whole expenditure of the Government, for the year 1826, was 24 millions of dollars, which, assessed upon our twelve millions of population, produces a charge of only two dollars a head, while, according to a statement he made, the taxation of the British People amounts to fifteen dollars a head. Observing, (in passing merely,) that the gentleman has stated the amount of public burthens in Great Britain, enormous as they certainly are, at a higher rate than I have ever seen any authority for, I think I shall be able to satisfy him, that he has put our own much too low. His statement pretermits several important items, which undoubtedly enter largely into our complicated system of public burthens. He seemed to assume the amount of duties paid to the Government, as the full measure of American taxation. But, Sir, this is not so. It is true that the proceeds of the duties are all which the Government receives, but they are not all that the People pay. The merchant, who pays the duties to the Government in advance, must have his profit upon that advance included in the price of the goods; and this profit, repeated and multiplied through a series of exchanges, amounts, at last, to a heavy tax upon the consumer, over and above the amount of duties paid to the Government. The ordinary amount of duties is twenty-odd millions, and the usual mercantile profit, of from 331, to 50 per cent. upon that sum, would raise the whole charge, imposed by the General Government, to about thirty millions of dollars. But to ascertain the full amount of public burthens sustained by the People of this country, you must also take into the account the taxes imposed by the State Governments, with all their subordinate local jurisdictions, comprehending, besides the But, Sir, I protest altogether against comparisons with Foreign Governments. Our institutions, our situation, moral and physical, the genus and habits of our People, are all peculiar. They are sui generis. In having the freest Government in the world, we are entitled, by the favor of Providence, to the greatest share of public blessings; and among them, that we should not be subjected to a relentless taxation which takes "from the mouth of labor, the bread it has earned." In what consists the va lue of a free Government, if it is not that, by the constant influence and control of the will of the People over their rulers, the Government is restrained from oppression, pecuniary as well as personal? Sir, the honorable gen. tleman from Pennsylvania did not tell us to what a situa tion the People of Great Britain had been reduced by their public burthens-of the number of their paupers and starvelings-that two-fifths of the whole population of that country were kept alive by being billeted upon the constrained charity of the remaining three fifths. Would the worthy gentleman have us esteem ourselves happy, and without any cause to complain of governmental exactions, as long as we can keep within the limit of this extremity of wretchedness I hope not, Sir. I have long thought, Mr. Speaker, if I may venture to express such an opinion, that there is too great a disposition among some of our distinguished Statesmen to bring our affairs, our policy and our principles, to the standard of Foreign Governments. A prominent feature in the celebrated first Message of the present Chief Magistrate to Congress, was its perpetual fond recurrence to the proceedings of Foreign Governments, as the lesson of our political duties, and the measure of our political powers. He told us what France, what Russia, what Great Britain had done, and gave us to understand that we should go and do likewise. Now, Sir, to all this I object, as antiAmerican-as anti-Republican. Our circumstances and our institutions are peculiar, and so too should be our policy. [H. of R. War, and Navy, and their dependencies; of the Attorney General, and Postmaster General, Judges, Marshals, and District Attorneys, Officers of the Customs, Postmasters; of Diplomatic characters, Commercial Agents, (exclusive of Consuls,) Commissioners under Treaties, Territorial Officers, Indian Agents, Surveyors, Registers, Receivers, &c.;" in fine, the pay of all Civil Officers, whose appointments depend upon the Executive, added to the commissioned officers of the Army and Navy, amounted to about $3,500,000; and that the amount of moneys disposed of by contracts made under the direction of the Executive, including Fortifications, Docks, Navy Yards, Internal Improvements, Light-houses, transportation of the Mail, supplying the provisions, clothing, guns, cannon, &c. for the Army, building ships, and furnishing supplies necessary for the Navy, was about $4,500,000; making an aggregate of eight millions annually four times the amount of Executive patronage, as estimated by Mr. Gallatin in '99. : But, Sir, to return to the subject of our public expenditures. I would say to the honorable gentleman from Pennsylvania, that the true mode of testing the economy of our Government, at any given period, is not to compare its expenses with those of a Foreign Government, but with its own at some antecedent period. Now, Sir, if we do this we shall find that, during Mr. Jefferson's Ad- Now, Sir, when the honorable gentleman from Pennministration, in 1802, for example, the whole expenditures sylvania comes to survey this immense field, so producof the Government, exclusive of the payments of the tive in rich rewards, he can no longer, I am sure, consipublic debt, amounted to $3,737,079,; while the same der its possession a disadvantage to those who enjoy it. class of expenditures, during the year 1826, according to He will see that, although the hopes of an expectant may the last Treasury report, amounted to $13,062,316. Here, be sometimes disappointed, in relation to a particular then we have an increase of expenditure equal to 350 office, yet that, in the multiplicity of other boons and per cent, in less than 25 years, which, after making eve- favors to be disposed of, ample means are afforded to rery allowance for the growth of the country, and the ex-tain his fidelity, and to console and indemnity him for his pansion of its institutions, does seem to me to be dispro- first disappointment. portionate and extravagant. Sir, I have dwelt the longer upon these views, because I have a deep and settled conviction, that economy is a cardinal virtue in every Republican Government. It is not merely for the pecuniary saving, and the consequent relief to the industry and resources of the People, which it brings with it, that I esteem it. It is still more for its political effects. It is not only the close ally, but the surest guarantee of the public liberty. It is the great in-litical object, that I attach so much importance to a wise strument for restraining that dangerous principle of Executive influence, which is perpetually undermining and assailing the fabric of free Government every where, and of our own not less than others. This influence exerts and enlarges itself through the disbursements of public money, ultimately under one shape or another. Diminish the public expenditure, then, and you at the same time diminish Executive influence. Sir, I may have fears upon this subject, which firmer minds can and do repel; but it has long been my opinion, that there is a decided tendency in our Government to a dangerous and dispproportionate accumulation of power in the Executive branch, and that Monarchy is the euthanasia of our political system. Gentlemen who treat these fears as altogether visionary, and those especially, who like, the distinguished member from Pennsylvania, consider patronage a disadvantage, rather than an aid to an Administration, have not, I am persuaded, explored the full extent and range of this powerful engine, in the magnitude which it has, at present, attained. Having been led, by particular circumstances, during the last session of Congress, to look into this subject, I will repeat here the result of an investigation then very carefully made. Many persons have hastily supposed that the patronage of the Executive consisted exclusively in appointments to office. But an equally, if not more important branch of patronage, consists in the disposition of public moneys through the medium of contracts made under the direction of the Executive. Both of these branches were included in an estimate of the amount of Executive pa tronage, made by Mr. Gallatin in '99, and I took the list of items, enumerated by him, as the basis of my calcula tion. In doing this, I found that the "annual pay of the officers in the several Departments of the Treasury, State, Believing this immense force of Executive patronage to be dangerous to the public liberty, and as the disbursements of public money must necessarily be made by the Executive branch of the Government, that every increase of expenditure tends directly to increase the influence of that Department, I am for embracing every fit occasion to reduce the public expenditure to the real demands of the public service. It is with reference to this great poeconomy in the administration of our public affairs. When Mr. Burke proposed his great scheme of economical reform, he did not look merely to the saving of money, though that was something to a People groaning beneath the weight of their public burthens-but he looked beyond, to the higher object of diminishing, through the instrumentality of pecuniary retrenchment, the danger ous and growing influence of the Crown. When, in the same memorable year, Mr. Dunning submitted his celebrated resolution, affirming that the "influence of the Crown had increased, was increasing, and ought to be diminished," he submitted by the side of it, another reso lution, affirming it to be the right and the duty of the House of Commons to examine into, and correct abuses, in the expenditure of the public revenue, and declared that both propositions stood upon one great principle. Sir, there was a period in the history of our own coun try, when these doctrines were not only avowed, but prac tised. I allude, Sir, to the Presidency of Mr. Jefferson, which I have ever looked back to as the purest era of our Government-as the era of sound principles and of correct practices. As I hope the doctrines of that day will once again, at no very remote period, come into favor, and as they are particularly applicable to the subject of our present deliberations, I must beg permission to read a beautiful development of them in the words of their great teacher. In his first official communication to Congress, he held the following language: "These views are formed on the expectation that a sensible, and, at the same time, a salutary reduction, may take place in our habitual expenditures. For this pur. pose, those of the Civil Government, the Army, and Na. vy, will need revisal. When we consider that this Go. vernment is charged with the external and mutual rela II. or R.] Retrenchment. [FEB. 5, 1828. Have " any agencies, created by Executive authority, on salaries fixed by that also, been suppressed?" Let the secret history of the Executive Departments give the answer. tions only of these States; that the States themselves | the self-denying republicanism of Mr. Jefferson. Instead have the principal care of our persons, our property, and of renouncing the exercise of power which the laws and our reputation, constituting the great field of human con- the Constitution had given them, we have seen them laycerns, we may well doubt whether our organization is not ing claim to powers which are sanctioned by neither; in too complicated, too expensive-whether offices and of stead of the suppression of unnecessary offices, and the ficers have not been multiplied unnecessarily, and some- curtailment of Executive patronage, we have seen them times injuriously to the service they were meant to pro- rapidly multiplied and increased, under their auspices; mote. I will cause to be laid before you an essay to instead of recommending the limitation of Executive diswar is a statement of those who, under the public employ. cretion over the public disbursements, we have seen them ment of various kinds, draw money from the Treasury, or asking for large grants of public money, to be expended from our citizens. Time has not permitted a perfect at their mere will and pleasure. To descend a little more enumeration, the ramifications of office being too multi-into detail-let me ask if "the expenses of diplomatic plied and too remote to be completely traced in a first agency have been considerably diminished?" It is nototrial. Among those who are dependent on Executive rious that they have increased, and I shall presently atdiscretion, I have begun the reduction of what was deem-tempt to give some idea of the extent of that increase. ed unnecessary. The expenses of diplomatic agency have been considerably diminished. The inspectors of internal revenue, who were found to obstruct the accountability of the institution, have been discontinued. What respect has been paid by the present AdminisSeveral agencies, created by the Executive authority, on tration to those great maxims of fiscal responsibility, insalaries fixed by that also, have been suppressed, and culcated by Mr. Jefferson? Have they been willing to should suggest the expediency of regulating that power acquiesce in the doctrine of "appropriating specific by law, so as to subject its exercise to the legislative in- sums to every specific purpose susceptible of definition?" spection and sanction. Other reformations of the same For an answer, I refer to an estimate of one of the Dekind will be pursued, with that caution which is requisite, partments; in which, to effect a survey of roads and cain removing useless things, not to injure what is retain- nals of national importance, which may surely be defined, ed. But the great mass of public offices is established if any thing be susceptible of definition, we are asked to by law, and, therefore, by law alone can be abolished. appropriate a sum of $50,000-it was $30,000 last year Should the Legislature think it expedient to pass this roll for the survey of such routes as the President may think in review, and to try all its parts by the test of public uti- proper to denominate national. Have they shown more res lity, they may be assured of every aid and light which Ex-pect for another of those maxims, that which enjoins a ecutive information can yield. Considering the general" disallowance of all applications of money varying from tendency to multiply officers and dependencies, and to the appropriation in object, or transcending it in amount ?" increase expense to the ultimate term of burthen which There is now a commnnication upon our tables from the the citizen can bear, it behooves us to avail ourselves of Head of another of the Departments, seeking to be eman. every occasion which presents itself for taking off the cipated from this restraint, and asking for the privilege surcharge; that it never may be seen here, that, after of transferring appropriations from one object of expen. leaving to labor the smallest portion of its earnings, on diture to another. Has there been a disposition manifestwhich it can subsist, Government shall itself consume the ed in the estimates of any of the Departments, to "reresidue of what it was instituted to guard. In our care, duce the undefined field of contingencies, and thereby too, of the public contributions entrusted to our direction, circumscribe discretionary powers over ” Sir, it money it would be prudent to multiply barriers against their dis- will be found that this "field of contingencies," instead sipation, by appropriating specific sums to every specific of being reduced by the present Administration, has purpose susceptible of definition; by disallowing all ap- been greatly extended, and that "the discretionary pow plications of money varying from the appropriation in ob-ers of the Executive over the public money," have been ject, or transcending it in amount; by reducing the undefined field of contingencies, and thereby circumscribing discretionary powers over money; and by bringing back to to a single department, all accountabilities for money, where As I have thus ventured, Mr. Speaker, to present my. the examination may be prompt, efficacious, and uniform." self in the unfashionable, if not invidious character, of an I said, Mr. Speaker, that I had always regarded the economist, I must be permitted to state, somewhat more Administration of Mr. Jefferson as the purest and bright- in detail, what are my notions upon this subject. Though est era of our Government. Is not the pregnant extract, the advocate of economy, I am not, Sir, the advocate of which I have just read from his first message to Congress, a niggardly parsimony. I would do away all sinecure sufficient evidence, in itself, of the justness of this praise? places; all supernumerary offices, which serve no other It is possible to conceive a nobler spectacle than he pre- purpose than to be snug receptacles for court favorites, sented on that cccasion? The Chief Magistrate of a na- and channels of Executive influence. But, in relation to tion voluntarily divesting himself, by his own act, where officers who are really necessary to the public service, I it was competent for him to do so, of every attribute of would give them liberal compensations. I know not, at his power, which, however advantageous to himself, he this moment, a solitary officer, whose salary I would reduce. deemed to be inconsistent with the public interest; and I would touch the salary only through the office; and by in cases where it was not competent for him to apply the one and the same act, wherever I found a sinecure, or a remedy, calling upon the legislative authority to do so, mere nominal employment, I would sweep both the salaby reducing his patronage, circumscribing his discretion, ry and the office. In regard to those great public estaband defining his powers! Sir, the spectacle is rare as it lishments essential to the security of the country, I would was noble. If it was not presumption in me, I would maintain them all in a state of salutary vigor and efficienventure to recommend it to the imitation of the distinguish-cy; but as the best means of doing that, I would endea. ed individuals who now preside over the administration vor to free them from incumbrance, and to purge them of our public affairs. They might find it, perhaps, the from abuse in every branch of their Administration, This, most effectual means of acquiring present popularity, as Sir, is my idea of public economy. it certainly would be of earning true glory for the future. But they seem to have taken a different view of what became their situation. Their whole course has been in striking contrast with proportionally enlarged. Some of the items in this increase of "contingencies," I shall have occasion to bring more particularly to the notice of the House. Sir, I have been very much surprised that this proposi. tion of retrenchment has been so promptly met as an attack upon the present Administration. Are they not friends of economy? The President has given us the FEB. 5, 1828.] Retrenchment. {H. OF R. amplest professions upon this subject—even of a "strict" | referred. That act of Congress, properly considered, and "vigilant" economy. Do his friends distrust his sincerity, or does their sensibility, on the present occasion, arise from the proposed inquiry into the disbursements of the Government? Sir, this is made our duty annnally, by the Standing Rules and Orders of the House. It is a duty imposed upon us by a still higher authority-that of the Constitution itself; which requires that "a regular statement and account of the receipts and expenditures of all public money, shall be published from time to time." Now, sir, to make this published statement of the expenditures of public money what it was designed to be, a check on extravagance and abuse, it must, sometimes, at least, embrace particulars and details which can be elicit ed only by special inquiry. does not vest any right in the President. It only conveys an authority to the accounting officers of the Treasury, and empowers them to credit disbursements of public money, in certain cases, without specific vouchers, which, otherwise, they would not have been authorized to credit. Hence, the concluding declaration of the law, that, in cases of secret service, the mere "certificate of the President shall be deemed a sufficient voucher for the sum or sums therein expressed to have been expended." The true purpose and effect of the law, is to protect the President from disclosing the nature of his expenditures out of this fund, to the accounting officers of the Treasury, and not from communicating them to the Representatives of the People, in their high official character, as the grand inquest of the nation, if they deem it expedient to call for them. This power of Congress is an inherent and fundamental right of the People, and can never be abandoned in principle, without betraying the interests and privileges of our constituents. How far it may be safe and prudent to exercise it, is another question-one of mere discretion, which must depend upon the particular circumstances of each case, as it shall arise. But an honorable gentleman from Massachusetts, [Mr. EVERETT] seemed to think that we had no rightful authority to enquire into the expenditure of one of the funds embraced by the proposed enquiry-the fund for the contingent expenses of foreign intercourse. He seemed to think that this fund was put into the hands of the President as the constitutional organ of our intercourse with foreign nations, and that as such he had a right to dispose of it in any manner he pleased, without disclosing the Believing it to be the right and the duty of this House, particulars of its expenditure to any one, and that, by the at all times, to institute any inquiries it may deem necesproposed enquiry, we should invade a high prerogative of sary into the disbursements of public money, I should the Presidential office. Sir, I will first remark that this vote for the present inquiry upon general principles objection proceeds from a misapprehension in point of alone. But I confess, sir, I have a further reason for givfact. None of the resolutions call for the particulars of ing my assent to the proposed investigation, in the prethe expenditures out of this fund. They only ask for the sent instance. I find that much larger sums have been respective amounts of what has been expended out of this furnished to the present Administration, on account of all fund, and settled at the Treasury, without any specifica-the funds embraced in the scope of this inquiry, than tion of the nature of the expenditure, and of what has were furnished to the Administration which preceded it; been expended and settled, in the usual way, upon speci- and hence it seems to me to be particularly proper, that fic vouchers. The law authorizes the President to cause we should inquire what has created the necessity for the expenditures out of this fund to be settled at the these increased supplies, and in what manner they have Treasury, "by specially accounting for the same, in all been disposed of. For the purpose of exhibiting this instances wherein the expenditure may, in his judgment difference more distinctly to the House, I have compiled be made public ;" and in other instances" by merely from our appropriation laws, a comparative statement, making a certificate of the amount of such expenditure as showing the sums appropriated for the contingent exhe may think it advisable not to specify." Now, sir, the penses of the several Departments, and the contingent resolutions under consideration ask only for the aggre- expenses of foreign intercourse, during the three last gates of these two classes of expenditures; and do not years of the last Administration, to wit, 1822, 1823, and seek a disclosure of the particular items of either. There 1824; and the sums appropriated for the same objects is, therefore, no foundation, in point of fact, for consider- during the three years of the present Administration, to ing these resolutions as invading any prerogative of the wit, 1825, 1826, and 1827. [Here Mr. R. exhibited the President, even if the doctrine of the gentleman from following table.] Massachusetts were correct. 1822. 1823. 1824. Total. 24,492 18,800 27,350 70,642 36,000 26,150 92,450 6,000 7,000 19,000 Do. do. Do. do. Do. do. Tr's Dep. 30,300 6.000 Do. do. do. of For. Inter. Do. 5,768 6,450 19,286 000 40,000 40,000 20,000 40,000 82,560 70,868 126,950 280,378 183,000 82,000 193,500 458,500 265,560 152,868 320,450 738,878 But, sir, as I consider that doctrine altogether erroneous, and of dangerous consequence to the legitimate functions of this House, I beg leave here to protest against Contingent expenses of State Dep. it. It was once contended in England, that the House of Commons had no right to inquire into the expenditure of the civil list revenue, because that was to be regarded in the nature of a private and personal grant to the King, subject exclusively to his own discretion. There was a plausible ground for that claim in England, inasmuch as the civil list revenue is always settled upon the King, at his accession, for life. But even there, it has been long since repudiated, and abandoned by Ministers themselves, and the civil list revenue, as well as every other branch of the public revenue, is held to be a trust, in the hands of the sovereign, subject at all times, to examination and control by the Representatives of the People. If this be Contingent expenses of State Dep. 25,550 the acknowledged doctrine in England, in relation to a monarch holding his power independently of any express act of consent on the part of the People, how much more applicable is it to a Government like ours, where the Chief Magistrate is the immediate creature and cervant of the public will and responsible for all his acts? This idea of the responsibility of the President, in regard to the disbursements of what is commonly called "the secret service” fund, is founded upon a total misconception of the act of Congress, to which I have already Foreign Intercourse From this exhibit, it will be seen, that the total amount of appropriations for each of the contingent funds in question, for the three years of the present Administration, has greatly exceeded the total amount of the appropriations for the same funds, during the last three years of the preceding Administration; presenting, in the aggregate, an increase of little less than 50 per cent. To this table, I have subjoined a statement of the appropriations for the whole expenses of foreign intercourse, both regular and contingent, for the same periods, exhibiting an increase of corresponding extent, in that branch of the public service, under the present Adminstration. I have included the appropriation for foreign intercourse generally, because that is a subject particularly referred by the Constitution and the practice of the Government, to the discretion of the Executive; and for the regulation of its expenses, therefore, the Executive is particularly responsible. tures. [FEB. 5, 1828. proximating, at least, the actual expenditures of the Government. If the increase of expenditure, in the several branches of the public service, embraced by the statement I have exhibited, has not kept equal pace with the increase of appropriations, I have seen enough to satisfy me that that increase has, at least, been very considerable, under the present Administration. The aggregate expenditures of the Government have notoriously increased. I here speak of its ordinary current expenditures, by which I mean all expenditures, except payments on account of the public debt, and demands arising from treaties with foreign nations. Those expenditures, in 1822, were $9,827,642, in 1823, $9.784,152; in 1824, $ 10,448,779, making a total sum, during the three last years of the last administration, of $30,060,573. In 1825, the same class of expenditures amounted to $11,416,582; in 1826, to $13,062,316; 1827, to $12,285,530,; making a total sum during the three years of the present Administration, of $36,764,428. The increase of the ordinary expenditures of the Government, under the present Administration, compared with a corresponding period of the last Admimistration, has amounted, then, to an annual sum of $2,234,618. Some gentlemen may, upon the first blush, account for the great difference in the appropriations for this branch of the public service, under the present and late Administrations, by referring it to the opening of our diplomatic intercourse with the South American States. But it so happens, that that intercourse was opened several Now, Sir, I do not mean to hold the Executive respon. years before the commencement of the present Adminis- sible for the whole of this increase of the public expen tration; and that, in the very first year embraced by the diture; but as their friends are ever ready to claim for statement, to wit, in 1822, a sum of one hundred thou- them the credit of whatever good has been done since sand dollars was appropriated, by a separate law, for de- they came into power, it is but fair that they should bear fraying the expense of missions to the independent na- a portion of the blame for the evil which may have been tions of South America. The comparison, then, is alto- committed. We are perpetually told of the sixteen milgether fair, embracing two equal periods of time, when lions of the principal of the public debt, which have been the circumstances of the country, in its foreign relations, extinguished under the present Administration, as an eviwere as similar as they well could be. The other sub-dence of their good management, and as if the merit be. jects of comparison in the foregoing table, are confined longed personally and exclusively to them. If they are to contingent appropriations, because, in the disburse- to have the whole credit of this operation, they must subment of them, the Executive and its officers have an un-mit to bear a portion, at least, of the blame which may limited discretion, and must, therefore, be held exclu- be imputed for not doing more. The statement which I sively responsible for excessive or improper expendi- have just made, shows that if the expenditures of the Government under the present Administration, had been Before I take my leave of this table I will call the at- kept within the limit assigned to them by the last Admi tention of the House to a fact disclosed by it, in connex-nistration, a further sum of near seven millions of dollars ion with a vaunting remark made by a friend of the Ad- might have been applied to the extinguishment of the ministration, [Mr. PEARCE] a few days ago. He claimed public debt; and, instead of sixteen millions, twenty-three great credit for the Administration, that they asked no millions of it might have been discharged, since the preappropriation for contingent expenses of foreign inter- sent Administration came into office. Considering “the course, during the present year; and either he or some deep solicitude" which the President himself informs other gentleman gave us to understand that such a thing us, "is felt by every class of our citizens for the total had not happened before, since the origin of the Go- discharge of the public debt," and the earnest desires vernment. Certain it is that I have seen this statement professed by himself upon the subject, it was justly to made in a tone of great confidence and self-applause, have been expected that he would use all his influence in several leading journals devoted to the support of the and all his vigilance to hasten a "consummation so deAdministration. Now, sir, we are not under the neces-voutly to be wished." sity of travelling very far back, for a refutation of this assertion for it so happens, that, in two out of three years of the last Administration, embraced by the statement I have exhibited, there was no such appropriation. The years 1822 and 1823, it will be seen, present perfect blanks as to this appropriation. If we go farther back, we shall find long tracts of time, during which there was no such appropriation. For four or five successive years of Mr. Jefferson's Administration there was none. I said, Mr. Speaker, that the large increase in the supplies granted by Congress to the present Administration, for these objects, rendered it particularly proper that we should inquire into their disbursement. I do not mean to say (because I have no knowledge upon the subject) that there has been any thing wrong in that disbursement; nor do I mean to say, that the actual expenditure has been equal to the appropriations. But as we all know that the appropriations made by Congress are founded upon estimates, furnished by the several Departments of what they will require for their respective operations, the appropriations made must be regarded as a fair criterion for ap Now, sir, with such facts as these before our eyes, is it very surprising that some of us should entertain and venture to express the opinion, that, whatever other merits the present Administration may possess, an exempla. ry frugality is not one of them? There are many persons in this country who have not regarded the last Administration as a model of public economy. If they were obnoxious to the charge of extravagance, what must be said of the present Administration? And yet the honorable gentleman from Massachusetts, in his pathetic summary of the wrongs and persecutions of the present Adminis tration, specially complained of the charge of extrava gance. He seemed to think it a very hard case that those, whom he considered such good stewards of the public resources, should be regarded by others as rather deficient in some of the attributes of that character. He complained, too, that the members of the cabinet, whom he eulogised for their distinguished talents, their wisdom, their virtues, their public services, had been viewed and spoken of with less admiration by others; and set all this down to the account of a persecuting spirit. |