try. Deep is the stain which rests upon its honor. For nearly half a century it has been guilty of the gross in justice of withholding from the hardy veteran of the Revolution, the earnings of his toil and blood. At the close of that glorious war, upwards of two thousand of the comrades of the present memorialists survived. All have descended to the grave, save the small remnant of two hundred and thirty. The same promises were made to all alike; and if those promises have not been fulfilled to the survivors, they were also violated to those who are no more. Many have died in penury and want, and have left to their descendants nothing but their honor as an inheritance. If, then, sir, this Government has withheld from them that to which they were entitled, the Revolution accuses it of injustice; all that is associated with the past or the present, loudly proclaims its injustice to the work. We have committed an irremediable sin Tears of penitence may be shed, but they are shed in vain; they cannot awake the dead. Justice may be done to those who now show us their many scars, received in the days of their youth, in support of the holiest of canses, but that justice can only reach the living. The honor of our country is thus implicated in this claim of legal right, which is now asserted, after the lapse of forty-four years, and it behooves us to look narrowly into the subject ere we form our opinions. [SENATE Congress, and urged strong and satisfactory reasons for its interposition. Congress listened to their entreaties, and the commutation act was accordingly passed. The motives which influenced the officers to solicit the commutation, were of two sorts--those of patriotism, and self interest. The Revolution had overturned the privileged orders, and whatsoever looked even remotely to the creation of a privileged class, was extremely obnoxious to the People. The act of '80 was considered-I will not stop to inquire with what justice-as producing this effect. The officers, wisely and properly, concluded to get rid of the odious idea of being pensioners on the Government, and therefore asked the passage of that law. They resolved to lose, as speedily as possible, the officer in the citizen, bearing about them no other badge of distinction than that furnished by honorable scars. I do them no injustice when I also ascribe to them the influence of self-interest; that is acknowledged to be the main-spring to human actions, and operating, to a greater or less extent, over all men. Their fortunes had, no doubt, suffered severely during the war, and it became, therefore, a matter of high moment to them, individually, that they should be able to control as large a sum as circumstances would permit. This was effected by the commutation of their half-pay into full pay for five years. They thereby were placed in possession of Government Upon what, then, does this legal claim rest? The plain securities to a large amount, which, if their situation jusstate of its origin is this: In consequence of the worth-tified it, they might retain until brighter days beamed on less currency in which our armies were paid, the officers the finances of the country, or, if compelled to sell, would and soldiers had suffered so much for the means of pro- place in their possession larger resources. It was objectcuring even the smallest comforts, that dissatisfaction ed, by the Senator from New York, [Mr. VAN BUREN] with the service had increased to such an extent as to re- that they did not receive cash. This is admitted-but quire imperatively at the hands of Congress the adoption they received Government certificates, the Government of some expedient calculated to retain a sufficiency of having stipulated, by the act, to pay either in money or officers in the Army. Resignations had become nume- securities. Nothing justifies the belief that the officers, rous and alarming. General Washington addressed him- when they asked the commutation, expected to receive self to Congress, and urged upon them the propriety of payment in cash They knew the wants of Government enacting a law which should promise half pay for life to most thoroughly-a dollar in specie was scarcely any such officers as should remain in the service until the end where to be found-two hundred millions of dollars of of the war. Congress adopted the expedient, and ac- paper money had been thrown into circulation, which conlingly, in 1780, passed the act containing the provi- had depreciated to a rate so low as to be worthless. The Sen and stipulation which had been recommended to only n.cans that the country had to meet its engagements their adoption. By that act, all officers who served to with the officers, or its other creditors, was by issuing the end of the war became justly entitled to half pay for certificates. With a full knowledge of these facts, the life. Has the Government acquitted itself of the obliga- commutation was asked, and was granted; and now, Sir, tion which it had thus voluntarily assumed If not, sir, after so many years have elapsed, we hear complaints utthen has it been guilty of a violation of its plighted faith,tered against it. Nor does there exist, Mr. President, and the claim now set up is well founded. the slightest circumstance to induce the belief that the officers received an unjust measure by the terms of the commutation; but, on the contrary, every thing opposes that idea. I have said that they themselves asked Congress to commute; that they acquiesced in that commutation up to.a very recent period-that all but a mere remnant had descended to their graves, and that no complaint had, until lately, been uttered against the Government. These facts could not fail to be satisfactory-but there exist other facts, equally conclusive, upon this head. I contend, sir, that the act of 1783 totally changed the character of the provision which had been made for the officers by the act of 1780, or, in other words, entirely abrogated its provisions. The act of '83 commuted the half pay for life into five years' full pay, and the only question which remains, would seem to be, whether the oficers had accepted the act of 1783 in discharge of the act of 1780. If so, the old bond, to speak with greater precision, created by the act of '80, is discharged, and the new bond, created by that of '83, is accepted in its stead. Of that acceptance there is no question. In the absence of all positive proof upon the subject, the presumption which arises from the lapse of time, would, of itself, be sufficient. No man can believe that a claim so interesting to a large majority of those entitled, would have been permitted to slumber for nearly half a century. But this question is rendered no longer debateable, by the confession made by the memor alists themselves. They admit the acceptance, by them, of the commutation, and seek to place their claim upon another footing. Complaints are now urged against the act of '83, and the casure which it dealt out, is pronounced unequal and just. I have a ready answer to make to these complaints. The act of '23 was passed at the earnest entreaty of the officers themselves. They memorialized The time which was selected for the application was, of all others, the best for their interests. The battle had been lost and won. The banner of America floated in triumph. After having annihilated the power of Great Britain in this hemisphere, nothing remained to be accomplished, but to obtain a recognition of our rights as a free, sovereign, and independent Nation-and this recognition soon thereafter followed, Like the Israelites of old, our fathers had passed through the wilderness of doubt and danger, and had already entered upon the pos session of the promised land. Every breast was filled, and every eye beamed with gratitude towards those gallant men, who had fought the good fight. This was the era of their application to Congress, and one more fortunate in itself could not possibly be imagined. But the time of their application was not more propitious than SENATE.] Surviving Officers of the Revolution. [FEB. 1, 1828. was the tribunal to which they applied peculiarly favora. We have no correct data on which to proceed in making ble. That tribunal was composed, in part, of their bro-up such account; but I do not think it unfair to conclude, thers in arms, and, for the residue, of those ardent compa- that the want of those very data constitutes an objection triots who achieved victories in the cabinet, as great as to this claim. If the gain of the Government be rested had been won in the field. Such was the tribunal to which on in support of the claim, the Senate has a right to rethe appeal was made-and I, for one, will not, for a mo- quire it to be shown, and the burden of proof devolves ment, believe that it was capable of practising injustice properly on the memorialists. towards those who, in their very presence, had poured out their blood and devoted their lives in defence of their country's rights. No, Sir, I will not agree, by any vote which I shall give, to stamp upon their memories this seal of dishonor. Their fair fame constitutes no small portion of the wealth of this Union, and I will not consent to throw a stain upon it. I might repeat what has been said by others, that the Chairman of the Committee who re-been so. That measure met with decided opposition ported and advocated the commutation law was General Hamilton, a distinguished officer and civilian. That Gen. Washington, when President, never called this decision in question, as he would most assuredly have done, had he esteemed it unjust; nor was it ever adverted to by any of his successors. Who, then, is now at liberty to infer that the commutation was based on improper principles, or that a hard measure was dealt out to the officers? Shall we, at the distance of forty-four years, undertake to reverse this decision of our predecessors, and to brand their memories with the charge of injustice? They stood in the midst of the era for which they were legislating, and were surrounded by those for whom they legislated. They weighed all the circumstances applicable to the case, and were qualified to decide correctly. We, on the contrary, are but the men of yesterday, and have but a dim and indistinct view of the condition of those times. We are not, then, Sir, qualified to legislate understandingly upon this subject; and, for one, I shall leave untouched the decision which was pronounced in 1783. It has been intimated, that the Government also gained in the process of funding. It is true, that, although the certificates were funded in the year 1791, at their nomi nal amount, yet that the interest on a part of the amount was deferred for a few years. But can any man doubt but that the funding system was most eagerly desired by the holders of the certificates? We know the fact to have from many parts of the Union; but it nevertheless prevailed, much to the gratification of the certificate holders. It was a day of jubilee to them, and made the fortunes of many. If the officers had parted with their certificates, it was their misfortune, but not the blame of the Government. But, Mr. President, if the Senate felt at liberty to go into this matter, at this day, and to inquire into the correctness of the basis on which the commutation was placed, the bill upon your table would find in that inquiry no claim to our support. The officers had a life annuity, and sold out for a ten years' purchase, paid in advance; the five years' full pay being rather more than equal, including interest, to ten years' half pay. Would any discreet man be willing to purchase an annuity, even from the most youthful and healthy annuitant, at a greater purchase? Considering "the various ills that flesh is heir to"-the numberless enemies to human life-I ask if a period of ten years is not a liberal term to allot for its continuance? The common law has been said to be the essence of pure and correct reasoning, and the period which it has prescribed as the ultima thule of life is seven years. If one be gone beyond seas, and shall be unheard of for seven years, that law numbers him with the dead-dis solves the tenderest of ties-pronounces his wife a widow, and delivers over his effects to his legal distributors. Thus, then, Mr. President, this commutation was made at the request of the officers themselves; was accepted by them; was based upon fair principles; and the certificates, issued in pursuance thereof, were funded at the request of the holders. Forty-four years have passed! by, and no marmur of discontent has been expressed. No debt, then, is due from the Government, and it stands acquitted from the charge of injustice. An appeal has been made by the gentleman from New York [Mr. VAN BUREN] to our liberality; our equity. I listened to the gentleman with great pleasure; and if I had dared to have given audience to my feelings, turning a deaf ear to the suggestions of duty and sound policy, I might have been led captive. Before we yield the reins to our feelings, it behoves us to inquire whither, and how far, they will carry us. The gentleman seemed to admit the claims of the dead to be equally strong with those of the living. Sir, the rights of the representatives of the deceased officers must, of necessity, be as strong as those of the survivors. The acts of 1780 and '83 embraced all alike; and if, as has been contended, the full pay should have been allowed for seven instead of five years, it is equally due to all who were embraced under its provisions. Then, sir, if 1,200,000 dollars be due to the survivors, 230; if the representatives of the deceased, of the 2,480 be included, the Government must necessarily make provision for the payment of $11,860,869, that being, upon the hypothesis assumed, the sum that would now be ac tually due. This is the first fruit of a liberal policy. A result from which there is no escaping. Let us not be deceived by the expectation that the widows and orphans of the deceased officers will not apply for their share of this claim. They will apply. This morning I have re ceived an application on behalf of one of them, and the It has been urged, however, sir, by the advocates of applications will become constant and unceasing. Nor is this bill, that the Government has gained by this proceed this the only consequence which should, I will not say ing a large sum of money, by reason of the elongation of will, flow from it. The soldiers of the Revolution, who the lives of the present applicants. The memorialists may stood by the side of this corps of officers, and encounter | have lost; but it does not, therefore, follow, that the Go-ed the heat of the war, are equally entitled to the exer vernment has gained. Recollect, sir, that this commutation law embraced about two thousand four hundred and eighty persons, of whom but two hundred and thirty bave lived to this day. Now, in order to have a correct account of profit and loss stated, we should ascertain the various periods at which each of the decedents have departed this life. For all who died within the first ten years the Government necessarily sustained a loss equal to the unexpired term of the ten years. Upon all such losses, interest should be calculated up to this day, as has been done in the case of the memorialists, and the balance might then be fairly struck. Do I hazard any thing in the conjecture that the Government has lost by the operation? cise of our liberality. The gentleman from New York, has said that the officers stand on a different footing from the soldiers-that their claim rests on a compact with the Government. And I would ask, sir, if the soldier might not rest his claim also on a compact Did not the Go vernment agree to pay him six dollars per month? Has it complied with this contract? I contend that it has. fulfilled, as far as could have been demanded of it, its agreement with both officers and soldiers, but I inquire of those who hold a different opinion relative to the offi cers, to say, whether the soldiers have not equal, or greater cause to complain? They were paid in paper money, in miserable trash, which depreciated a thousand FEB. 4, 1828.] for one. Surviving Officers of the Revolution.-Statement of Mr. Agg. [SENATE. for all the money in the world? No, sir; it would be exchanging immortality for mortality—an undying name for the perishable wealth of this world. This country has not been unjust-it has not been ungrateful. When was it, sir, that a Revolutionary man, possessing worthiness, asked for office, that he did not receive it? Offices have been dealt out to them by State and United States' Governments, with a liberal hand; and to secure them against suffering and want, this Government has provided for them a liberal resource, in an existing law. I must then, Mr. President, enter my dissent from the idea that we have either withheld what was due, or denied what should have been granted. The Senate adjourned to Monday. MONDAY, FEBRUARY 4, 1828. The CHAIR presented a communication from Mr. John Agg, in relation to the concert to misreport the speech of Mr. Randolph, assumed to have been entered into between the reporters of the Intelligencer and Journal, by Duff Green, in his statement in answer to the memorial of E. V. Sparhawk. The payment became merely nominal. From the lips of one of those who had shouldered his musket during the whole war, I learned that, practising great economy, he had treasured up a part of his pay, up to the end of the war; that then he had found the Government wholly unable to redeem its paper, and that he had given it to the winds. And yet, sir, it is said that the soldier has no claim upon that liberality which is invoked on behalf of the officer. But it is urged that the act of limitation, of 1794, bars the soldier's claim-and why not that of the officer? It is equally applicable to all Revolutionary claims. How feeble, Mr. President, would have been the defence, arising from that source, yesterday. The barrier reared by the act of limitation would have yielded before the fervid and glowing appeal which the gentleman made to our liberality. The Treasury would have found no security behind it. And I cannot admit the justice or propriety of disregarding its provisions as to one class of men, and enforcing them as to another. Acting upon the principles which the gentleman at tempted to enforce, there still remains another class of Revolutionary sufferers, who should possess our regard. I allude to those who fought our battles in the cabinet, "who legislated with halters round their necks," who Mr. EATON remarked that he did not think it at all gave their all, and died bankrupts in fortune. I will incumbent upon the Senate to go into the examination of name but one of them-Robert Morris. Who than him the matter contained in this communication. It had no was more deserving! Who adventured more largely, or direct relation to the affair which had brought the memosuffered more severely? He literally gave all to his rial and the answer before the Senate. In the first place, country, and died either at the door or within the walls of Mr. Sparhawk came forward and complained of an injury. a jail! Here is a theme for impassioned eloquence-one They had consented to receive his memorial; and were which addresses itself almost irresistibly to the feelings. therefore, in a manner, bound to hear Mr. Green, in anThe gentleman referred us to certain acts which had pass- swer. But he thought they ought to go no farther. If ed into laws, as incitives to the passage of the present both sides were heard, it was surely sufficient without bill. I will not analyse them minutely. The Govern-going into the consideration of affairs which had no bearment must, at all times, exercise a sound discretion, and ing upon the matter in hand. He understood the ques I have no doubt but that it acted wisely in the instances tion now to be, whether the statement of Mr. Agg should alluded to. But, if precedents of recent legislation are be received. He hoped it would not be, and made a moto be urged in support of the bill, why do not gentlemen tion to that effect. report a bill to remunerate the Jerseys, and other States, for losses and injuries which they sustained in the Revolution? An example of liberal legislation was at hand, in The CHAIR stated that the receiving of a memorial, the law making provision for the sufferers on the Niagara or other application, was a matter of course. But it was frontier during the late war. Sir, we cannot repair losses always in the power of a Senator to make a motion that which were then sustained. To do so would make bank. it be not received. The gentleman from Tennessee havrupt all the exchequers in the world. It was a revoluing made that motion, the question was now before the tionary war. The husbandman can oppose no resistance to the tempest, which prostrates, in its course, whole forests; neither can Governments repair the ravages of revolutionary war. It is a political tempest, fraught with Lightnings that render desolate the face of nature. Mr. JOHNSTON, of Louisiana, thought that the paper was already received. Senate. Mr. JOHNSTON, of Louisiana, said that he did not see any good reason why this paper should not be received. If one communication upon this subject were received, he thought all should be. The subject was an unpleasant To these surviving worthies, then, sir, I would say, one to enter upon at all; but as the memorial had been Brave men, your country venerates and reveres you. received, as well as the answer to it, he wished that whatYour honorable scars and silver locks are your passport ever had any legitimate connexion with the affair in ques to ber affection and gratitude. She has done for you all tion, might be laid before the Senate. In relation to the that justice required-that you yourselves demanded. cause of the first complaint, he knew very well that, as a She commuted at your request, and funded as you desir- criminal matter, they had nothing to do with it. As an ed. She has thus cancelled the debt which she imposed assault and battery, it was a case to be settled by a court upon herself. She cannot discriminate in your favor of justice. But he was far from thinking that the Senate without creating thereby a burthen which would bank- had no jurisdiction over the place in which the offence rupt her exchequer. Let not these hoary-headed vete- was committed. They had, it was true, no legal jurisrans indulge in vain regrets. Sir, they have sources of diction; but they had a police jurisdiction, and he thought consolation, and of rejoicing, which can never be dried they ought to act promptly to its enforcement. The up. They have the recollection of a well-spent life to building in which they held their deliberations had been brighten the decline of their years. They have fought appropriated to the use of Congress. The part in which the good fight, and their lives will terminate in honor. this body sits, is allotted to the Senate, and a police jurisWould they exchange their well-bought honors for all diction over its apartments undoubtedly exists, which is the wealth which could be poured out upon them? placed in the hands of the President. The members Would the honorable Senator from Maryland [Mr. SMITH] were, doubtless, willing on all occasions to aid him in any (I beg his pardon for alluding to him personally) ex- measures which he might think necessary to adopt for its change the glory which he won at Mud Island Fort, and regulation and execution. He was very far from suppos at Baltimore in the late war, for aught that could be ofing that the body had any punishing power. But he confered him? Would those gallant men exchange a single sidered that if, in any case, the Chair did not see fit to act scar which they obtained under the banners of liberty, in relation to a violation of good order, it was the duty of the body to take up the subject, and express their opinion any one. The CHAIR remarked, that, as the power of the President had been mentioned by the gentleman from Louisiana, he would state, that his power only extended to the regulation of the chambers, and to the providing rules for their arrangement. The Chair had certainly no pow. er of punishing offences. Mr. SMITH, of Maryland, observed, that he did not apprehend that the communication of Mr. Agg had any thing to do with the subject of the memorial presented by Mr. Sparhawk. It was a matter totally foreign to the application which the Senate had received from Mr. S. and he saw no reason for its reception. [FEB. 5, 1828. power to punish the offence complained of? Have you power to imprison the offender-and if you have, how far can you go in its exercise? How far are you licensed? How are you limited? And, if you go on, where wil you end? These questions were of serious importance, and could not easily be answered. Was the business of the Senate to be obstructed by memorials brought in from day's end to day's end, upon every trivial occasion? He thought not. And suppose [said Mr. S.] you were to refer the matter to a committee, and they were to report that one of the parties has assaulted the other in your premises, and triumphed over him-What will you do with him? I cannot conceive. If the application was for the dismissal of an officer of the Senate for malprac tices, it would be a different matter. As it was, he thought it a subject on which they could not act with propriety, and he had wished that the memorialist had been allowed to withdraw his papers when the motion was made the other day by the gentleman from Kentucky. It ought to have been withdrawn in its incipient stage. Of Mr. Sparhawk, Mr. S. said he knew nothing. He might have great cause of complaint; but this was not the place for him to apply to. He had nothing to say against accommodating the Reporters. They were useful indivi duals, and he believed the Public was much indebted to them. There were, he knew, complaints that they sometimes committed errors-but he thought they were gene. rally correct-and indeed to him it was matter of wonder that they did not make ten mistakes where they made one. They certainly exhibited a desire to be correct, and ought to be admitted to all proper privileges. But Mr. Sparhawk's resort for the injury he complained of, was not here. He must apply to a court of justice. If a complaint had been lodged against the Printer to the Se nate, he should have been ready to consider it and vote upon it. In the present case, he wished the matter might drop where it was; and hoped that the motion to allow the parties to withdraw their papers might be agreed to. Mr. JOHNSTON, of Louisiana, remarked, that he did Mr. ROWAN said, the facts were, that Mr. Sparhawk not attempt to assert any right on the part of the person presented a memorial, to which Mr. Green had replied, now applying here. But he thought all the papers ought and in replying, he had mentioned the journal to which to be put together; and was therefore in favor of receiv Mr. Agg was attached. He, therefore, presents a state-ing the communication. The CHAIR said, that, if the motion to read was sus tained by the Senate, the paper might be read. Mr. EATON repeated, that he could not see any just ground for considering it at all, as it had nothing to do with the quarrel Mr. KING said, that the reason why the object of all memorials, etc. was stated on being presented, was, that the fact might be ascertained whether they were proper subjects of consideration. The object of this paper had been stated, and it was evident that it had nothing to do with the case before the Senate. For this reason, he was against receiving it. ment in answer to that allusion. But Mr. R. considered, Mr. NOBLE desired to hear the statement read. that if this were admitted, there would be no end to the Mr. EATON observed, that it could not be read if it statements. The chain would be interminable. This was not received; and that the question upon receiving paper had nothing to do with the matter; and if it had, must first be taken. he should be not the less opposed to receiving it. He had been against receiving the first papers presented by Mr. Sparhawk, because the affair of which they treated was not a matter for their consideration. As to the dignity of the Senate, he thought it had been far more compromitted by receiving those papers, than by the act of which they complained. He wished that, at this time, the whole subject might be disposed of. He wished to get rid of all this stuff, for he maintained that they ought not to act upon it. As he had said before, it was a subject for the examination of a court of justice, and there it ought, if at all, to be discussed. To the gentleman who said that the Senate had jurisdiction over the transaction, he answered, Where is your jury, your deciding body, before whom the case can be tried? He assured the gentleman there was no power in the Senate for the purpose. They could not go into the examination of the case, for where was the machinery by which it was to be done? There was none. He hoped, therefore, that the Senate would not receive the communication now presented, and that the several individuals might have leave to withdraw their papers. Mr. SMITH, of South Carolina, expressed his belief: that the Senate had no jurisdiction over this subject. How [said Mr. S.] can you proceed? Have you the Mr. NOBLE rose to make some remarks, but The CHAIR interposed, and observed, that a question on reading could not be debated; and read the rule to that effect from Jefferson's Manual. The question being then put on reading the statement offered from Mr. Agg, it was negatived. The question occurred on receiving the communica. tion, when it was rejected. TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 1828. [The Senate was principally occupied, to-day, in the consideration of Executive business.j FEB. 6, 1828.] Revolutionary Pensioners.-Discriminating Duties. WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1828. [SENATE. the history and present condition of our discriminating On motion of Mr. SMITH, of Maryland, the bill mak. by the Committee. these last have also been subjected to fifty cents per per cent, additional impost on the cargo. Since 1804, ton light money. Thus making the discrimination forty-four cents per ton without, and ninety-four cents Mr. SMITH said that he was instructed to make this per ton with, light money on the vessel, and ten per Since the 3d of March, 1815, the motion by the Committee on Finance. The Committee, cent, on the cargo. discrimination remains the same, except in certain cases, since the subject was last discussed, have had a corres- and as to certain nations which I will now proceed to pondence with the Secretary of War, on the subject. It appears to the Committee that the sum of eight hundred particularize. In no cases has the duty on American thousand dollars will be sufficient for the pensions of the vessels been altered, except the addition of fifty cents year 1828. The unexpended balance, five hundred and per ton, March 1st, 1817, whenever their crew and offisixty-four thousand dollars, added to the sum of two hun- to foreign vessels, it was proposed, by an act of the 3d cers were not two-thirds Americans. But, in respect dred and thirty six thousand dollars, proposed to be ap- of March, 1815, to abolish all discriminating duties propriated in the bill, will answer the same purpose, so far as regards the pensions of 1828. But the unexpended whatever, upon them or their cargoes, when the last balance, five hundred and sixty-four thousand dollars, vessel was owned, provided a reciprocal rule was there was the "growth or produce of the country" where the might be called for this year, by those to whom it was due; and, there being no money in the Treasury to meet adopted in relation to this country. Some doubts arose the demand, the pensioners would be compelled to apply discriminating duties had existed to be "abolished”--as to the application of this act to countries where no to Congress for relief. The Committee thought it best to leave the unexpended balance subject to the claims and, also, as to cargoes not the "growth or produce" upon it, and to appropriate, independently of that, a suf- of a particular country, but of some other country, in the interior of a continent, and, transported thence by ficient sum to meet the pensions of the year 1828. The Secretary of War thought the appropriation should land, or boat navigation, were "usually first shipped" be inade, as proposed in the bill; yet he would have the at the ports of a different nation. Hence, January 7th, right to take up the unexpended balance and pay it away &c. to "imposed ;" and the privilege of the cargo was 1824, the phraseology was altered from "abolished,' if it should be called for. The Committee were not of this opinion. Though this had been the practice of the extended from the "growth and produce of the counGovernment, it was illegal. The act of 1820 forbids it. try to any articles "first or usually shipped" at any No inconvenience could arise from the course proposed ports in the Netherlands, or Prussia, the Hanscatic ci The sum unexpended would, after ties of Hamburg, Lubec, and Bremen-and at any ports the usual time, go to the surplus fund. The Chief Clerk in Norway, Sardinia, Russia, or the Dukedom of Oldenof the Pension Office, Mr. Edwards, had given it as his last privilege should have been limited to particular burg. It is, by the way, somewhat singular, that this opinion that the five hundred and sixty-four thousand dollars would be called for. It was also evident, from cal-places, when the rule is old as the navigation law of culations which Mr. SMITH made, that all those were 1651, wherever foreign vessels are allowed to bring their own produce, to admit in them all other produce not dead, whose pensions had not been demanded. Mr. "usually first shipped at their ports ;" and, on this prinS. had suggested, he said, the propriety of enacting a law that all pensioners, who did not, for two years, apply ciple, Venice, Genoa, and Leghorn, have long been for their pensions, should be considered as dead. But he places from which Asiatic goods from the Levant were had been informed that a law was unnecessary for the permitted to be, in their vessels, introduced into Eng purpose, as it could be done by a regulation of the De- the St. Lawrence, is mostly shipped from Montreal and In this way, now, American produce descending Quebec, with the character, and all the privileges of before mentioned, and under certain commercial ConCanadian produce. ventions, since completed with foreign nations, the following changes as to duties on foreign vessels, have ocConvention of December 22, 1815, pay only the same curred since March 3d, 1815. British vessels, by the duty as American ones, unless coming from places where American vessels are prohibited; but when coming from these last places, they pay $2 per ton, by our act of March 3d, 1817. I say nothing now as to the laws about the Colonial intercourse with the British West Indies. vessels, by the Convention of June 24th, 1822, end by our act of March 3d, 1823, pay only $1 duty, per ton, on the ship, and $3 75 per ton, on the cargo, diminishing one-fourth annually, after September, 1824. Swedish vessels, by the Convention of 1818, are placed on the terms of the act of March, 1815, so that the discriminating du ties now exist, as to England and France, only to the extent above named: but as to Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Russia, Prussia, Sardinia, the Hanse-towns, the Dukedom of Oldenburg and Guatemala, they do not exist at all as to their vessels and cargoes, when bring partment. Mr. HARRISON would vote, he said, for the appropriations proposed by the Committee. The reason why the pensioners had not applied for the sums due to them, was not that they were dead, but that the pension system is complicated. The process of drawing the money was tedious and difficult. Mr. H. would take occasion, he said, at a proper time, to call the attention of the Senate to this subject, and endeavor to devise some easier means by which these meritorious men might be enabled to receive from Government their scanty pittance. The amendment was agreed to, and the bill ordered to be engrossed for a third reading. DISCRIMINATING DUTIES. The bill in addition to an act, entitled "An act concerning discriminating duties on tonnage and impost," having been taken up Mr. WOODBURY said, the bill now under consider ation, relates to a subject of no small magnitude. As it is not accompanied by any report of facts or principles in its support, because such a report was made at a former session to this body, I must ask the indulgence | of the Senate a few minutes, to recall to their minds land. Under the laws of 1815 and 1824 French |