Εικόνες σελίδας
PDF
Ηλεκτρ. έκδοση

the true Democracy of the country, that the perpetunity of our institutions has been preserved. It is by the farmers, the ma. chanica, the workingmen of our Republic, that this Adminis. tiation has heen and will be sustained. It is by those who woul! see equal rights and equal privileges bestowed upon all. It was guch men that poured out iheir blood upon the ballle fields of our Revolution. It was such men thai won for this country its freedom and independence. They were the men who brought Jefferson into power. They were the men who stood by Madi. son in the dark days of the last war. They were the men who efiocted the political revolution of 1828, and who have main. tained the Democratic ascendency since that time, And, eir, so long as they shall govern, so long will the Republic he safe.

Mr. OSBORNE of Connecticut obtaine:) Tho floor, but gave way for a motion to adjourn

And then the House adjourned.

IN SENATE.

WEDNESDAY, June 3, 1840. Mr. NORVELL presented the memorial of the Legislature of Michigan, praying for a donation of lands, or money, 10 aid in the construction of a canal around the Falls of St. Mary; which was laid upon the table.

Mr TAPPAN presented the petition of Micajah T. Williams; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

Mr. BUCHANAN, from the Committee on Fo. reign Relations, to which was referred the bill for The relief of Alexander H. Everell, made an adverse report thereon; which was ordered to be printed.

Mr. WHITE, from the Committee on Pensions, made an adverie report on the bill for the relief of William A. Cuddeback; which was ordered to be printed.

Mr. W. in pursuance of notice, introduced a bill for the relief of William R. Davis; which was read iwice, and referred to the Committee on Claim.

Mr. ROBINSON gave notice that to-morrow he would ask leave to introduce a bill the belierlo expedite the great Southern mail.

Mr. FULTON presented the perition of Samuel Morris and Frederick Savgrave; which was relerred to the Committee on Public Lands.

crops, and then advanced the price to suit his owu cupidity? It is the bank favorite or bank officer, who has taken ont of the institutions his hundreds of thousands of paper to carry on his speculations. Who is it that has suffered by this monopoly? Sır, it is all branches of communily; but none so much as the poor man, who is suddenly ca'led upon 10 pay advanced prices for the actual neeessaries of life, without a corresponding advance in the price of his labor.

Who is it that has sought to monopolize the cotton trade of the South, and indeed of the world? Need I tell you that it is the United Stuies Bank? Need I tell you that it is beneath that very load that it is now staggering? Sir, if banks shall keep themselves within their proper spheres; if they will curfine their operations to their legilimate objects; if their paper shall be what it purports to be, the representative, the true repre-entative of gili and silver, this bill cannot injure them. Solvent banks cannot be injuriously affected. It is the insolvent bank that may feel its power-it is the speculating institution, whose reins will be checked. Such in stitutions may not dare to extend their operations beyond their legitimate powers, for their bills may be returned upon them for specie. And, sir, can any one who regards the stability of trade and the honesty of mercantile transactions, regret that such should be the Paci? Can any one who would see industry and fair dealing trivinph over indolence, improvidence, and gambliog, regret the effects of such a measure?

Sir, in all the aspects in which I have been able to view this bill and ils provisions, I cannot but think that our public moneys will be more securely kepi; our public creditors more promptly and satisíactorily paid; and that so far as it may have any effect upon the trade and busine:s of the country, that that effect will be most salutary and desirable.

But, sir, suppose this bill should not pass; I ask gentlemen of the Opposition what would they have as a substitute. Will any one deny that it is a Uniied States Bank hat ihey desire? Have not some of the more bold already avowel it? Others, not so conrageous, do not dare, openly, fearlessly, and honestly lo declare it to the world, but seek, on all occasions, to proclaim distress, ruin, prostration of all business, and desolation throughout ibe land. Thus it is, that the timid became alarmedcredit becomes weakened-business is consequen:ly checked, and a panic is produced. And thus, too, it is, that the Opposition expect by and by to be able openly to declare for a United States Bank, drive the country into its support, and place beneath its thraldom. And, sir, this is the question which the people of this free Republic hav. again to decide Once, twice, thrice, is not enough. With all the evils and sins of the old Bank before them, with the Con titution of their country staring them in the face, they are again to say whether they will fasted upon themselves and posterity a monopoly, that shall swallow up all the effor s of individual enterprise, and not only control ihe bile siness and industry ct the country, but which shall hold within its grasp its political existence, and even liberty itself. Sir, can it be that the people of these unjled States are prepared for such an act? Are not aristocracy and wealth sufficient, in all conscience, 10 contend single handed against industry anii modera'e means, without the aid of combined corporate millions? And when you give to those millions the power to create ficticious money to the amount of millions more, what has he who depends solely upon his own hard bands and honest heart to expect? What but a complete subser. viency to corporate wealth?

leave to bring in a bill for the relief of Clinton T. Dison.

Mr. PRENTISS, from the Committee on Pensions, to which was referred

A bill for the relief of Jacob Adams; and
A bill for the relief of Joseph Bailey;

adverse reports thereon

made. acease, from the Committee on the Militia,

to which was referred so much of ihe report of the Secretary of War as rela:es in the organization of the militia, made a report thereon, concluding with a resolution that they be discharged from the further consideration of the subjeci; which was agreed to.

Mr. WALL, from the Committee on the Judiciary, to which was referred the bill concerning prisoners of the United States committed to ibe jail of the county of Providence, and State of Rhode Island, reported the same without amendment; and aller some remarks from Mr. W. it was considered as in committee of the whole, and ordered to be engrossed for a third reading.

The unfini-hed business of yesterday, being the motion of Mr. Clay of Kentucky, to lay the memorial of James C. Reynolds on the table, being taken up, Mr. CRITTENDEN addressed ine Sedate, and was replied to al much length by Mr. ALLEN; when the question being taken, the retilion was laid on the table.

The Senale then went into the consideration of of Executive business, and afterwards

Adjourned.

It is expected that most men interested in banks and cor. porations will be opposed to this bill. There is a sympathy existing throughout the whole Bank and corporate communi

When you touch one, you touch the whole; and although solvent institutions may be rather beneficed than injured, there is, as they fancy, an injury in prospect. It is to be expected that bank ofcers, whose living is dependent upon and grows out of the monopoly granted to those nustatutions, imagining that their privileges are to be encroached upon, will be opposed to this oill. It is to be expected that bankrupts, whose very existence has been wrapped up in the favors which they have received from moneyed institutions, and all whose chimerical schemes have vanished inta inia air, will attribuie all their failures to the operations of this bill. But especially, sir, is it to be anticipates that the dependants of the United States Bank should raise their voices in opposition, for their interest in its defeat is most palpable, Let this bill be defeated-let the Uni

ted States Bunk be rechartered, or another Bank established, and the revenues of the Government be deposited in it as for: merly, and a basis is formed, upon which millions of paper promises are thrown into circulation, for which the people are laxed-X-d, too, fur lending their own money for the onefit of the special invorites of the Bank. Sir, there are come, who are always willing to blame every body and everything but themselves, but nothing 60 readily as the Govern ment under which they live. And, should this bill pasa, let gentlemen return to their constituenis and tell them that every case of adversity throughout the lengih and breadth orthis vari country is caused by the passage of this bill. Let them go to the manufacturer, who has pursued his business with recklessness unparalleled; to the importer and wholesale merchant, who, in his haste to grow rich, has overlooked the responsibility of liis debtors, and is consequectly involved in inextricable dith. culties; let them go to the monopolist in trade, who, in his ang. iety to control the market, has forgotten that his succese de. pended upon sales as well as purchases, and whose merchan. dise is now uron his hands; to the spendthrill, who has livell upon the forbearance and indulgence of his friends; to the man whose extravagance has reduced him to want, and to the gain. bler of every grade. Let them go to the disappointed politi. cian, to every species of discontent, and to every nook and corner of distress, and tell them that it is all caused by the passage of this bill. And, sir, if the coming season should prove unfruitful, tell them that the droughi and the food, the mildew and the frost, have all been caused by the operations of the Sub. Treasury. And, for a remedy for all these evils, tell them to elect Gegera! Harrison for Pre. silent, and establish a United States Bank. Should any one be so iinpertinent as to ask what are his principles, proclaim it upon the housetops, that it is deemed unnecessary and impoli. tric to avow them--that it is sufficient for the people to know hat he is a candidate-hat he must be taken with something akin to generous confilence," and must be electal, without any declaralion or principles. And, sir, when it shall be said that the Administraiion party is opposed to local internal improve ments, to a United States Bank, to the assump:ion of the State debts, to any greater tarit than the wants of the Government ro. quire; an that it is in favor of a strict construction of the Con. silution, of the pres’ vation of the rights of the States and of bringing the Government back to the days of Jefferson; les it again be proclaimed that these principles are all to be kept out of sight till after the election, when "all the interests of the great opposition party" will he harmonized. Let it be declared from one end of the nation to the other, that the only prisciple that binds the Opposition party together is that avowed by a gentleman from New York iwo or three weeks since war upon this Administratinn.”

Such, sir, has been the case with one of the parties of this country, from the soundation of the Governmeni until the pre. sent time. In mosi, if noi all elections, whilo one party has held up to view the principles by which it is governed, while it has taken is stand upon those principles, and, trusting to the intelligence of the people, has been willing to rise or rall, as their vertict should be rendered upon them; the other party, with a perseverance worthy of a better cause, underrating the mind upon collateral and immaterial issues, and to keep out of aight the great questions that are actually involved. Sir, do I err when I say that such is the case now? Why is it, thai tens of thousands, ay, sir, hunilrels of thousands of pamphlets, said to contain the life of General Ilarrison, are sent forth under the franks of gentlemen, and scattered throughout the country? Bul, specially, sir, why is it that nothing is contained in those pamphleis, indicating the political principles of the General? is it to draw off the public mind from the great ikalle that is to he tried? Is it to turn attention to his military services, that in their supposed blaze his political principles may be kept out of view, and his civil qualifications he firgotten? Why is it that there is an apparent anxiety to seize every opportunity in pour cut indiscriminate denunciation upon the Administration, that it may be rendered unpopular and obnoxious? Why is it that thousands of dollars are wasted by delays in discussing the most minnte and trifiing matters? Why, sir, I ask, but to draw off public attention from the great principles of the parties, and to keep out of view the real issue to he tried- an Indo' pendent Trea-ury or a United States Bank."

Sir, it is of linle consequence to me whether General Ilarri. son, in luis military career, won laurels that a conqueror might be proud of, or whether his fame is anything but desirable. I care not whether, as a shrewd and experienced commander, he eneumped his troops at Tipperance upon the most advantagee ground, or whether he was induced by a wily fne to se. lect the very spot that his enemy pointed out to him. I ask not whether, at that baille, he mounted his own steed or that of a brave comrade, that his own person might not be recognised. I ask not whether that comrade, while upon the horse of the Ge. neral, fell upon that battle field, and gave up his life for big country. I care not whether the battle ofthe Thames was won by Gen. lÍarrison, or whether anoiher gentleman now in the Senate chamber, serving his country as her second officer, is entitled to all the honor anıl glory of that victory. I care not whether fort Stephenson was evacuated by his order, or whether it was de sented by a man whose name will never be forgotten in the an. Jials of his country. Sir, I will not enter into a discussion of these matters. When about to select a man to preside over the destinies of this great Republic---when we are to place at the helm of state one uron whom the happiness and wellare of so many millions depend, it is not military same alone that is to insure his sucress - it is not talents, nor education, nor gone ral information that are to make him acceptable-but it is prin. ciples. They will be sought for, scrutinized, canvasged. And although a candidate may have ihe military fame of a Cæsar, or an Alexander; although he may have served his country in her greatest peril, yet his reuptation and his services can never answer as a substitute for correct and fundamental political principles.

Sir, let me tell gentlemen that they miscalculate entirely the intelligence of the people, if they surpose they can be hum. bugged by para 'o, or led off from the great principles which they have snipurte for years, by the empty sound of a hurrah. No sir, no. The people understand their rights, and dare main. tain thern Nobunk bribes can seduce them. No corporation combinations for the reduction of wages can intimidate them. No hyp?critical sympathies can deceive them. But the work. ing men of this Union, who bave always proved true to the Con. stitution of our country, and have again and again rescued it from the threatened ruin, will not fail to do their duty in the great contest before them. It is by their efforts, the efforts of

ties.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

WEDNESDAY, June 3, 1840. On motion of Mr. BELL, the Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union was discharged from the consideration of so much of the President's message, and the report of Secrelary of War, as relates to Indian Affairs; and the subject was referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs.

Mr. PETRIKIN présented, from the Committee on the Public Buildings and Grounds, a certain communication which had been referred to that committee; which was ordered to be printed,

[ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small]

The CHAIR ancounced that the first business in order during the morning hour, was the motion of the gen!leman from New Jersey, (Mr. RANDOLPH,) to commit to ihe Committee on Commerce the bili reported from thai commiitee by the geatleman from Maryland, Mr. HILLEN, to repeal the act regulating pilos.

Mr. CURTIS, who was entitled to the floor, said he believed the commitiee were mistaken in their views on the subject commillel to them; which he was prepared to show by an examination of the report. The report was ordered 10 be printed on yeserday; but was not on the table this morning. He was anxious that every member should have the report before him, before he proceeded to the discussion; he would herefore suggest that the subject should by general consent be laid over till 10morrow, al which time the report would be on the table.

Mr. HILLEN said he could not objeci, if it was the full understanding that he question should be taken up to-morrow.

The suggestion was agreed to by general consent.

The CHAIR announced that the next business in order was the bill reported from the Commiliee on Public Lands, authorizing the Stale of Tennessce to issue grants and perfect titles to certain iands therein de cribed; and to setile tue clairns to the vacant unappropriated lands within the same, passed April 18, 1836. The question was on its commitment.

Mr. PETRIKIN, who was entitled to the filcor, considered it very wrong to keep a large body of land in that State, and yet that that Sate should have no control over it. The lands lie there upsettled, and the State has no power to take it. The bill had been often discussed by both Houses; and noswithstanding the measure was perfectly just in itself, yet by the process of siaving off action on it in the Committee of the Whole on the sale of the Union, it has been defeated. That was the mode its enemies pursued to kill the bill, and it is the mode now proposed to be resorted 10-that is, io sefer it to the Committee of the Whole, where they know, in consequence of the mass of business before that committee, it will not be reached this session. He did not believe that, by the rule, it was required to be committed; and he was therefore opposed to placing it in a siination where it could not be acted on. To bring the House to speedy action on it, he moved the previous question.

Mr. LINCOLN inquired of the Chair what would be the effect of the previous question?

The CHAIR replied, that it would bring the House to a vote on the motion 10 commit.

Mr. L. WILLIAMS moved a call of the House; which was refused.

Mr. EVERETT was understood to say he could not see wherein this question differed from the decision on the pre-emption bill; and if it did not differ, he did not see how the previous question could be made to apply to the motion for its commitment.

The CHAIR said th?re was a manifest distinction between the principle of this ball and the preemption bill; and the previous question would be on the motion to comm't; and, if the gentleman thought proper to tahe an appal, he would explain his reasons, anil show the distinction.

Does the genueman lake an appeal?

Mr. EVERETT said he would probably take an appeal.

The previous question was seconded-yeas 98, nays not counted.

Mr. L. WILLIAMS demanded the yeas and nays on the question, "Shall the main question be now pui?" which were ordered.

Mr. EVERETT inquired of the Chair whal the maiu question would be, if ordered.

The CHAIR replied that it would be on the commitment of the bill to the Committee of the whole on the state of the Union.

Mr. EVERETT. Then I take an appeal from that decision.

The SPEAKER said that, upon examination of the bill, to see whether, under the rules of the House, it ought 10 be committed, he found that it

contained a donation of landsmilcedes to the State of Tennessee all the lands within its limita: there. fore, on that ground, the bill must necessarily be committed, and the previous question tras un the comainitment.

Mr. EVERETI contended that the previous question was not on the commitment, but on the third reading of the bill, and on that ground appealed from the decision of the Cha'R.

And the question being on the appeal,

Mr. L. WILLIAMS deraanded the yeas and nays; which were not ordered.

Toe ques.ion, “Shall the decision of the CHAIR stand is the judgment was the House?" was then taken by tellers, and resulted-yeas 94, noes not conated.

So ihe decision of the Chair was affirmed, and the previous question decided to be on the commitment.

The question then recurring on the commitment of the bill to the Committee of the Whole on the stale of the Union,

Mr. MONTGOMERY demanded the yeas and Days; which, being uriered, were-yeas 104, nays 65, as follows:

YEAS - Moser3. Adams, Panks, Baker, Bime, Black, Bind, Brewsler, Briggs, Albert G. Brown Arson Brown, Calhoun, Connor, James Cooper, Mark A. Cooper, Crabb, Craig, Dinz, Davies, John Davis, Dawson, Deberry, Dennis, Dellei, Du, Bong, Dromgoole, Eul, Edwards, Evans, Everein Fletrher, Floyd, Galbraith. Jamea Garland, Gerry, Goggin, Graham, Green, Griffin, Ilzbersham, Hall, Hammond, Wil liam S. Hastings, John Hastings, Hawes, Hawkins, Hill of North Carolina, Hollen, Hoffman, Ilook, Hopkins, llu bard, Hunt, JackalbatJames, Joseph Johnson, William C. Johnson, John W. Jones, kempehall, King, Lewis Lincoln, Lucas, McKay, Marchand, Marvin, Munigomery, Morgan, Samuel W. Morris, Naylor, Newhari. Nisbet, o le. Paynter, Peck, Randolph, Raridon, Rayner, Roel, Rheit, Edward Rogers, James Rogers, Russell, Shaw, Shepari, Simouton, John Smith, stanly, Sarkweather, Scenrod, Storrs, Strong, Sumter, Taliaferro. Wadly Thompson, Toland, Tripletl. Trumbull, Underwood, Vandernorl. David D. Wagener, 'Weller, Wick, and Lewis Williams-104.

NAYS-Messrs. Alioril, Judson Allen, llugh J. Anderson, Andrews, Beaty. Blackwell, B.vyd, Aaron V. Brown, Burke, Sampson Il. Boiler, William B. Campbell, Carr, Carter, Caser, Chapman, Cliffordd, Criry. Crockett, Cross, Davee, John W. Davis, Duncan, Eastman, Gentry, Goode, Jland, Henry, Ilow. ard, Jameson, Cave Johnson, Nathaniel Jones, KH.n, Kille,

covard, lowell, McCarty, McClellan, McCulloch, Mailory, Miller, Montanya, Calvary Morris, Parrish, Parris, Petrikin, Prentiss, Reynolds, Ridgway, Albert Smith, Stuart, swearin. gen, Sweney, Philip F. Thomas, Jacob Thompson, Turney, Peter J. Wagener, Warren. Watterson, Elward D. White, John White, Thomas W. Williams, Henry Williams, Joseph L. Williams, Christopher L. Williams, and Worthington-65.

So the bill was ordered to be committed.

Mr. HUBBARD said that he had not a correct understanding of he decision of the Cuar on the first question, and that he had therefore voted in the allirmative with a view of moving a reconsiderapion, so as to put him elf righi. He did not rise for the purpose of discussing the bud, but merely to sia'e what its provisions were. Mr H. then read the bil, and contended that it made no appro. priation of money, but merely celed to the Sia.e of Tennessee, certain lands to enable hr to sellle criain claims of North Carolina. It made no appropriation whatever, and therefore ought not to go into conmittee. For these reasoos he moved a reconsideration of the vole, by which the decision of the SPEAKER, to the contrary, had been sustained. He also made some allusion to the pre-emp. tion bill, which was passed a short time ago, and wished the present bill to be treated on the same principles. The pre-emprion bill was not relerred to a committee of the whole, and why sheuld this be subject to a different rule? For his part, he wished them ireated boih alike. He had no idea oi' making fish of one and fesh of the other; if he was right on the pre-emption bill the other day, he was right now,

Mr. HOWARD of Indiana gave notice hat if the vote on the commitment was reconsidered, he would move to reconsider the vote on the appeal. He had voted to sustain the Chair under a misappicbension.

Mr. LEWIS WILLIAMS moved the previous question on the moiion to reconsider; which received a second, and the main question was ordered.

Mr. MONTGOMERY inquired of the Chair, if the House refused to reconsider the vote on the commitment, whether it would be in order for the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. HOWARD) to move to reconsider the yole on the appeal.

The CHAIR replied ihat it would not.

And the questson now being on the motion to reconsider,

Mr. MONTGOMERY asked for the yeas and nays; which, having been ordered, were-yeas 82, nays 90, as follows:

YEAS-Messers. Alford, J. Allen, Andrewg, Atherton Beauty, Bell, Blackwell, Boyd, Aaron V. Brown, Buike! Williain 0. Biller, Wiliam B Campbell, Carr, Carter, Casey: Chapman, Chinn, Clark, Chitford, Crary, Crockell, Cross Dana, J. W. Davis, Garret Davie, Duncan, Earl, Ely, Everett, James Garland, Gentry, Gerry, Goode, Hammond, Hand, Henry. Howard, Hubard Jameson, Cave Johnson, Nathaniel Jones, Kile, Leci, Leonard. Lowell, McClellani, M. Culloch, Mal. livry, Mason, Miller, Mitchell, Níontanya, Calvars Morris Parish, Parris, Perrikin, Pope, Prentiss, Reynolda Ridgway, Robinson, Sergeant, Albert Smith, Stark weather, Sieenrod, I T. Stuart, Swearingen, sweney, Jacob Thompson, Triplail, Trumbull, Turney. Vanderpoel, Warren, Walierson, Edward D. While, John White, Jared W. Williams, Thomas W. Williams, Joseph L. Williams, Christopher Hl. Williams, and John T. H. Worihington-82.

NAYS_Messrs. Adams, Banks, Baker, Beirne, Black, Brew. ster, Brigge, Anson Brown, Butler, Calhoun, Connor, Mark A. Conper, Crabb, Craig, Davies, John Davis, Dawson. Deberry, Dennis, Dellet, Doig, Dromgoole, Edwards, Evans, Fletcher, Goggin. Graham, Griffin, Grinnell, Habersham, liall, William S. Hlusrings, llawes, Hawkins, Hill of Virginia, Hill of North Carolina. Hillen, look. Huni, Jackson, James, Joseph John. Ann, William Cost Ihnson, John W. Jones, Keim, Kemble, Kempshall, King, Lewis, Lincoln, Lucas, McKay, Marchand, Marvin, Montgomery, Morgan, Samuel W'. Morris, Newhard, Nisbet, Ole, 0-borne, Paynier, Peck. Ramsey, Ranilolph, Rayner, Reeil, Rhell, Eswarii Rogers, James Rogers, Russell, Salinnstall, Samuels, Shaw, Shepard, Simonton, John Smith, Thomas Smith, Siany, Storrs, Strong, Sumter, Talialerro, Til linghast. Toland, Underwood, Wagener, Weller, Wick, and Lewis Williams-90.

So the House refused to reconsider.

On motion of Mr. J. W. JONES, the House then resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole on the State of the Union, and toook up the

INDEPENDENT TREASURY BILL. Mr. OSBORNE, who was entitled to the floor, spoke at some length of the origin, tendency, and principles of the bill. He denounced the bill as a remarkable project, anil contended that it was anti-Republican, and opposed to the habits of the people. That it made war upon the baoks by draining them of their specie; and ihat it might be used as an engine to harass and destroy the banks. He dwealt upon the state of the currency generally, past and present, and attributed it to the policy of the past and present Administrations.

Mr. HUNT next obiained the floor, and de. nounced the measure as one of war upon the great business interests of the country, and even its libertes. He adverted to the policy of the past and present Administrations; and, in the course of his remarks, made some remarks in reference to an investigation which was gravely going on, on charges made against certain Government officers, for purchasing public stores from Whig merchants of Baltimore; when he was interrupted by

Mr. HILLEN of Maryland, who said it was nrtorious that the charges against the Government officers were not only ihat they had been dealing with Whig merchants, but that they had been paying those merchants higher prices than the goods could be purchased for elsewhere. These charges, he would also inform the genileman, were made by the Whigs themselves against these Government officers.

Mr. HUNT was understood to be thankful for the correction, and rroceeded in his remarks till The hour for the recess, balf past twoo'clock, with. out finishing.

EVENING SESSION. Mr. HUNT resumed his remarks in opposition to the bill, and concluded at a few minutes before seven o'clock.

Th• CHAIRMAN having then given to floor to Mr. H. Williams of Massachusetts, the committee rosa, and The House adjonrned.

IN SENATE,

Thunsday, June 4, 1840. Mr. LINN presented a memorial signed by seveniy citizens of the Territory of Oregon, praying the extension of the jurisdiction and laws of the United States over that Territory; which was read, laid upon the table, and ordered to be printed.

Mr. WALKER presented two petitions from citizens of Natchez, in relation to the subject of the joint resolution, introduced inio the Senate a few days siuce for the relief of the inhabitants of the

[ocr errors]

city of Natehez; which were referred to the Committee on Finance.

Mr. W also presented a memorial of members of the bar of the circuit cour of the United States for the district of Mississippi, remonstraling against the removal of the said court from Jackson 10 Vicksburg; which was referred to the Committe on the Judiciary.

Mr. PRESTON presented a supplemental memorial from Mary W. Thempson; which was laid on the table, and ordered to be prinied.

Mr. LINN, from the Committee on Private Land Claims, te which was referred the bill for the relief of Nathaniel Pryor, reported the same with an amendmeut.

Mr. FULTON, in pursuar.ce of previous notice, asked and obtained leave to introduce a bill for the relief of Epraim D. Dixon; which was read iwice, and referred to the Committee on Claims.

Mr. WILLIAMS, from the Committee on Naval Affairs, to which was referred the report of the Secretary of the Navy on the expenses of the Navy Depariment, asked to be discharged from the surther consideration thereof; which was agreed to.

Mr. W. also, from the same commiltoe, made an unfavorable report on the bill for the relief of Robert T. Wainwright.

Mr. PIERCE, from the Committee on Pensions, to which was referred bills from the House

For the relief of Reuben Murray;
For the relief of Sarah Oakley;
For the relief of Joseph Bailey; and

For the relief of Jacob Adams; made unfavorable reports thereon.

Mr. P. also, from ihe same committee, to which was referred the petition of James Phelps and John Lathram, made unfavorable reports thereon.

Mr. TAPPAN moved to take up the joint resoJution for the amendment of the Constitution of the United States, by limiting the tenure of office of the Judiciary; which, after some remarks from Mesess. MERRICK, WEBSTER, SEVIER, WRIGHT, and TAPPAN, was agreed to; and then, on motion of Mr. T. its further consideration was postponed until Thursday next.

The bill concerning prisoners of the United States committed to the jail of the couniy oi Providence, and State of Rhode Island, was read a third time and passed.

HERS OF ROBERT FULTON. The repori of the Committee on Claims, adverse to the claim of the heirs of Robert Fulton, was then taken op, and Mr. MERRICK renewed his remarks in opposition to the report, and in favor of the claim.

On motion by Mr. HUBBARD, the further con. sideration of the subject was postponed until 10morrow.

GENERAL BANKRUPT LAW. The bill for the estabrishment of a general system of bankruptcy throughout the United Stales was taken up, the question being on the motion to strike oul the 18th section, providing for compulsory bankruptcy.

Mr. CLAY of Kentucky addressed the Senate in favor of the motion, and was replied to by

Mr. WRIGHT, who opposed the mouion at leogth, contending for the necessity of including the compulsory principle, to make the bill "uniform," as contemplated by the Constitution, in iis operation on the debtor and creditor. He also replied to the remarks of Mr. CALHOUN on the motion to exempt banks from the provisions of the bill. Mr. W. having concluded,

Mr. WEBSTER intimaled his intention to reply, and moved an adjournment.

The Senate then adjourned.

[ocr errors]

sistent superintendents, foremen, and bosses, desig. nating which building each individual attends to, his name, and occupation.

On leave given, Mr. HOPKINS presented certain additional testimony in relation to a case before the Committee of Claims, which was referred accordingly.

On leave, Mr. H. submitted a motion that the papers in relation to the case of Joseph Ramsey be printed; which was agreed to.

Mr. WICK asked leave to submit a motion discharging the Committee of the Whole from the consideration of a bili in relation to a certain tract of land in Indiana, with a view to put it on its third reading Mr. ANDREWS objected.

Mr. WICK gave notice that he would renew the motion to-morrow morning.

Mr. ANDREWS gave notice that he would oppose the motion. PILOT LAW.

bour was the motion heretofore made by Mr. RANDOLPH, 10 recommit to the Commit:ee on Commerce the report and bill providing for the repeal of the law commonly known as the Pilot law.

Mr. CURTIS, who was entitled to the floor, ad. dressed the House during the morning hour in favor of the motion to recommit.

The report and hill, he contended, ought to be recom nitted, because i he facts presented before the committee did not tend to justify the conclusion to which ihe report had copie. The act of March, 1837, which it was now proposed to repeal, made it lawful for the inasters of vessels coming into or going out of any port situated on the waters conterminous with or dividing the two Stales of New York and New Jersey to take a pilot from either of the two States. The law was simple in its terms, and he presumed no man would infer that injury had resulted to any one from its passage. Iistendency was to free tra le, and to give to those "who go down into the sea in ships" the choice of pilots to direct and guide their course.

The report before the House set forth that ihe acı of 1837 was an unjust, injurious, and oppressive law. If such was the fact, the law ough: 10 be repealed; but if, on the other hand, a careful examination of the testimony which was directed by this House to be sent to the Committee on Com. merce sbouid lead to the conclusion that ihe commercial interests of this country, that a vast amount of property afloat and a great num?er of lives were, by this law, guarantied against the perils of a dangerous monopoly, then he thought ihe House would agree with him that it ought noi to be repealed.

Who were they that were so dissatisfied with the provisions of this act, and who now asked for its repeal? The complaints came to us in memori. als from New York, Philadelphia, Baliimore, Norfolk, and Charlesion; they were signed by the pilots; and they alone, so far as he koew, asked ihe repeal of the law.

The memorial from the pilots of Virginia set forth an extraordinary reason for the repeal of the law; it was, that the law was designed io in'erfere with and nullify certain siate laws to break up monopolies. So far from this being a cause complaint, it was with him a cause of great congratulation. The pilots of Virginia did not complain of any prac ical evil; and the same remark was applicable (Mr. C. contended) to all the memorials which had been referred to the committee from the pilots of all the States, and which he examined seriatim with some minutenes3.

What led to the enactment of the law of 1837? The report now under consideration stated that the application was made to Congress for its passage, on acoount of certain remarkable disasters which had occurred in or about the post of New York, the blame of which was unjustly imputed to ihe New York pilots-and that, under the excitement which those disasters created in the public mind by the loss of those vessels, and of several hundreds of lives, Congress, partaking of that excitement, passed the law. How was the fact? He was sorry to say, as a citizen of the State of New York, that the date of the complaint was not correct.

He was sorry that that complaint did not date correctiy, on the 3d of January, 1837. The compoint of the inefficiency and neglect of the pilots of New York was of long standing. Il bad been a matier of reproach to Ne* York for more iban ten years-a reproach not only at home, but throughout the United States, and throughout the commercial world. It was a common reproach to say that a man was more lazy than a New York pilot. The neglect of duty by those pilots was a matter of public notoriety. He would not say whether the loss of the ship “Mexico," on the 3d of Janvary, 1837, was justly impuled to them or not, for he did not wish to go into that matter; the complaints against them had been open and notorious for ten years prior to the loss of that ill-fated vessel. So general, indeed, had the complaint become for a considerable period prior thereto, that Governor Marcy, on the 31 of December, 1836, in his annual message, called the attention of the Legislatore of the State of New York, to the subject. The “Mexico" was lost in January, and on the 3l of December previous, the Governor calleil the attention of the Legislature to the condition of the pilot system, which he spoke of as reproachful to the Stale. Tbe reason and foundation of these complaints were to be found in the close and odious monopoly given to pilots by the law of the Stare of New York, passed in the year 1819. On this law and its injurious results, Mr. C. commented at some lengih; showing what the actual condition of things was when the law of 1837 was passed. The complaints were general, and he would show that there was suflicient testimony before the Committee on Commerce to have sat sfied the genileman from Maryland, (Mr. HILLEN) who made this report, that these complainis were not only general, but had been continued for years, and that The application for the passage of ihe law which it was now proposed to repeal, and its passage, were not to be traced to any excitement growing out of the loss of the Mexico."

To this end, Mr. C. here introduced and had read the testimony of sundry persons, shipmasters and others, delailing the numerous calamities which had occurred, and the vast number of lives that had been sacrificed on the coasts of New York, New Jersey, and the adjacent waters, (where the bones of hundreds of gallant ships lie buried,) prior to the wreck of the “ Mexico."

There was ano her point to which Mr. C. would ask the attention of the House. The “Mexico," as had been stated, was lost on the 3d of January, 1837; on the 12th of the month of December previous, a gentleman then representing in pari the city of New York,, (Mr. McKeon,) introduced a resolution on the subject, referriog it to the Committee on Commerce; and a very able and interest. ing report was made upon it. A similar resolu. tion was introduced into the Senate a few days afterwards; and the whole facts were laid before Congress.

One word as to the report of Mr. McKeon. Was that report confined 10 the wreck of the “Mexico?” Not at all. On the contrary, it defailed the condition of the pilotage of New York for several years previous to the date of the report; and, thal gentlemen might see from what grevious evils the law of 1837 had delivered the commerce of the port of New York, and of the United States, and of the commercial world, he would request the Clerk to read an extract from the report.

Certain portions of Mr. McKeon's report were here read; and also the finding of the grand jury of the city of New York atter the loss of the "Mexi. co;" which latter document also speaks in very emphatic terms of the evils resulting from the combination system of pilotage.

Mr. C. then referred to the only act passed on this subject prior to that of 1837, and by which act the power over it was given to the several Siates, until there should be further national legislation thereon. He doubled very much the constitutionality of that part of the act which attempted to give the power to legislate in fulure on this subject of commerce to the several States. It was a matler which the Constitution of the United States had committed to Congress, and upon which the states had no concurrent jurisdiction,

[ocr errors]

73

[ocr errors][ocr errors]

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

THURSDAY, June 4, 1840. By general consent, Mr. PETRIKIN offered the following resolution, which was adopied:

Resoloed, That the Commissioner of ibe Public Buildings and Grourds inform this House, forthwith, how many superi tendents, a sisiant superintendents, foremen, bosses, and workmen, of different kinds, are employed, at this time, at the Treasury and Patent Office buildings; and the salaries paid cach of ibe aforesaid superintendents, as.

But the Legislature of New York had refused 10 interfere to put an end to one of the most olioos, grinding, property and life destroying monope lies that had ever existed on farih--the monopoly of the pilotage of the port of New York. A ter years of suffering without redress, Congress bad at last come forward, unger the power conferred by the Constitution, to relieve the city of New York and its commerce from the destructive influences of that combination. He appealed to the House to say whether a law which had conferred such benefits, was to be repealed on any slight excuse or any insufficieut reason? He believed that breiter reasons than the report of the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hillen) had brought forward, must be laid before the House before it would take upon itself the responsibility of repealing a law, the repeal of which would again expose the property and the lives of all those connec ed with the navigation of the port of New York to the dangers and perils of this revived monopoly.

Mr. C. concluded just as the morning hour expired, and Mr. ATHERTON called fer the orders of the day.

Mr. HOFFMAN was understood to ask the House to take up a bill, of a single section, authorizing the Secretary of the Treasury to compromise with the sureties of Samuel Swartwout.

Mr. GRAVES was understood to object, but the ground of the objection the Reporter could not hear.

Mr. HOFFMAN asked a suspension of ihe rule, merely with a view, he said, to take the sense of the House. He would not ask for the yeas and nays.

No action was had, for Mr. SERGEANT rose and asked leave to make a report from the Committee on the Judiciary. Objection was made.

INDEPENDENT TREASURY BILL. On motion of Mr. ATHERTON, the House again resolved iiself into Committee of the Whole on state of the Union (Mr. Banks of Virginia in the chair) on the bill (from the Senate) to provide for the collection, safekeeping, transfer, and disbursement of the public moneys.

Mr. WILLIAMS of Massachusetts being entiiled to the floor, addressed the committee at inuch length in favor of the bill. After recapitulating ils principal features, he proceeded to contrast it with that of the deposite banks. This bill proposed that, by a certain period, all the money of the Government should be received and disbursed in gold and silver; also, that the revenue should be under the control of Government. On the other hand, the Opposition were in favor of the employment of banks to perform this duły, in which case all the revenues of the country would be in the hands, and under the control, of those institutions, and where it would be used for the benefit of the stockholders and borrowers. These were the two proposisions, at which they were at issue. The issue was not merely on a choice of measures, but it was an issue involving the fundamental principles of Government. It involved two contrary and antagonistical principles. One of the propositions was founded on a distrust of the people, while the other, the present bill, acknowledged the capaciiy of the people for self-government, by the choice of their own agents, responsible to them. The issue was, in fact, a question between a responsible and irresponsible power.

This bill expressly recog. nised the principle that the people had the capacity of self-government, and acknowledged to the fullest extent their sovereignty. But ihe deposite system, for which the Opposition were so anxious, restricted and denied the sovereignty of the people, by placing the revenue in the power of banks, which were irresponsible, and would converl the money into their paper, for the benefit of them. selves and customers. Was this surrendering the revenue to soulless corporations, and whose bodies could not be touched, calculated to give supremacy to the popular will? No. Sovereignty was not the design of the banking system. All they wanted was lo get the control of the revenue, and then, where would be the power of the people? an ancient, but true maxim, that “by dividing sovereignty, you destroy it." And so if the re

venue of the country was to be given over 10 The banks, our Government would cease to be a Go. vernment of the people. The moment the control of the public money was lodged with the banks, that moment the sovereignty would depart froin the people and be transferred from the many to the few.

He admitted that such a thing might not be inconsistent wiih other Governments. It might suit very well the aristocratic Governments of Europe, but iis introduction into our country would never be tolerated. It was anti-Democratic in its tendency, and aimed a fatal blow at the roots of the tree of liberty. Besides, the very same principle would lead to a direct transfer of every other power belonging to the people. By the same rule the banks might claim a control over the Executive, the judicial, and every other officer of the Government. For, if the people had no right to control the revenue, they had no right to ccn'rol any thing else. The very same principle which deprived them of the one, must necessarily deprive them of every other power. This measure of the Opposition, was then c'early repugnant of the first great principles of our Government, and lo the equal rights and sovereignty of the people.

Among o her objections to the independent Treasury bill, it was urged that it would injure the manufacturer, and rob the laborer of his hard earnings. If he thought so, he would assure the committee and the country that he would be he last to sland up in its defence, as there was no class so worihy the protection of Government as the labor. ing men. That class of men was the true source of all our greatness and glory. It was the laboring men of our country who had achieved her greatest triumphs; they were the true foundation of her greatness, and the real architects of her fame; to Them was to be attributed the growing cities, and all the works of enterprise in every State. Therefore, he would repeat that if he thought this measure would act injuriously upon them, and rob then of the fruits of their industry, he would be the last man to say a word in its defence. But how was the charge sustained? Where was ihe proof that it would produce such injurious effects? What portion of the bill was it that contained fearful evil? It was urged that it would destroy the banks. This was erroneous, for ihe bill made no war opon the banks. li merely dissolved the partnership which formerly existed, and left them to them. selves. The operation of this bill could not injure the banks in the least, provided they had a solid basis to rest upon. If the banks came to ruin after the passage of this bill, it would arise solely from their own weakness and rottenness, and not from any hostility from Government.

This Independent Treasury bill, was purely a defensive, instead of an offensive measure. It was a defensive measure necessary to the safety of the people, and the proper administration of Govern.

What! he woold ask, could any one desire a repetition of the humiliating scenes of recent years, when, by a similtaueous suspension of the banks, the Government was unable to touch thiriy millions of its money, and was laughed and sneered at into !he bargain for its poverty?

Tois bill proposed to save us in future from such danger and degradation, by placing the revenue at the disposal of the representatives of the people, at the disposal of their own officers, instead of leaving it under the control of speculating institutions, who used it in their own business. This measure was not only necessary to the efficiency of Government, but to the soundness of the banks themselves. Its tendency would be to confine the banks to their own resources. They would then do a safe business, without relying upon the uncertain cantingency of receiving the public money in deposite.

It was also objected to, as calculated to withdraw the public money from the business of the country. But what right, he would ask, had the banks or The merchants to the use of the public money? They had no right whatever. Such a power had never been delegated to the Government to allow private individuals and corporations io trade on the public revenue. Yet we were constantly abused for not permittiug the public money, raised from

the great body of the people, 10 be used by bank. rupi speculators and irresponsible corporations. Why ii would le, in fact, levying a contribution upon the poor, for the benefit of ihe rich. It would be taxing the laboring classes to fill the pockets of the privileged lew. It would be a most odious sys. le ia of favoritism, unworihy of a free and intelligent people.

Another objection was, that the revenue would be collected in gold and silver. All that it would be necessary to say in reply to this objection was, tha! There was no other currency recognised by the Constitution, nor was there any other currency in which Government could meet the demands upon the Treasury. Every citizen had a right 10 exact the payment of his debts in specie, ihe only legal and constitutional currency. It was charged, also, that this measure would creaie one currency for the Government and another currency for the people--that the officers of Government would receive a better currency than others. But how could the office holders be benefited, when the Governmeni paper was to be redeemable in specie? In that case, it would conier no benefit upon the office holder; and admitting, for the sake of argument, that the money did become depreciated, even his colleagne (Mr. CUSHING) admitted that it could not then be admitted into the Treasury.

It was also said thal the effect of this bill would be to drain the banks of their specie, and accumulate it in the vaults of the Treasury. But from a calculation made by those best able to judge, it was asceriained that the amount of specie would be so small, that it could nct affect the business of the country. According to an estimate of the Treastry Department, it appeared that only five millions would be wanted. Now, if that amount were withdrawn from circula'ion in a single year, it would not be more than was abstracted by the operations of commerce alone. But this sam would be taken gradually, and in such a way that no inconvenience could be felt.

Mr. W. then proceeded to notice the charge, that the policy of the Administration in this respect was owing 10 the low prices of provisions, and the distress which prevailed in the country. In confut. ing that charge, he relerred to a table of prices of flour during different Administrations, and con. tended that if high prices were any sign of merit, then the price of four during the present Adminisiration was a conclusive answer to the cry of ihe Opposition. As for the distress in the county, how could it be shown that the Administration was in any way responsible for i1? If there was a stagnation of business, he contended that it was but the natural consequence of overaction and mad speculation. The Stales had run into debt beyond the means of payment, and that was one great cause of their embarrassment. What hand had the Administration in producing such results? Had the Administrauion been in any way instru. mental in running up the enormous amount of State debts for internal improvement? Did it charter the swarm of Siale banks which deluged ibe country with their paper? Did it induce the banks to favor the rage of speculators? These were not the acts of the Administration, nor was it responsible for the debts of the States. It was to the State Legislatures alone that the embarrassment was 10 be attributed, and to them alone belonged the responsibility.

But it was said these things were done by a ma jority of the Administration party in each Stale. Such was not the case. The assertion could not be proved. A reference to the facts would show that they were done by a majority of the Opposition, with perhaps a few interested Democrats who aided them by their votes.

It was also charged that ike policy of the Administration tended to degrade the laborers of this country to the level of the laboring classes of Eq. rope. But this Administration advocated no such policy. The charge was as groundless as it was rie diculous. As for degrading the laboring classes of this enlightened country to the condition of the la. borers of Europe, it was not possible for any Administration to do it, even if they could entertain so unholy a wish. Gentlemen who made this charge must keep in sight tbat there was a vast difference

ment.

It was

was

belween our Government and the Governments of Europe. Under our free insiitutions, it would be morally impossible to reduce the laboriog portion of the community to the level of the oppressed operatives in monarchical countries. Mi, W. then illustrated his position at some length, by a reference to the causes producing a reduction of the price of labor in European countries, and which could never apply to us. Before such could ever be the case, there must he a complete revolution in our form of Government, and a revolution in the condition of the people. Before the bright star of our freedom could descend in the shades of European darkness, the intelligence of the working classes, beaming forth in characters of living light, must be extinguished: ani that would never be the case.

Throughout the whole of this discussion, the Opposition had taken the ground that the interests of labor were identified with ihe banking systein. Bu: was this assumption just and well founded? Could they adduce any prool that a paper currency was calcuiated to promote the interests of the la. bor ng classes? One of the ablest writers on political economy contended that “stability” was one of the essential of a good currency. But bad the paper system any stability? Did not experience show that it was perpetually changing, and was unstable as ihe waters of the ocean-variable as the ebb and Auw of its tides?

Mr. W. then read several extracts from the address of the late President of the United States Bank, showing ihe effects of a sudden expansion and contraction of paper issues, which couid never exist when the currency of a country was of gold and silver, and possessed the quality of s'ability.

Mr. W. then drew a glowing picture of the effects of this paper system on the country, in producing the existing distress; how it had robbed the poor man of the fruits of his industry, and encouraged the rich to run into debt beyond the means of paymen!; and yet this was the system now so urgently contended for by the Opposition.

He then referred to a number of tables, showing the almost incredible lesses sustained by the depreciation of bank paper, which loss musi, from the very nature of things, continue so long as the paper system was kepe up After so doing, he then went on to show that, under a system having specie for its basis, no such loss could ever occur.

He also proved that the paper system operated unequally at the expense of the laborer. He

more

laborer, the suspected Thief had more than the pauper, the convicted thief more than the suspected one, and the transported telon three times as much food than the independent laborer was able to procure by his most suenuous exertions.

By way of confirmation of these statements, Mr. W. read from a number of English writers of authority, showing the great degratation of the working classes in thai country, whose labor was all swallowed up to maintain the pomp, extravagance, and splendor of the few. He also read parliamentary documents, showing the rapid and fearful increase of pauperism, and crime, as a natural cons:quence of such degralation.

He then argued that this lamentable state of things could not be altribuied to the poverty of the country, for the amount of aggregate wealih had increased; but it was to be traced solely to the expansions and contractions of a paper system affect. ing the prices, and always falling upon the devoted heads of the poor.

Mr. W. here read several tables, showing the connection betrien expansion and pauperism. He was astonish-d that his colleague should have selected England as an instance of the good effects of this paper system. It was a most unfortunate selection. What was the true condition of the "happy people” of that "mighty empire?”! He would not go to the starving millions in her posses. sions in Iuda, bui he would call at eation to the suffering millions in her "own green ise.” He wonld call attention to the extracts which he had read. He would ask gentlemen to pause and reflect upon the state of things there set forth, and then say whether they were desireus that the enlightened laborers of this country should be placed in the same siluation, by the introduction of a similar system.

No: he was sure there was no patriot who would for a moment entertain the idea. It was, therefore, due to the American laborer that the connection between bank and Siale should exist no longer. I had existed already too long, and it was high time that a connectioa should be dissolved, the tendency of which was to outrage the liberties of the people.

He did not mean to say that there should be no paper, and no credit, but ibat it should be on such a plan that would not deprive the laborer of the fruits of his toil, nor industry of its reward. He wished it regulated so that it would secure to labor The 'rue amount of its earnings, and establish jus. lice between the emp'oyer and the employed.

This measure would do all that. It would give us a uniform currency, create a demand for specie, and make the currency more sound and stable. It would secure to the manufacturers a specie standard of true value, and check excessive imporiations.

Mr. W. after showing various other benefits that would arise from the passage of ihe bill, said it must be evident that the President, so far from being an enemy to the laborers, as had been charged, was friendly to their interests, as his anxiety for the adoption of this measure fully proved. It was the desire of the President and his friends to establish a uniform sprcie standard, onder which it would be impossible for such ruinous fluctuations again to occur.

The remarks of Mr. W. with the numerous Tables and authorities to which he referred, will be published in full as early as convenient.

Mr. SMITH of Vermont made some remarks in relation to the contest in his district, and concluded by saying that his opponent was voted for by the Whigs generally, on the ground that he was in favor of a National Bank, and that he (Mr. S) received the support of the Democratic party, on the ground that he was opposed 10 such a bank, and in favor of the Independent Treasury system. The principles of this measure, he said, were sundamental-it reached the currency-the business and industry of the country—that it would vitally affect the political and social condition of the country, so long as it shall hereafter continue in operationthat it would protect the political character and morals of the country. It would impart healthy action in the currency, by infusing into it a larger basis of specie--it would prove beneficial to the business and industry of the country, by keeping

the currency stable, and preventing unnatural stia mulation and overaction in trade, and by so regu. lating the industry of ihe country, as to keep labor constantly employed, in contradistinction io the ruinous fuctuations under the banking system.

Mr. S. argued tha' the contest was the same noir between the two great contending parties that it

in the year 1800. It was a contest of the mass of the people against the moneyed few, to sustain the Constitution in all its purily, te preserve the Republican form of Government, and the just balance of power which exists between all its departments, and to secure

to the present, and to perpetuate to future generations those equal rights guarantied in the Constilution, and an equal distribution of the blessings of our great political system. The per ple are of the impression that the opposition by the Whig party to this measure, is from something more than meets the eye. There is something masked under it. The people remember well that the contest in the Revolution was belween ihe oppressor and the oppressed. The contest is the same now. It is one between The mass, for an equal distribution of the blessings of Government, with the moneyed power who wish exclusive privileges, such as will secure to them

power than even accumulated wealth gives them, 10 enable them through that power 10 oppress the people.

The House at the hour of half past two, took the usual recess.

EVENING SESSION. Mr. SMITH or Vermont continued his remarks, He contended that the antagonist measure to the Independent Treasury bill was a National Bank. The Opposition are in favor of a National Bank; thry are sincerely devoted to such a measure, notwithstanding they will not directly and openly avow il. He would not discuss the constilutiona. lity of a bank; it was sufficient for him that such an institution was altogether inexpedient. It was not suitable to the character of the people, or the priociples of our Republican system. It was no reason that such an institution should be established in this country, because one was suitable to the Eng. lish Government and people, or any other moparchical Government, or the subjects of such a Government. The Bank of England lends all its aid to sustain the nobility. The moneyed power of all the European Governments naturally concentrale, and combine to sustain those Governments and in consequence to the same degree to oppress the people.

Heargued that in this country the Executive needed no such sustenance. Therefore, the banks and the Government should be kept separate. It would be dangerous to Republican liberly to ally the Executive to the moneyed power, by giving him the control of the whole banking system. To make such a bank as the Opposition wish to have, lo control the State institutions, and to regulale the business, the exchanges, and the industry of the country, it would have to be constituted of a capital of one hundred millions of dollars. Such a bank, to regulate nine hundred State banks, wiih a combined capital of four hundred millions, all in active operation, allied to the Execulive, would be a most potent and fearful power indeed. If such a bank be allied to the Executive, and give it all the potency it should have, and which the Whig party desire that it should have to regulate these nine bundred Stale banks, it would control every channel of society. If such an institution be allied to the Executive, with the power and patronage of the Government, and the time would not be in the future that the people would be able to Throw off the shackles, except by a fearful and bloody revolution. The banking institutions are not satisfied to control the business and commerce of the country, but the Whig party wish to give them a control of the Government itself, by giving them charge of the fiscal operations of the Governmeni-by depositing with such institutions the revenues of the nation to discount with, and to speculale upon. Such a union would be fearful indeed. But be bad no idea that any Administra. tion would ever again consent that these institutions should be employed as fiscal agenis. No friend to his country could consent that the Execu

standing ail that had been said about the sympathy of the manufacturers for the poor, these manufacturers, with large capitals, ground down the poor man to the dust, and that while in a rise of prices his wages were the last to be raised, at a fall of prices his wages were the first to be reduced.

After adverting to a variety of other objections, Mr. W. proceeded to notice ihe argument of his cilleague, (Mr. Cushing,] in relation to the good effects of the paper system in England, as compared with other countries. He said a full and impartial examination into the condition of the working classes in those countries when that system was established, would soon enable any one to see the froits of it.

Mr. W. then adverted at some length to the degraded condition of laboring classes in Sweden, Austria, Denmark, etc. When under a paper sys. tem, they were bought and sold with the land like beasis. He compared this with the condition of the laborer in Cuba, who, under a hard money currency, received from sixty to seventy dollars per month.

What, he asked, was the actual condition of the laboring classes in England, on which his colleague had passed so glowing a eulogium, as a beautiful specimen of the good effects of a paper system? What was the true condition of the great miss of the English? Were they not the degraded victims of toil, slavery, and low prices? Was it not notorious that the very pauper had a beller living than the bonest and industrious operative? Was it not well known that even condemned criminals were better fed than the virtuous working man? Yes, the Foreign Quarterly Review showed that the pauper had a greater allowance of focd than the

[ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]
« ΠροηγούμενηΣυνέχεια »