the humiliation to which we were now subjected in being superintended by the heroes of Algiers and Navarino, the project of certain Senators to apply the public moneys in a different direction, namely, to divide them among the States, and which required them to keep the sum for distribution as large as possible, in order to present captivating dividends to each distributee. The plan of putting the country in a posture of defence was incompatible with these plans of distributing the revenues. The two plans cannot go on together; one or the other must give away, and he had purposely drawn the resolution under consideration to make an issue between them, and to draw the line between those who will put their country in a state of defence, and those who will leave it naked and helpless.

Mr. B. had felt it his duty to bring to the notice of the Senate the approach of the French squadron of observation, and to show that it came because "America had no force capable of being opposed to it." It was a subsidiary argument, and a fair illustration of the dangers and humiliations of a defenceless position. It should stimulate us to instant and vigorous action; to the concentration of all our money, and all our hands, to the sacred task of national defence. For himself, he did not believe there would be war, because he knew that there ought not to be war; but that belief would have no effect upon his conduct. He went for national defence, because that policy was right in itself, without regard to times and circumstances. He went for it now, because it was the response, and the only response, which American honor could give to the visit of Admiral Mackau. Above all, he went for it because it was the way, and the only manly way, of letting France know that she had committed a mistake in sending this fleet upon us. In conclusion, he would call for the yeas and nays, and remark that our votes would have to be given under the guns of France, and under the eyes of Europe.

Mr. WEBSTER said his duty was to take care that neither in nor out of the Senate there should be any mistake, the effect of which should be to produce an impression unfavorable or reproachful to the character and patriotism of the American people. He remembered the progress of that bill, (the bill alluded to by Mr. BENTON,) the incidents of its history, and the real cause of its loss. And he would satisfy any man that the loss of it was not attributable to any member or officer of the Senate. He would not, however, do so until the Senate should again have been in session on executive business. As soon as that took place, he should undertake to show that it was not to any dereliction of duty on the part of the Senate that the loss of that bill was to be attributed.

Mr. LEIGH said there was one or two facts in relation to this matter to which he would call the particular attention of the gentleman from Missouri, [Mr. BENTON.] Mr. L. referred to a report of the Committee on Military Affairs, at the last session, on the expediency of providing for fortifications. He did not understand the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. BENTON] to say that that specific report was rejected. He (Mr. L.) understood it was rejected with other appropriations.

[Mr. BENTON explained.]

Mr. L. continued. I have, said he, a particular recollection. My mind was attracted to the subject by the quarrel going on between France and the United States. He expected some means to be resorted to in order to strengthen the national arm. The bill to strengthen the fortifications of the country had passed the House of Representatives on the 24th day of February, and so anxious was his mind on the subject, that he went to the Secretary's table to examine whether particular appropriations were in the bill. He found

none.

[JAN. 12, 1836.

The Committee on Finance reported a series of amendments to the bill, in no case diminishing appropriations, in some cases increasing them, and in some instances making entirely new appropriations. All the gentlemen of the Senate with whom he had familiar conversations, would remember his frequent expression of anxiety on the subject of this bill. It was sent back by the other House with agreements and disagreements to the Senate's amendments. He did not now recollect to which. After five o'clock in the evening of the 3d of March, this bill was reported to the Senate. They had joint conferences with the different Departments on those new appropriations, and came to the conclusion to retain all the new appropriations. An amendment containing an appropriation of $3,000,000, to be used under the direction of the President of the United States, provided such expense was necessary to the defence of the country, was in it after it was returned from the House of Representatives. The objection to the appropriation was not on account of any distrust to the President. No, sir, said he, it was merely as to the constitutionality of it. The Senate disagreed to the amendment of the House; the House insisted, and refused to recede. He alluded to a practice of changing the time of the clock on the last night of the session, and not relying upon it, he took out his watch and ascertained by it, if it did not deceive him, that the committee of conference on the part of the Senate went out before eleven o'clock; and, said he, here we sat until twelve o'clock at night, waiting for their report. They sent a messenger to keep the House in mind of the appropriation bill. For what reason the House did not take up the report of the committee of conference, it would be improper, indecent, and disorderly, in him to state. He had stated the facts, and every member who was present would remember them as stated.

Mr. PRESTON said the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. LEIGH] had given a very clear view of the facts. He (Mr. P.) did not feel called upon to explain, because he had voted for the rejection of a bill containing an undefined appropriation of $3,000,000. It was enough for him to know that it was an unconstitutional and indefinite appropriation, and dangerous to be put into the hands of the Executive. He would go further. If, instead of these vague rumors about the movements of the French fleet, the whole frontier had been laid in ruins, he would have voted against it. How was it that this appropriation had been sprung upon them? They were not called upon for it by the proper department, and he did not feel called upon without the department, whose business it was to make the recommendations requiring such appropriations. He was not then disposed to take the responsibility for what belonged to the proper departments, and he was not now disposed to do it. Under the better opportunities of the Executive to acquire information, it was the duty of the department to keep the Senate informed of the necessity and object of appropriations, and until that was done, the Senate was not bound to act. The honorable Senator from Kentucky [Mr. CLAY] had introduced a resolution for the distribution of the surplus revenue, arising from the sales of the public lands, and his colleague, the honorable gentleman from South Carolina, had reported a bill for the appropriation of the balance of the surplus revenue, for purposes that were defined. But, in this case, the appropriation is first made, and then the Executive is to be asked how much is necessary. You appropriate thirty millions, and the Executive says five millions is all that is wanted, what becomes of the rest? From these vague rumors, the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. BENTON] had taken occasion to remark that he desired the exterior of the United States put into a state of defence.

JAN. 13, 1836.]

In all this he concurred. Every Senator had concurred in general appropriations to put the navy and army in a state of defence. This undefined appropriation was not the only exception. The gentleman from Missouri [Mr. BENTON] had said this appropriation was intended to operate as a permanent defence. He would ask, for what purpose was this French fleet coming on our coast? Had he said for what purpose were they coming? Why were the breezes bringing this great armament? If they were coming in hostile array, why are we (said Mr. P.) kept in the dark by the President of the United States? They had been looking, anxiously looking, for a message from the President, whether these newspaper rumors respecting this fleet of

observation were true.

The President ought to know-it was his duty to know. He trusted, however, the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. BENTON] had superseded the functions of the President. Could it be for the purpose of overawing them out of their votes that this alarm had been raised? France, our former ally, he believed, did not doubt our valor. He believed she had a due respect for us. Why, sir, said Mr. P., do they think that the approximation of a fleet of France can alarm us into a vote? No, sir, said he, we would cover ourselves with a panoply for our mutual defence. The President of the United States, in his message, had informed them that he had ordered the representative of this country in France (Mr. Barton) to receive the money due to us, or ask for his passports to return to the United States. We were not now represented in either England or France. He did not say, however, that we were cut off from all intercourse in England as in France.

The President had recommended making reprisals, if France refused payment. France had refused, but the remedy was not pursued. It may be, said he, that this fleet is merely coming to protect the commerce of France. If the President of the United States, at the last session of Congress, had suggested the necessity of making this appropriation, we would have poured out the treasury; we would have filled his hands for all necessary purposes. There was one hundred thousand dollars appropriated that had not been called for. He did not know whether he was permitted to go any further and say to what extent any of the departments were disposed to go in this matter. At the opening of this session the President in his message entered into a detail of our affairs with France, and promised us, on the return of Mr. Barton, a special message. Mr. Barton had returned, if they were to rely upon the same source of intelligence upon which the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. BENTON] had relied. We are asked, why has the Senate not done its duty? I ask, said Mr. P., why the President has not done his duty? The Senator from Missouri [Mr. BENTON] had preferred a general indictment against the Senate before the people of the United States. It was strange the gentleman should ask the departments for calculations to enable us to know how much was necessary to appropriate, when the information was not given to us when we rejected the undefined appropriations.

I rejoice, said Mr. P., that the gentleman has said even to my fears there will be no French war. France was not going to squabble with America on a little point of honor, that might do for duellists to quarrel about, but not for nations.

There was no reason why blood should be poured out like water in righting this point of honor. If this matter was placed on its proper basis, his hopes would be lit up into a blaze of confidence. Who were the plaintiffs in this case? Not France. We are the plaintiffs. France is the defendant. If a ca. sa. should issue, it would be to levy upon the goods and chattels of France, or, in casę VOL. XII.-8

[SENATE.

of her insolvency, to levy on the body of Louis Philippe. No, sir, said he, we shall have no war with France. I can imagine a state of things, said Mr. P., calculated to make a war inevitable.

If the Senate had wandered so far from its duties as had been intimated, and a war was to be waged with the Senate, that might make a war with France. But God forbid that such a state of things should exist. If a war of partnership was to be waged, he deplored the consequences. He hoped no measures would be adopted here that would lead to a war with France.

If the real cause of apprehensions should occur, he hoped for unanimity. Whether the resolution of the honorable gentleman from Missouri, [Mr. BENTON,] the propositions of the honorable gentleman from Kentucky, [Mr. CLAY, ] or from his colleague, [Mr. CALHOUN,] should be taken up first, he would leave to be settled between them.

Mr. CLAYTON was surprised at the suggestion of an idea that the American Senate was not disposed to make the necessary preparations for the defence of the country; that they had endeavored to prevent the passage of a bill, the object of which was to make provision for large appropriations for our defence. The Senator from Missouri had gone into a liberal attack of the Senate. He (Mr. C.) was not disposed to say any thing further of the events of the last night of the session. He took occasion to say there were other matters in connexion with this appropriation. Before any department or any friend of the administration had named an appropriation for defence, he made the motion to appropriate five hundred thousand dollars. It was on his motion that the Committee on Military Affairs made the appropria tion to increase the fortifications. Actuated by the very same motives which induced him to move that appropriation, he had moved an additional appropriation to Fort Delaware. The motion was to increase the seventyfive thousand to one hundred and fifty thousand, and elicited a protracted debate. The next question was, whether, in the general bill, five hundred thousand dollars should be appropriated. He recollected the honorable chairman of the Committee on Finance told them there was an amendment before that committee of similar tenor. As chairman of the Committee on Military Affairs, he felt disinclined to give it up. The amendment fell on the single ground, by one vote, that the Committee on Finance had before it the identical proposition made by the Committee on Military Affairs. He appealed to the country whether, under those circumstances, they were to be arraigned before the people of the country on a charge of a want of patriotism. He had always felt deeply affected when those general remarks were made impugning the motives of patriotism of the Senators. He was willing to go as far as he who goes farthest in making appropriations for the national protection. Nay, he would be in advance of the administration.

On motion of Mr. EWING, and without taking the question on the resolution, The Senate adjourned.

WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 13.

SUSPENSION OF INDIAN HOSTILITIES. Mr. WEBSTER asked the unanimous consent of the Senate to take up the bill making appropriations for suppressing hostilities with the Seminole Indians. There being no objection made, the bill was taken up, and read a third time, and passed.

SUFFERERS BY FIRE IN NEW YORK. Mr. WRIGHT moved the Senate to proceed to the

SENATE.]

[JAN. 13, 1836.

Mr. CALHOUN moved to strike out from the bill the second section. He was oppoesd to all that did not pro vide for the actual sufferers. He was opposed to becoming the general ensurers for all losses, whether of an agricultural, manufacturing, or commercial community. Mr. WRIGHT held in his hand a statement, showing the amount of bonds for duties to be three millions six hundred thousand dollars. Mr. W. said, if the second section should be stricken out, relief would then be extended to only a portion of the sufferers.

He

The

Mr. CLAY did not like either of the sections, and perhaps it was not possible to prepare one to meet the views of all the other gentlemen of the Senate. had, however, prepared two sections to meet his views, and wished the Senator from South Carolina [Mr. CALHOUN] to withdraw his amendment for the present, in order that he might introduce them. He objected to the bill, as reported, on account of the inequality of its operation. The second section of the bill, as reported, provided for cases where no loss had been incurred by the persons who were to have the benefits of it. mercantile community of New York were exceedingly sensitive, and the distinction taken by the gentleman from New York [Mr. WRIGHT] was entirely too refined. It was an old saying, that there was no friendship in trade. By their reported bill, relief was extended to all persons who had imported goods in the port of New York. Suppose (said Mr. C.) there are other persons who import in New York, not citizens of that place, persons from Philadelphia, were they to be excluded from the benefits of the provisions of the bill? It is said (continued Mr. C.) that the Government may give relief to this man or to that man, as the case may seem to require. It was the want of universality in the bill that made it objectionable to him. He did not consider this like the case of a poor debtor, whose debt the Government were likely to lose. Here Mr. C. submitted his amendments, as follows:

1. That, in all cases where merchandise was consumed by fire in the city of New York on the 16th and 17th of December, 1835, the duties paid or accruing thereon shall be refunded or remitted, under such rules and regulations, in regard to evidence, as the Secretary of the Treasury may prescribe; provided that the total amount to be allowed under the act shall not exceed

dollars. And if the amount of the aforesaid duties shall be ascertained to exceed that sum, it shall be divided between the sufferers ratably, in proportion to their respective losses.

2. That in all cases of bonds taken prior to the aforesaid fire, for duties on merchandise imported into the port of New York, by persons who have suffered loss by the said fire, in the destruction of their buildings or effects, to the amount of their respective bonds, it shall be lawful, under such rules and regulations as may be prescribed by the Secretary of the Treasury, to extend the time of payment of the aforesaid bonds to three, four, and five years, in equal instalments, with the assent of the securities, or to take new bonds, with sufficient surety or sureties; provided that no such indulgence shall be given in the case of any bond which had fallen due before the fire aforesaid.

Which being read, he resumed:

If we had a Government warehouse system introduced, and the Government had lost the goods, there would be no doubt of the liability and power. The amendment he had offered would employ the vigilance of the merchants who had actually sustained losses, to prevent frauds upon the munificence of the GovernThey would know, through the entries and clerks in the custom-house, and the regulations of the

ment.

consume the sum appropriated for their benefit. There were cases which the bill might not meet; but, in a general provision of this kind, it was not to be expected that every case would be provided for.

Mr. WRIGHT said he has compelled to trouble the Senate with a very few remarks, and he found himself very delicately situated, if he correctly understood the state of the question. To make himself sure upon that point, he would ask if he was right in supposing that the honorable Senator from South Carolina [Mr. CALHOUN] had withdrawn his motion to strike out the second section of the bill. [Mr. CALHOUN signified that be had withdrawn the motion.] Mr. W. continued. He said the question was then upon the amendment offered by the honorable Senator from Kentucky, [Mr. CLAY,] which was virtually to remit the duty upon the goods burned. This was part of the relief prayed for by the citizens of New York, in the memorial in their behalf which had been presented to the Senate; but a relief separate and distinct from that provided for in the bill under discussion. This bill merely provided for forbearance of the debts due to the Government for duties, in consequence of the calamitous fire. Another bill, he felt authorized to say, would be presented, or would come from the other branch of Congress, proposing a remission or refunding of the duties upon the burned goods, and the delicacy of the situation of himself and his colleague arose from the fact that, if they should vote against the amendment now proposed, providing for this relief, they would be subject to the misrepresentation and misconstruction of voting against that part of the relief prayed for by their constituents; while, if they voted for the amendment, they necessarily, by its adoption, denied what he considered the more general, and, so far as that whole great commercial community was concerned, more important relief of a forbearance of payment of the outstanding duty bonds.

He

In this position, he knew but one course; and that was to pursue singly the object proposed by the bill before the Senate, and to postpone to some future occasion the remaining wishes of the sufferers. would say, however, that neither himself nor his colleague had made up their minds that the relief proposed by the amendment could not be properly extended, and their votes against the amendment must be understood merely to indicate that they were unwilling to substitute that measure of relief for the one provided for in the bill, and not that they were unwilling to grant both; not that they were opposed to the principle of the amendment, but that they could not consent to adopt it at the expense of sacrificing another measure of relief equally important, and, in their judgment, more clear from objection.

Mr. W. said he was not disposed to disguise or deny that the bill before the Senate granted to the merchants of New York the use, without interest, of an amount of capital equal to the amount of bonds the payment of which was forborne, and for a time equal to that forbearance. This he understood to be the object of the bill. An immense amount of the capital of that commercial city had been annihilated by the fire. Property of the value of between seventeen and eighteen million had been entirely destroyed in the period of a few hours, and he had supposed the object of the bill was, by a forbearance of payment upon the duty bonds, to give to the city the temporary use of that portion of the capital thus destroyed. In that case, but about one fifth of the loss would be thus supplied, and that would be done without asking the Government to give one cent beyond the mere use of this portion of its dues for a very short period. The whole amount of bonds to be extended by

the bill exceeded by a very trifle $3,600,000, and a very large portion, more than two thirds of the whole amount, were only to be forborne for six, nine, and twelve months.

He asked if this small measure of relief was not due to the occasion. Every man within the hearing of his voice could appreciate the condition of such a community under such a loss of property. Every one must see that the business of that city could not go on without material and substantial relief, or without immense changes among the business men. Every one must feel that hundreds upon hundreds of the most respectable and enterprising of the merchants of the city must be entirely ruined, unless some relief, speedy and efficient, shall be afforded.

Still, Mr. W. said, he announced to the Senate with the most heart-felt and proud gratification, that, as yet, not a single mercantile failure had been the consequence of this unexampled calamity. Why, he would ask, was be able to state this singular and cheering fact? Because every effort of enterprise and faithfulness had been brought into action, while hope, confident hope--the last support which leaves the sinking and despairing man--had hung upon the prompt and favorable action of Congress, of the State Legislature, and of the corporate authorities of the city, to sustain those exertions until the future operations of trade might enable the worthy sufferers so far to retrieve their losses as to be enabled to pay their debts, not only to their neighbors, but to the Government; and thus save the city from a scene of wide-spread and fatal bankruptcy, the extent of which, if ever it commences, no human foresight can

measure.

What, then, (said Mr. W.,) is asked by this bill in furtherance of an object so important to that great com. mercial emporium, to its neighboring commercial cities, indeed, to the whole country? A mere forbearance of payment upon debts due to the Government, to the amount of three millions and a half of dollars, and upon more than two thirds of that sum for a very limited period: six, nine, and twelve months. Might he not, then, hope that opposition would be withdrawn, and that this extension of credit would be given without further delay.

He felt bound to repeat to the honorable Senator from Kentucky, [Mr. CLAY,] and to the honorable gentleman from South Carolina, [Mr. CALHOUN,] that propositions, embracing precisely the principles contained in the amendment proposed by the former gentleman as a substitute for this bill, will be laid before Congress. He would further say that the question of a remission or refunding of the duties upon burned goods had been one of doubt and difficulty. It had, to a greater or less extent, occupied the attention of Congress from the commencement of the Government to the present time; and although he could not say that a uniformity of action would be found upon it, he believed he was right in the assertion that no remission had taken place upon such an application for many years now last past. He regarded that proposition of relief, therefore, as one of doubtful result, and certainly calculated to excite long debate, and to occupy much time, if ultimately successful. The present measure was not of that character, but was the one which had been uniformly adopted in such cases; and for that reason had been put forward now, under the hope that it would not only meet the approbation of Congress, but its prompt adoption.

Any objection, however, to the second section of the bill, of this character, might be easily removed by an amendment which should make that section general, and applicable to all the outstanding duty bonds taken at all the ports of the country. It was not for him to object to such an amendment. The bill, in that shape,

[SENATE.

would be made more acceptable to his suffering constituents, because relief to any commercial town in the country would consequently relieve the suffering city, whose interests it was his duty to represent in this debate. The present state of the national treasury would permit the extension of time upon the existing duty bonds, without injury to the fiscal operations of the Government, and if any member of the Senate would propose such an amendment to the second section of the bill, he should most cheerfully assent to it. He had not felt, and the committee from New York representing the interests of its citizens had not felt, at liberty to ask that the bill should be extended beyond the suffering port; but he could not be mistaken in saying that, if made general, it would be even more acceptable, and more beneficial to that city than in its present shape.

But, Mr. W. said, the adoption of the amendment proposed by the honorable Senator from Kentucky [Mr. CLAY] as a substitute for this bill, would not afford the relief required. He feared the honorable Senator himself was not aware of the practical effect of the proposition. What did he suppose would be the extent of the relief it would afford? He (Mr. W.) was able to say, from the information given to him by the intelligent gentlemen who composed the committee from New York, that it could not exceed a million and a half of dollars; that the whole amount of duties to be remitted or refunded upon burned goods, in case that measure should be adopted according to the prayer of the memorial, could not greatly exceed that sum. This would furnish great, and, in many instances, effectual relief to the immediate sufferers by the fire; but it would be, more properly speaking, individual than general; it would act more emphatically upon individuals than upon that great trading and commercial community; it would distribute eventually, and when the extent of the claims could be ascertained, a large sum of money among the actual sufferers who were importers and dealers in dutiable goods, and in that sense was a most desirable measure of relief. The bill before the Senate, however, had a larger scope, and proposed to accomplish a more general object. It proposed to relieve, so far as forbearance of payment could do it, the whole city; it was not opposed to the measure of relief provided for by the amendment, but independent of it; it was more speedy in its influence, and consequently would be more instantly beneficial.

Mr. W. said it was not by any thing we could give that he expected business in that great commercial emporium would be continued without fatal interruption; it had become embarrassed by an unprecedented destruction of property, sweeping from thousands of individuals, as it were, instantly, the means of paying their debts and discharging their obligations of a pecuniary character. The Government was a creditor to more than three and a half millions of dollars. We have our hand upon these oppressed merchants, and unless we raise it, by an extension of time for the payment of this great sum of money; if we enforce payment in this hour of their affliction, hope must desert them, and mercantile failures must commence, the extent of which no human foresight can measure. Will not the Senate, then, consent to the forbearance proposed by this bill, and leave for future consideration the relief provided for in the amendment?

Time, Mr. W. said, was every thing to the suffering merchants. He had been informed, by the respectable committee who were here to represent their interests, that something like $40,000 in amount of these bonds were falling due daily; while a provision in the revenue laws positively prohibits the entering of goods by, and the reception of new bonds from, a merchant whose former bond is due and unpaid in the hands of the col