« 上一頁繼續 »
day, for the purpose of taking up and acting on the article of impeachment. Mr. WHITTLESEY said, (this day being set apart by themselves for considering private bills,) he, as the member charged with attending to this class of business, would say, that it was perhaps inexpedient to press the consideration of many more of the numerous private bills yet on the docket, ause, if they were passed, and sent to the Senate, and not acted on there, they would be in a worse situation than if they remained as they are, for the House to take them up at the next session. He should not, therefore, oppose the motion for postponement. The House then went into Committee of the Whole, Mr. STERIgERE in the chair, and took up the article of impeachment reported by the select committee against Judge Peck. Some verbal amendments being made to the article, on motion of Mr. BUCHANAN, The committee rose, and reported the article to the House, and by the House it was agreed to without objection. Mr. BUCHANAN then moved that the House proceed now to the appointment of five managers, to conduct the impeachment on the part of the House of Representatives. r. WILLIAMS inquired how many managers were inted in the case of Judge Chase. r. BUCHANAN replied that seven managers were appointed on that occasion, but it was thought that five were as many as were necessary for the present case. Mr. B.'s motion being agreed to, The House proceeded to the appointment of five managers, by ballot, when the following gentlemen received a majority of votes, and were appointed, viz. JAMES BUCHANAN, of Pennsylvania. HENRY R. STORRS, of New York. GEORGE McDUFFIE, of South Carolina. AMBROSE SPENCER, of New York. CHARLES WICKLIFFE, of Kentucky. -The first four were appointed on the first ballot. Four ballots took place before a fifth manager was chosen, in all of which till the last the votes were pretty much divided between Mr. WickLIFFE and Mr. DoDDRIDGE, besides whom a large number of members received more or less votes. On motion of Mr. BUCHANAN, it was Resolved, That the article agreed to by this House, to be exhibited, in the name of themselves and of all the people of the United States, against James H. Peck, in maintenance of their impeachment against him for high misdemeanors in office, be carried to the Senate by the managers appointed to conduct said impeachment. 1 On motion of Mr. BUCHANAN, it was Resolved, That a message be sent to the Senate, to inform them that this House have appointed managers to conduct the impeachment against James H. Peck, judge of the district court of the United States for the district of Missouri, and have directed the said managers to carry to the Senate the article agreed upon by this House, to be exhibited in maintenance of their impeachment against the said James H. Peck, and that the Clerk of this House do go with said message.
Monday, MAY 3, 1830.
Mr. A. SPENCER, from the Committee on Agriculture, reported the following resolution:
Resolved. That ten thousand copies of the Manual on the growth and manufacture of Silk in other countries, transmitted to this House by the Secretary of the Treasury on the fifth day of February, 1828, be printed for the use of this House, '5.4
Mr. POLK moved to lay the resolution on the table, but the motion was negatived-nays 80.
Mr. McDUFFIE opposed the resolution; having understood that the work proposed to be reprinted possessed no value. The instructions were too complex for unlettered people, and experience proved that it was of no use to them. Persons in his part of the country, who made many pounds of silk every year, could derive no benefit from this book. Mr. CAMBRELENG concurred in the opinion that the book was not worth printing. A person engaged in preparing a work upon the same subject, and who understood it well, informed him that the manual was worthless. Let the committee take all the works on this subject, and comile one containing the best of each. Several works have en since issued, that are superior to the one in question. Mr. BATES, of Massachusetts, said, here was experience against experience. It was alleged by gentlemen that practical, intelligent persons, professing to be able to give an account of the subject themselves, had denounced the work in question as worthless. Now, he had in his district some men of some little intelligence, who were engaged in the silk culture, who said the work was a very valuable acquisition. He had received letter on letter for a copy of the work, but not one was to be had. The book was valuable, because it gave an account of the best modes of cultivating silk in countries where it had been cultivated for centuries. As he had no doubt of the value of the work, and as it was not voluminous, he hoped the House would have it disseminated, without regarding the pittauce it would cost. Mr. WAYNE would not undertake to pronounce on the merits of the work, but he knew that many of the people whom he represented were very desirous to obtain it. In the early settlement of Georgia, the object of many was the growth of silk, and it was commenced and tried for some time. Why was it discontinued From one of two causes: Either by being superseded in value by other pursuits, or being discouraged by the want of information. Many, however, continued the culture, and some have prosecuted it for forty years, who residing on lands too arid for other cultivation, have gone on in the original pursuit; the culture has not been extended because of the want of suitable information to instruct them in it. He wished, therefore, that the information contained in the work in question should go forth for the benefit of those who needed it. He referred to societies formed or forming in Georgia, for the cultivation of silk, to whom the information would be particularly useful and acceptable. Mr. SPENCER, of New York, rose to make some remarks, but the expiration of the hour arrested the debate.:
Mr. MALLARY moved to postpone the consideration of the bill relative to the Tennessee lands until Thursday next. Mr. CROCKETT expressed a hope that the bill would not be postponed. He would rather the bill were taken up and rejected, than that it should be thus sported with, as this would be the third time it had been postponed. He stated a number of facts and urged several reasons against its further postponement. The motion to postpone was negatived: yeas, 62– nays, 81. The bill was then taken up. An amendment offered by Mr. BARRINGER was accepted by Mr. CROCKETT; which was concurred in. The question being then on the engrossment of the bill, Mr. GRENNELL spoke at considerable length in oppo. sition to the bill. Mr. CROCKETT earnestly defended the bill, and was replied to by Mr. VINTON. Mr. CHILTON demanded the previous question; which being seconded, Mr. WINTON moved to lay the bill on the table, and asked for the yeas and nays on the question; which were ordered. *". ...,
The question was then taken on laying the bill on the table, and decided in the negative : yeas, 75—nays, 86. The House then ordered the main question to be now
ut. p Mr. WILLIAMS asked for the yeas and nays on the engrossment of the bill; which were ordered. o The question was then taken on the engrossment of the bill, and decided in the negative: yeas, 69—nays, 90. The bill was theresore rejected.
The House then proceeded to consider the bill in alteration of the various acts imposing duties on imports. Mr. BLAIR, of South Carolina, said, that, as any proceeding here, connected with the tariff, must be highly interesting to his constituents, and as the bill was calculated to render the system still more, odious and oppressive, he imagined that no apology would be thought necessary for the few observations he designed to make. As I do not expect, [said Mr. B.] to be troublesome to this House, either now or hereafter, by long or frequent speeches, I hope I skall be heard with attention; and, sir, as the restrictive system bears with peculiar severity on the people I have the honor to represent, I presume I may be allowed to speak of the tariff, and its effects generally. I find, sir, that duties for revenue were laid on at various times, from the commencement of our Government until the year 1812; and although these duties did, in fact, operate as bounties on the home manufacture, we, of the South, neither objected to, nor resisted them, because they were thought necessary to meet the exigencies of Government. Duties for the avowed protection of mauufactures were first laid on in 1816, and have been increased by almost every subsequent Congress, until they have at length, in 1824 and 1828, reached a magnitude well calculated to alarm every true friend to the welfare, peace, and harmony of our o As regards the unconstitutionality of what is called “protecting duties,” I shall say but little; it has been so often and so clearly pointed out, not only by the ablest men in this House, but likewise by the remonstrances of South Carolina, and particularly by the one presented by her Senators at the last session of Congress, that I deem it useless to say much on that point. It is acknowledged, on all sides, that the constitution gives no express authority to Congress to impose a tariff for any other purpose than that of revenue. But the friends of the restrictive system make out, or attempt to make out, the powers by implication, by the most subtile, refined, and far-fetched construction. They pursue a course of or. metaphysical reasoning, until they reason themselves not only out of reason and common sense, but out of the constitution to boot. Some of the advocates of high protecting duties pretend to derive their authority from that clause of the constitution which speaks of “the common defence and general welfare.” The result of their legislation is a miserably bad comment upon their doctrine; their provision for the common defence is likely to terminate, and will eventually terminate, in a great diminution of the public revenue cripple and deteriorate the resources of our navy; and their fatherly attention to the “general welfare” will end in universal bankruptcy, misery, and distress. This, at least, will be the result as regards one portion of the United States—I mean the South Atlantic portion. But again, the authority for this inquitious system, this “rider on the pale horse (spoken of in the apocalypse,) that brings all hell after it,” is drawn by others from the power to “regulate commerce with foreign nations.” Yes, sir, and they have regulated it with a vengeance 1 They have indeed acted the part of a cool-hearted, unfeeling step-mother towards it; or, like the foolish nurse, have al
most killed the child with kindness—and this bill, if adopted, would absolutely strangle it to death. I will only say Åo. on this point, if the people, the rightful father of commerce, ever wish it to thrive, they must release it from its nurse, and let it shift for itself. Sir, I think, if a plain and rational construction of the constitution is to prevail—if, in a word, the constitution is not intended as a mere license for the majority to plun. der and enslave the minority, your system of “protecting duties” has no foundation on which to repose. Let us not be told that the Supreme Court, that creature of a creature, must ultimately decide this great question. This would be a mockery, an absolute mockery. It is well known that the judges of that court, according to their own decisions, either cannot, or will not, look into the mo, tives and intentions of Congress. In the language of the bar, they “cannot travel out of the record"—they regard only the title of the act; and the tariff laws of 1824 and 1828 purport to be revenue laws. You refused to call them by their right name. Any hope, therefore, that that tribunal would redress our grievances, would be utterly vain and idle. Much stress has been laid on the recent opinions of Mr. Madison, by some of the friends of the present tariff. With all due respect for that distinguished man, I must be ak lowed to say, that, in his late celebrated letter to Mr. Ca bell, he has used language, and presented views, very dis ferent from those he set forth in various numbers of the Federalist. I had provided myself with that book, in or der to read from it various extracts, with the view of con: trasting his former with his recent opinions. But this would be a painful task, and I decline it. I believe every gentleman who hears me, will acknowledge that it would be no difficult matter to quote Mr. Madison against him. self, in various instances. And, sir, if high names are to form a criterion for determining our constitutional rights, we could array against the Mr. Madison of the present day, the names of Jefferson, Pinckney, King, and many others equally distinguished with himself. But, sir, I protest against pinning our political faith to the sleeve of any great man. Whenever the people of the respective States give o the right of interpreting the constitution for themselves, they will be no longer worthy of it. They will be fit subjects for an Asiatic despotism. Besides, sir, we find that our great political sages are not altogo. ther infallible or consistent on topics of this kind. Mr. Madison is not alone in his inconsistency. Mr. Monroe, a few years ago, turned a complete political somerset on the Cumberland road. Having a high regard for Mr. Mor roe's amiable personal character, and the goodness of his heart, and the circumstance to which I allude being unt versally understood, I forbear to comment upon it. All this, however, goes to show the folly and the impropriety of allowing our greatest and best men to interpret and do termine our constitutional rights by construction. We must judge for ourselves; and we must judge from the letter of that noble instrument, and its irresistible inferences, These, sir, are some of my views of our great federal charter. I may not have stated them with the most formal
with the technicalities of the courts. I cannot intrench myself behind all the enormous pile of books and preparation, of the bar. And, perhaps, I have as little inclina. tion as capacity for the task—all I can do, is to feel like? man, and endeavor to speak like a Carolinian—and feel. ing thus, sir, I must say that South Carolina, and the south: ern States generally, have never known or felt the Federal Government but by its burdens, while the North has known it only by its blessings. Where are all your great naval establishments, navy yards, and magazines kept Nearly all to the North. In what direction do the offices and appointments of the Federal Government go i Moss,
ly to the North. And where is all that vast amount of
accuracy, because I am no lawyer—I cannot arm myself
treasure collected in the South expended ? And where is the patronage of the Goverement principally bestowed; All in the North and the West. The South, and especially South Carolina, has “no share in the crop.” Sir, she desires none—she only asks you to let her alone. She wants nothing from you; but is willing to give you all that her compact with you fairly entitles you to demand. No State in the Uniou ever exhibited greater patriotism, or showed a more absolute devotion to the federal compact, than South Carolina. In the war of independence, she had more than her proportionate share of suffering. She never failed to contribute her full share, both of blood and treasure, to the support of the good cause. And I am proud to say, she was not deficient in head or in hand—in the council or in the field; but in both those departments her high character was ably sustained by her Rutledges, her Pinckneys, her Moultries, her Marions, and her Sumpters. * Well, what was her conduct in the late war . She not only contributed her full share of the means necessary to your defence, but, when it became necessary for you to defend her against the common enemy, as you were bound to do, you acknowledged you were unable to do so. Your resources were exhausted, or employed elsewhere. At your request and promise of remuneration, she used her own purse; she expended her own money, in doing that which, of right, you ought to have done. But, when she came to apply for your boasted remuneration, it was not refused in direct terms, to be sure; but such unknown, complex, and fretful rules of evidence were established in your departments, that few of her claims could be brought within their requisitions; and South Carolina has not, even yet, been reimbursed her money. But, sir, under similar circumstances, she would do the same thing over again. Nor was she deficient during the late war either in talent or in nerve. Witness her Croghan and Laval, her Lowndes, her Cheves, and Calhoun—the latter of whom was justly regarded as one of the master spirits of the storm. It has been said in another place, and perhaps it may be said here, that in him was found one of the first and ablest champions of the system, now so much reprobated by his own State. If this be true, it proceeded, no doubt, from an over-generous feeling, common to the South. Although the South, and especially South Carolina, had suffered long and severely through the embargo, the non-intercourse system, and the war that succeeded; and although during all this time the northern manufacturers were reaping a rich harvest, yet at the close of that war our staple article was seen selling at more than three times its present price. The value of our lands and negroes was proportionably enhanced, and wealth teemed in upon us from every quarter. This could not escape the avidity of the manufacturers. Enlisting our warm sympathies in their behalf, they cried, “give, give;" and the too generous South said, “take, take abundantly.” . But what they at first received very thankfully as a boon, they soon arrogantly demanded as a right; and South Qarolina has borne these in positions until “patience itself is no longer a virtue." Sir, there are but few other States in the Union that would have submitted to the shears of the manufacturers as South Carolina has done. Had old Massachusetts, (a State that I shall always venerate for her early and ardent patriotism, her morality and intelligence,) had she, sir, been affected by your tariff as South Carolina has been, she would long since have taught you to respect her rights and her interests, or she would have taken care of them herself; and, indeed, as it is, some of her leading men had like to have kicked up a confounded dust about the molasses. Well, sir, shall the South, with all her enthusiasm and warm patriotic feeling, be less alive to insult and imposition than the cold regions of the North ; Sir,
whenever she is so, I pray to my God she may become another Hayti!!! Think you, sir, I am disposed to praise Carolina “Pardon me, Cassius, the enemies of Caesar shall say this—then, in a friend, it is cold modesty.” Do not apprehend, sir, that South Carolina wishes to separate from the Union. No State in the confederacy ever has or ever will cherish a more ardent and desperate devotion to the federal compact, provided you do not continue to make it an instrument for robbing her citizens of their hard earnings, and tyrannizing over her rights. No State has ever been more accommodating to the federal interests than South Carolina. She has never been a party in the Supreme Court. In short, she has never been troublesome to you in any way; but she cannot consent to hold the rank of a mere province, and her citizens to be enslaved. They will not become slaves to northern manufacturers, that their negroes may be slaves to them. No, sir, you have no just fears to entertain in relation to South Carolina. She will do every thing, nay, she has done everything that the federal compact, honor, and patriotism require of her; and after this, if the worst must come, why, in God's name let it come !!!. If those who ought to cherish her as an old revolutionary sister and confederate, regardless of their common sufferings and dangers, their joint achievements and their blended glory, still persevere in ungenerous and unhallowed attempts to beggar and enslave her, she will defy you, sir. What! will she again remonstrate Yes, sir, she will remonstrate in terms as vivid as the lightning's flash, and in a voice as loud as heaven's thunder. I will not apologize for using strong language. I speak the language of a sovereign State, whose patient endurance is stretched to its last limits. Under your iniquitous system, she struggles for existence. During last winter twelve months I heard, in her own Legislature, the tale of her enormous wrongs and sufferings. It was familiar to me, and I know it was no fiction; yet it was then portrayed in such glowing, burning words, as harrowed up every feeling of my soul. Yes, sir, I there heard eloquence, and I there saw a temper and a spirit that would have done honor to classic Greece or martial Rome, in their proudest days; and, sir, from what I there saw and heard, I feel warranted in saying that the time is at hand when her rights and her interests, in common with those of the South, must be respected, or she will seek a remedy herself. She was only then restrained from doing so, by a confident belief that the new administration, and the present Congress, would turn a hearing ear to her complaints. She hoped that you would return to correct, constitutional principles—to an honest, economical, impo policy, and this is all she desires. ir, there are two erroneous impressions, against which I wish to guard this House. On the one hand, I entreat you not to imagine that South Carolina, or her representatives, are disposed to menace, or to hold out any thing “in terrorem.” We are neither so vain nor so mad as to think that we could gain our object by attempting to operate on your fears. We would only address ourselves to our patriotism—your justice, and, as we hope, a returning regard for the constitution. But, on the other hand, I conjure you not to believe that she will be restrained from asserting and pursuing her just rights, through any apprehension of her own weakness. I am well aware that the physical as well as the moral energy of the South is very much underrated by a certain set of gentry in this country. But, sir, that very part of our population which some suppose, and, perhaps, hope, would neutralize our strength, would, on the contrary, add to our power. A majority of them would, I am confident, fight by the side of their masters. But, were it otherwise, and were we even weaker than our slanderels represent us, they ought to keep in mind the folly and the danger of driving a high-minded, chivalric 3. to desperation. Frederick the Great had once gained a decisive
battle over the Russians. Couriers were despatched to Berlin with the joyful tidings. But a mere remnant of the Russian army, that Frederick had hemmed in upon the banks of the Oder, and which he would neither take captive nor suffer to retreat, but determined to drive them into the river—this comparative handful of men, I say, under these circumstances, fought with such desperation as soon gave a new aspect to the field of battle, Frederick was totally defeated; and in half an hour after the news of a great victory had been announced at Berlin, a new courier stepped forward on the canvas, bearing a billet with these words: “Let the queen, the royal family, the treasures, and everything that may be found possible, be instantly removed to Magdeburg. All is lost s” Sir, a perseverance in your unjust policy will drive the South to equal desperation. It will “sow dragon's teeth amongst us, that will spring up in armed men.” And who shall set limits to the exertions of a free people contending for their rights But it is hoped there will be no necessity of resorting to extremities. If South Carolina cannot remain in the confederacy on fair, equitable, and constitutional terms; if, finally, she has no alternative but to adopt such measures as may eventuate in her separation from the great American family, or be. come a slave, she is disposed to leave you in peace; and she will leave with you—whatever may be her own destiny—she will leave with you her best wishes for your hap. piness and independence. But it is something worse than folly to imagine that any part of this republic can be completely independent of the rest. If any part can be so, I think it is the South. The North and the West can manufacture our raw material to a certain extent; but they cannot raise it. The South could both raise and manufacture it in abundance. Her bays and her mountains present inexhaustible sources of salt and of iron. Her fertile soil and congenial climate can furnish a redundance of provisions; and, sir, there is nothing she really requires that she cannot furnish from her own soil and resources. We have been tauntingly told to supply our own wants, and to erect manufactories also. Suppose we did; to whom could we sell ? To the northern or western people Surely not—they manufacture for themselves, and have no market but ours, either for their live stock, their provislons, their clothes, their clocks, and other “little notions.” Neither of us could compete with Europeans in a foreign market. Before we can do so, we must wait till all the fertile lands of the West are inhabited, our country overstocked with a starving population. We must wait till labor is as cheap here as in Great Britain; our workmen as skilful as hers; and, finally, we must wait till that noble spirit of the free and independent American is exchanged for the servile, slavish character of the poor, dependent British subject. The very fact that you require protection for your manufacturers here, where you have neither freight, insurance duties, or commissions to pay, is conclusive evidence that you cannot possibly compete with Europeans in a foreign market. Your demand for our raw material, with all the legislation that could be given in your favor, would be comparatively trifling. Great Britain and France could consume the whole, in as much as they manufacture for the whole world. But if we cease to buy their goods, they will cease to buy our produce. I take it to be a po: litical axiom, that commerce depends on the reciprocal exchange of one article for another; and that a country which will produce nothing that will sell abroad can buy nothing abroad. The North and the West are pretty much in this situation. They must get hold of the rice, cotton, and tobacco of the South, in order to use those articles as so many bills of exchange in a foreign market. They are paid freight and commissions on those articles of produce so taken
abroad. In return for which, they bring back goods, wares, and merchandise, on which high duties, freight, and com: missions are exacted. But this principally comes out of the pockets of the southern planters, who produce the at ticles exported, and consume most of those imported. We are, in this manner, subjected to a double imposition, while others bear scarcely any part of the public burdens. Sir, this state of things, alone, would seem intolerable. But the evil does not stophere. The South not only makes up the principal part of the revenue, and furnishes the North with nearly all the carrying trade, but she is taxed with high duties to enable northern manufacturers to com: pete with those of Great Britain. Sir, I feel this imposition much stronger than I can explain it. Perhaps too strongly to be perfectly intelligible. South Carolina is still willing to pay any duties, however heavy, that are necessary for revenue—any that are really necessary for the exigencies of the Government; although at the same time, she is sensible that a very undue propot. tion of that burden will rest on her own people. But how much longer she will go beyond this point may be a very important inquiry. Under all circumstances, do you think it probable wo will continue to purchase our clothing from the North, and our horses, mules, and provisions, from the West, while we are deprived of an advantageous foreign market so our agricultural products? Sir, if we are tame and mean enough to do so, we would not long possess the ability. Sir, I had intended to say much more on this subject; but I have been very handsomely anticipated by my able and honorable colleague [Mr. McDuffie) who preceded me. Much of that which I intended to say, has been said by him; and certainly much better said than it could have been done by me. But there were some plain, unpleasant declara. tions, in relation to the temper and opinions of the South, which I thought ought to be publicly avowed here, and which seemed to have escaped the attention of my worthy colleague. However harsh and grating the sound of those disagreeable truths may have struck upon the ears of some gentlemen in this House, I thought it due to candor—due to the State, which I, in part represent—due to this House, and to myself, to make this emphatical declaration of them. I have, sir, another reason for abridging my remarks at the present moment. The session is, or ought to be, nearly at a close. We have several very important measures yet before us, on which we ought to act, and which must ne: cessarily be discussed. I discover, too, that a great many gentlemen are very anxious to speak on this very subject now under consideration; and I, for one, am disposed to indulge them. Allow me, then, in conclusion, to say, once for all, that the people of South Carolina will consent to wear their own homespun all their lives—they will submit to any privation —nay, they will suffer annihilation—before they will be come slaves or dependents. Mr. DAVIS, of Massachusetts, spoke in favor of the bill, and in reply to the objections which had been made to it. Before he had concluded, he gave way for the purpose; and on motion of Mr. DRAYTON, the bill was passed by.
** TENNESSEE LANDS.
Mr. GRENNELL moved a reconsideration of the vote 9f §. on the third reading of the Tennessee land bill, stating that he did so at the request of the gentleman from Tennessee, [Mr. CRockert] who was willing to acsept the amendment suggested by the gentleman from Qbio, [Mr. VINTon] to place the proceeds of the lands in the national treasury, instead of giving them to the State of Tennessee, as proposed by the bill.
Mr. WILLIAMS was opposed to the reconsideration, and demanded the yeas .# nays on the question.
Mr. CROCKETT expressed an earnest hope that the House would reconsider the bill. He was willing to me. cept the amendment of Mr. VINTON, as he had become convinced that the State had no legal claims to the lands; and his great object was to secure the occupants in their Possession, without regarding whether the purchase mo. ney went into the coffers of the United States or of the
State. He proceeded, at some length, to explain the condition of the occupants, the necessity of granting the relief proposed, and to animadvert on the conduct of North Carolina, and the University of that State, in relation to the land titles in Tennessee. Mr. BELL submitted, at considerable length, his objections to the reconsideration, and his dissent from some of the views of Mr. CRoCKETT. Mr. CARSON and Mr. BARRINGER successively denied and replied to the statements of Mr. C. touching the conduct of North Carolina, and explained and defended that State against the imputations of Mr. C. In reply to a remark made in the course of the debate, respecting the tardiness of North Carolina in coming into the Union, Mr. BARRINGER took occasiou to say, that though that State was the last to come into the Union, she would be the last to go out of it. Mr. CONNER also replied warmly to the allegations of Mr. CRoCKETT, respecting the conduct of North Carolina. Mr. C. JOHNSON, of Tennessee, zealously supported the reconsideration of, and policy of the bill. Mr. McCOY rose to move that the motion be laid on the table, but gave way to Mr. GROCKETT, who replied to the gentleman who opposed his views, and further advocated the bill. Mr. McCOY then, after a few remarks, moved to lay the motion for reconsideration on the table; which motion was carried without a division.
THE TARIFF LAWS.
The House then went again into Committee of the Whole, Mr. Polk in the chair, and resumed the tariff subject.
Mr. DAVIS, of Massachusetts, spoke an hour and a half in continuation, and conclusion of the remarks which he commenced yesterday, in support of the protecting system, and in reply to Mr. McDUFFIE.
o remarks were to the following effect:]
r. D. said, he should make no apology for entering
into a debate which had assumed a most interesting and important character; and should first recall the attention of the committee to the measures immediately before them, as the gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. McDUFFIE] had, in his speech of three days, omitted to notice it. This is necessary, that we may be able to determine whether the amendment, proposed by him, which provides for a general reduction of duties, is the appropriate remedy; or the bill itself, which contains provisións of a very different character.
The bill proposes only to adopt such measures as will carry into effect existing laws, which are now imperfectl executed. Apprehensions being entertained that frauds are perpetrated in the collection of the revenue, the bill nas been reported with a view to their suppression; but
the gentleman, instead of advancing that object, has Vol. VI.-110.
thought proper by his amendment to propose an entire revision and alteration of the revenue laws. I do not complain of this, as gentlemen from the southern portion of the United States seem very solicitous to make this a matter of discussion, though I should have preferred acting on the matters in the bill by themselves, disconnected from the exciting considerations contained in the amendment. I shall then ask the attention of the House to the bill; but, before I resume my seat, I shall also take notice of the leading arguments urged by the gentleman in support of his amendment—for this is due to the source from whence they emanate, as well as the importance of the considerations involved. o The only question deserving notice in the bill is, whether the revenue laws have been evaded, and the Government defrauded to an extent which calls for a remedy... It is my purpose to be very brief on this head, especially as the gentleman from Vermont [Mr. MALLARy] went largely into the facts; and the proofs he laid before us seem not only to be unquestioned, but the gentleman from South Carolina admits that frauds do exist. The first evidence to which I shall invite the attention of the committee, is the President's message, in which we are advised, the frauds are perpetrated to such an extent, that he has felt it a duty he owed to his station to call on
|the legislative branches of the Government for their in
terposition to suppress them. It is reasonable to presume that the President would not invite our attention to 4he subject, unless he was in possession of proof that frauds exist. I believe it is not usual for that officer to transmit to us the evidence on which he makes the statements in his annual message. We consequently do not possess that evidence, but still we ought, in fairness, to presume that he possesses enough to warrant his assertions. But be this as it may, unless I am greatly misinformed, there is proof sufficient in the Treasury Department to satisfy any one who will examine it, that the revenue laws are shamefully violated. But, sir, the proof does not stop here; for we have on our tables another document, (somewhat apocryphal, if all the critics and reviewers have said of it is true,) emanating from the Committee on Commerce; but as the source from whence it comes is not suspected of partiality towards the industry of our country, I may with safety quote it as an authority to prove the violations of the revenue laws. We are told in this report, which purports to be a review of the condition of commerce and navigation, but which is a philippic against the tariff, that frauds to such an enormous extent exist, that, if we follow the statements of the writer out, they will appear incredibly great. We have yet another document, which comes here bearing the names, as I am informed, of about twenty thousand citizens of the city of New York, who allege, in substance, that the regular trade of that city is depressed to a ruinous extent by the united energy of sales at auction and frauds upon the revenue; the sales at auction, by their despatch, being a principal means by which all traces of fraud upon the revenue are obliterated. Their joint cooperation, it is said, bears with the most alarming severity upon all fair and regular trade. I have noticed the memorials of these persons, because they are as free from all suspicion of bias towards the tariff as the Committee on Commerce, being avowedly hostile to the protection of American industry. I hold in my hand one of these memorials, signed by an officer of the custom-house, in which it is said, “the revenue is largely and systematically defrauded.” “The proofs of this alarming truth. are so abundant, that it has long been a settled point among intelligent merchants.” And it is added, that “the officers of the customs in this city, whose experience has been on the largest scale, and who have devoted much attention to this subject, concur in the opinions and facts which we have now stated." The officers of the customs! Yes, our own