Obrazy na stronie
PDF
ePub

32D Cong.....3D Sess.

Mr. BORLAND. I will suggest that that motion is not in order unless there is a quorum pres

ent.

The PRESIDING OFFICER, (Mr. COOPER in the chair.) In the opinion of the Chair the motion is in order.

Mr. HUNTER. I hope my friend from Indiana will not press that motion that we shall adjourn over unti! Monday; for I think we can employ our time here upon nominations and treaties.

Mr. PETTIT. At the request of my friend from Virginia, I withdraw the motion.

Mr. CHASE. I think we have no such business before us as to require us to sit to-morrow, at any rate. All that remains is nominations, which can be dispatched without delay, when they shall be sent in, judging from the unanimity which has prevailed in the consideration of our business thus far.

Mr. HOUSTON. Some new question may spring up.

Mr. CHASE. If we are determined to go through with our business we can do so. All that is before us could be finished to-day, if necessary. But what would be the necessity for that? We know that there are communications yet to be made by the Executive, which we shall not receive until next week, and which prevent our adjourning. We cannot with propriety adjourn until we receive an intimation from the President that he has no further communications of an Executive character to send to us. Why not, then, adjourn over until Monday? I can see no reason why we should not do so; and I therefore renew the motion that when we adjourn it be to meet on Monday

next.

Mr. HUNTER. I will say that if we adjourn to-day to meet on Monday next, the result will be that we shall have to sit all next week, and perhaps the week after. It is very doubtful whether we should have a quorum.

Mr. BADGER. Mr. President, I have been here every day from the beginning to the end of our sitting; but while I am willing to come here, I am not willing to be dragged here upon days when I do not feel inclined to come, and when it is very evident there will be no quorum here.

Mr. HOUSTON. I have not the least disposition in the world to embarrass gentlemen who have different views from my own with regard to this matter. I am perfectly willing to sit here until we get through with every particle of the business before us. I am even willing to listen to the debates that may incidentally grow up on various topics; but I will repeat what I said before, that if we adjourn over until Monday, there will not be a quorum in the body for the transaction of business. I do not care about making sixteen dollars and rendering no service for it; I would much rather be on my way home. It seems to me, Mr. President that we are trifling with our duties here, when we are pretending to be in session, and yet adjourn over two or three days at a time. There is nothing in that which I can see that is very beneficial to the country, or creditable to ourselves. I wish to test the sense of the Senate on this subject; and it gives me great pleasure that there is not a quorum present on this occasion, so that no motion can be entertained except a motion to adjourn.

Special Session-Adjournment Over.

of the whole business of the session so as to adjourn to-morrow, it would afford me very great pleasure. I am exceedingly anxious for adjournment-no one is more so; but gentlemen should remember what is the condition of the public business. We know that the Executive expects during the next week to send in further communications, which will require our action.

Mr. FISH, (in his seat.) How do we know that?

Mr. CHASE. I will inform the gentleman that I have heard it stated by Senators who are presumed to know. I thought it was well known. At all events, Mr. President, this is an Executive session. It is not usual, at sessions of this character, to adjourn until some intimation is received from the Executive that he has no further communication to make. No such intimation is in the possession of any Senator; but, on the contrary, the Executive has intimated his intention of transmitting further communications to us. If, then, there is business which will require us to be here next week, why refuse to adjourn over? Shall we expedite the public business by coming here? I think not. We cannot certainly transact all the public business that is before us in two days; for we have these nominations yet to come. We then accomplish nothing by coming here, in the way of expediting the public business, but we merely embarrass those Senators who have engagements for their constituents at the other end of the avenue, and we shall also embarrass those Senators who, in consequence of the character of the day, may not wish to attend here to-morrow. Under these circumstances, I hope the honorable Senator from Texas will withdraw all opposition to adjourning over. I would go as far as he would to expedite the business of the Senate and to bring about an early adjournment; but I cannot see that our meeting here to-morrow would tend, in the slightest degree, to produce that result. The gentleman says we shall not have a quorum if we adjourn over; but, sir, I cannot believe that any Senator would absent himself, while the public business requires his presence here, without some good reason.

Mr. HOUSTON. I am sorry, Mr. President, that I cannot agree with what my friend has said in relation to the transaction of business at the Departments. If the object is to aid the President in making his nominations, or to aid the Departments, we ought to sit here day and night, so as to give them an opportunity to do something. If the Senate adjourns over they will not be able to do a single thing; and it is in mercy to them that I want to sit. It would be better if we should sit day and night, because that would relieve them in some degree, from importunity, and give them a chance to do something. I want to give them a little rest, so as to enable them to come to some conclusion; but if Senators are bent on this thingif it is the general wish that the Senate shall be turned loose upon the Departments to-morrow-I do not know as it will avail much for me to oppose it. Perhaps they would better have one day than take to-morrow and Saturday both, and I am somewhat inclined to yield to the suggestion of the Senator from Ohio, and consent to the Senate's adjourning over till Saturday; and then, if any gentlemen wish to keep Good Friday, they can have an opportunity. I believe I will not object to that, but I cannot give them more than one day.

Mr. CHASE. I will modify my motion, then, so as to adjourn until Saturday instead of Monday.

Mr. BRIGHT. Mr. President, it is manifest to me that it would expedite business to adjourn over until Saturday. The suggestion is made that we shall have no quorum until some business is transacted at the other end of the avenue. Why have we no quorum? It is because gentlemen feel Mr. MASON. Mr. President, I would agree compelled to go to the other end of the avenue to to this arrangement which the Senator proposes, attend to important business. If the Senate should if I were not convinced from our experience yesadjourn over, we can have an opportunity to-mor-terday and to-day that we shall not be able to get row to attend to the pressing business which has accumulated upon our hands, and thus we could enable the Executive to prepare business for us to dispose of here on Saturday. I think that for this reason it would really be a saving of time if we should adjourn from now until Saturday at twelve o'clock.

Mr. CHASE. I wish to say, in relation to the remarks which have fallen from the Senator from Texas, [Mr. HOUSTON,] that no one is more ready than I am to sit here and dispatch the business with which we are intrusted. If we could dispose

through the public business unless we sit from day to day. The business which we have before us of an Executive character occupies very little of our time; but it is principally taken up in debating subjects that have run over from the last session; that was the case yesterday, and it has been the case again to-day, and now we are told that we cannot get through until next week. I shall be obliged to resort to all parliamentary means to prevent the motion of the Senator from Ohio from being adopted.

Mr. BUTLER. I will answer for it that we

SENATE.

could get through with all the nominations the President would send to us in this week; and we could let the treaties rest until the next session.

Mr. BADGER. I will suggest to the honorable Senator from Virginia [Mr. MASON] that we shall accomplish nothing in the world by meeting to-morrow. No business can be done. I scarcely ever absent myself from my place; but I shall not be here, for one, and he may depend upon it that there will be no quorum.

The question being then taken on the motion of Mr. CHASE, on a division there were-ayes 20, noes 7; no quorum voting.

Mr. MASON then moved that the Senate adjourn; which was not agreed to.

Mr. PETTIT. I now renew the motion that when the Senate adjourns it be to meet on Monday next at twelve o'clock.

The question being taken, on a division there were-ayes 19, noes 8; no quorum voting.

Mr. HOUSTON. I wish to ask whether it is according to the rules for a member to vote on both sides of the same question?

The PRESIDING OFFICER. No, sir; it is

not.

Mr. HOUSTON. Well, sir, that has been done here; but there did not appear to be a quorum after all, so I will let that pass. I will now move that when we adjourn it be to meet on Saturday; and in making that motion I desire to say that there is no probability that we shall finish the business of this session until the middle of next week, or perhaps later than that; but it seems to me that by Thursday or Friday of next week we shall be able to get through with our business. We are called together by the Executive to attend to important public business, and I trust that Senators will not absent themselves so as to leave us without a quorum.

Mr. BADGER, (in his seat.) I am afraid they

will.

Mr. HOUSTON. Well, sir, I am afraid they will; but at the same time I hope they will not. If we shall be under the necessity of remaining here until the middle of next week, there will be nothing gained by sitting to-morrow, since, for various reasons, some of which have been adverted to, it is obviously the sense of nearly the whole body to adjourn over until Monday. I wish, therefore, to suggest to those Senators who resist this proposition, and who are very desirous of transacting our public business as fast as possible, that it can hardly be expected that we should facilitate the transaction of public business by a policy which leads us to resist the will of nearly the whole body. On this ground I have given way to the extent of allowing them to-morrow, and I hope they will consent to sit on Saturday. I submit that motion, that when we adjourn it be to meet on Saturday.

Mr. PETTIT. I hope we will either adjourn to meet to-morrow or adjourn over until Monday. Let us adjourn over for two days or none.

Mr. MASON. I have resisted until I find it is useless to resist any longer, and although I am still of the opinion that we ought only to adjourn from day to day, I will not resist the will of the Senate to adjourn over until Saturday.

The question being then taken on the motion of Mr. HOUSTON,. on a division there were-ayes 21, noes 2; no quorum voting.

Mr. BUTLER. There are some gentlemen who did not vote, and perhaps if they should all vote there would be a quorum.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. There are not enough to make a quorum.

Mr. BRIGHT. I move that the absentees be sent for. We have been sitting here at work all day, and it is no more than right that those members who are absent should be requested to attend.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. It is moved that the Sergeant-at-Arms be directed to request the attendance of absent members. Are Senators ready for the question on that motion?

Mr. WELLER. I move that the Senate now adjourn.

The motion was not agreed to.

Mr. PETTIT. I withdrew one motion which I made in order to gratify my colleague and other gentlemen, and I hope he will withdraw that. Mr. BRIGHT. Certainly; I withdraw it. Mr. PETTIT. I now move that when the

32D CONG....3D SESS.

Senate adjourns it adjourn to meet on Monday

next.

Mr. WELLER. I call for a division on that question.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. It is perfectly idle to put the question when it is known that there is not a quorum present.

Mr. PETTIT. Perhaps there is a quorum

now.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair will inform the Senator that there is not a quorum; there are but twenty-four Senators in the Chamber.

Mr. PETTIT. There may be others in the

ante-rooms.

Mr. BRIGHT.

I renew the motion that the Sergeant-at-Arms be directed to request the attendance of absent members.

The motion was agreed to.

Mr. SEWARD. I hope the motion of my friend from Indiana, that when we adjourn it be to meet on Monday next, will meet the concurrence of the Senate; and I wish to make an appeal to the honorable Senator from California, [Mr. WELLER,] and to other Senators who resist that motion, by stating that, while I am perfectly willing, and am determined to remain here so long as the public business shall require, if it be all next week, to the sacrifice of all engagements elsewhere, and while I am willing to meet to-morrow and next day, if it be necessary, yet it must be apparent that the Executive business for which we are convened is not in such a situation as to require our attendance here on to-morrow and the day after. We shall have time enough after it shall be prepared and brought before us to act upon it; and as we all have some business connected with our official trusts here which we cannot do at our regular sittings, I think some opportunity should be allowed for that, instead of requiring us to be here at a time when we can do nothing. Under these circumstances, I trust the honorable Senator from California will withdraw his opposition, and allow us to adjourn over.

Mr. BUTLER. So far as regards the termination of this session, it depends entirely on the communications from the President; and whether we meet to-morrow, or on Saturday, or not until Monday, makes not the least difference so far as that is concerned. I think if we should adjourn from now until Monday, we should do just as much business; and if we sit every day, we shall do just as little. Why, then, should gentlemen so strenuously adhere to their determination to force us to adjourn from day to day? The session terminates, as a matter of course, the moment the President sends a message here that he has no further communications to make and we confirm all the nominations. It will not close until then; and in the mean time I think it is the duty of gentlemen to attend here in their seats, and not go to the Departments and stay until about four o'clock, and then come here at the time when we want our dinners, and call for a division on questions in order to defeat the will of the majority of the body.

Mr. WELLER. Mr. President, I take it for granted that the honorable Senator from South Carolina alludes to me in his concluding remark, and I deem it proper to make an explanation. So far from having business at the Departments which detained me from my seat, I had a constituent, a California gentleman, who was fortunate enough to get married to-day, and having selected me to back hin upon that occasion, I was constrained to absent myself from my place here. No public business could have induced me to leave the Senate; but when private business, involving a question of such an interesting and delicate nature calls me away, I know that my gallant friend from South Carolina would be the last man to complain of my absence. I will say, furthermore, that whenever he shall be so fortunate as to get a lady in the same condition-I mean in a condition to consent to matrimony-it will afford me great pleasure to back him also. [Laughter.]

Mr. BUTLER. I will promise my friend from California the same thing; and I think there is a better prospect of his needing my services in that respect than of my needing his. [Laughter.] The question was then stated on the motion of Mr. PETTIT, that when the Senate adjourns it be to meet on Monday next.

Special Session-Adjournment Over.

Mr. MASON. The Senate has just made an order to send for absent members. In this state of business, a motion to adjourn is in order, but not a motion to adjourn until a future day.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. In the opinion of the Chair a motion to adjourn to a future day is in order. The motion was made, and the question has not been put.

Mr. HOUSTON. The Senate can only adjourn from day to day without a quorum; the rule so declares.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair understands the rule very well; but there is no motion to adjourn.

Mr. WELLER. I make that motion now.
The motion was not agreed to.

Mr. WELLER. I can only say that there are some very obstinate men here. [Laughter.]

Mr. PETTIT. I move that when the Senate adjourns it be to meet on Monday next.

Several SENATORS. That motion is not in order.

The PRESIDING OFFICER, (Mr. COOPER in the chair.) The Chair decides it to be in order. Mr. MASON. I am very reluctant to differ from the judgment of the Chair in any respect, but I am satisfied that the motion just made is not in order. I shall be compelled to appeal from the decision of the Chair on the question of order.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair will state the question. A motion was made by the Senator from Indiana, that when the Senate adjourns it adjourn to meet on Monday next. The Chair entertained the motion. The Senator from Virginia appeals from the decision of the Chair in entertaining that motion. The question now before the Senate is, "Shall the decision of the Chair stand as the judgment of the Senate?"

Mr. BRIGHT. I will say, with due deference to the opinion of the Chair, that it is manifest to my mind that the Chair is in error. The Chair will see what the effect will be, from the appeal which has been taken by my friend from Virginia. When the question is put, "Shall the decision of the Chair stand as the judgment of the Senate?" a division will be called, and there is no quorum.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. That we do not know; that question remains to be decided whether there will be a quorum when the question is put on the appeal.

Mr. BRIGHT. The proper motion, then, with due deference to the decision of the Chair, is to suspend the order requiring absent members to be

sent for.

Mr. MASON. When the Senate ascertains officially that there is no quorum present, of course the order continues in force to send for absent members; but as soon as there is a quorum any motion will be in order.

The question was then again stated on the appeal, and Mr. BRIGHT called for a division.

Mr. WELLER. I will propose a compromise. We have no quorum here; that is evident. Some Senators want to adjourn over till Monday, and some want to adjourn. only till to-morrow. I therefore propose, as a compromise, that we adjourn over until Saturday.

Mr. BRIGHT. I object to any compromise. The question being then taken on the appeal, on a division, there were-ayes 15, noes 4; whereupon the Chair announced the decision as sustained, and the question recurred on the motion that when the Senate adjourns it be to meet on Monday.

Mr. HUNTER. It is useless to be consuming our time in this way, when there is not a quorum present, and I therefore move that we adjourn.

Mr. PETTIT called for a division; and the" question being taken, there were-ayes 9, noes 12; so the Senate refused to adjourn.

Mr. STUART. I hope the motion to adjourn over will not be renewed until there is a quorum here. Let us have a quorum first, and then vote afterwards.

Mr. HOUSTON. There is not much prospect of that. Instead of increasing the number of Senators present, the longer we sit the more our numbers are diminishing. We have just got rid of several more, and I think we might as well adjourn and meet to-morrow, unless some gentlemen can give some good reasons for persisting longer in the motion to adjourn over.

SENATE.

Mr. PETTIT. I will gratify the Senator from Texas by giving some reasons. The reason which influences me is this: I am satisfied that we shall do no business to any valuable purpose, either tomorrow or the next day. To-morrow is what is called Good Friday. I never knew a good Friday yet, and I hope that to-morrow will be a good one at any rate. It was always "hangman's day" with me. In addition to that, many Senators have important business to transact at the other end of the avenue, and I hope we shall adjourn over for two days in order to give them a chance to attend to it. I am satisfied that we could not get a quorum if we should undertake to meet to-morrow or on Saturday. These are some of the reasons why I think we should adjourn over until Monday, and I make that motion.

Mr. HOUSTON. The suggestion presented by the remarks of the honorable Senator has some weight. I believe, after all, it will be well enough to turn the whole Senate loose upon the Departments, and then we can all have a fair chance. I think some of our members are rather getting the advantage of us by staying away when we are sitting here; and I will relent, sir, and agree to adjourn over till Monday. [Laughter.]

The question being then taken, Mr. WELLER called for a division; and upon a count, there were-ayes 14, noes 5; no quorum voting.

Mr. HUNTER. We have no means of compelling the attendance of absent members. We tried that during the last legislative session, one night when there was a great necessity for the appearance of a quorum, and at last we were forced to adjourn because we could not compel the attendance of absent members under such rules as we now have. We cannot do it on this occasion, and the motion to adjourn over cannot prevail for want of a quorum. I hope that we will adjourn.

Mr. BADGER. I move that we now adjourn, and on that motion I call for the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered; and being taken, resulted-yeas 14, nays 12; as follows:

YEAS-Messrs. Badger, Borland, Bright, Butler, Evans, Everett, Hunter, Mallory, Mason, Phelps, Shields, Smith, Thompson of Kentucky, and Weller-14.

NAYS-Messrs. Atchison, Bayard, Chase, Cooper, Dodge of Iowa, Fish, Jones of Iowa, Pettit, Seward, Stuart, Sumner, and Toucey-12.

So the motion was agreed to; and, accordingly,
The Senate adjourned.

FRIDAY, March 25, 1853.

The PRESIDENT called the Senate to order at a quarter past twelve o'clock.

Mr. ADAMS submitted the following resolution:

Resolved, That the Secretary of the Senate be, and he is hereby, authorized and directed to appoint a reading clerk, whose duty it shall be to attend in the Senate and assist the Secretary, and to do such duties when the Senate is not in session as the Secretary may require; and he shall receive per annum out of the contingent fund of the Senate, the same salary as the Chief Clerk of the Senate.

The PRESIDENT. The Chair will suggest that there is no quorum present. The rule requires him to wait a reasonable time for the appearance of Senators; and fifteen minutes, in the opinion of the Chair, is a reasonable time.

Mr. SEWARD. I move that the Senate ad

journ.

Mr. ADAMS. In order that we may have a certain count, I will ask for the yeas and nays on the motion.

The yeas and nays were ordered; and being taken, resulted-yeas 14, nays 13; as follows:

YEAS-Messrs. Atchison, Benjamin, Butler, Cooper, Evans, Hamlin, James, Norris, Pettit, Seward, Smith, Sumner, Toucey, and Wright-14.

NAYS-Messrs Adams, Atherton, Dodge of Wisconsin, Everett, Fitzpatrick, Gwin, Hunter, Mason, Phelps, Stuart, Thompson of Kentucky, Walker, and Weller--13. So the motion was agreed to, And the Senate adjourned.

SATURDAY, March 26, 1853.

Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. C. M. BUTLER. Mr. THOMSON, of New Jersey, who has been absent a few days in consequence of a domestic affliction, resumed his seat this morning.

32D CONG.....3D SESS.

Special Session-Indian Expenditures in Minnesota.

NAVAL DEPOT IN NORTH CAROLINA. The following resolution, submitted by Mr. BADGER on the 17th instant, was considered and agreed to:

"Resolved, That the Secretary of the Navy be directed to inquire whether it will not be advantageous to the Government of the United States to establish a naval depôt at Beaufort in North Carolina, and report to the Senate at the next session."

REPAIRING CAPITOL ROOMS.

The following resolution, submitted by Mr. JONES, of Iowa, on the 7th instant, was considered and agreed to:

Resolved, That the Secretary of the Senate pay the amount which may be allowed by the Committee to Audit and Control the Contingent Expenses of the Senate, for the expenses incurred during the last session, in repairing and fitting up for use two rooms in the basement of the Capitol.

PURSER WELCH.

Mr. COOPER. In the course of the examination before the committee of which the Senator from Texas [Mr. HOUSTON] was chairman, the committee appointed to investigate certain charges of fraud, there was some testimony given in relation to Purser Welch, by the late Secretary of the Navy. In that testimony, there was a single word which seemed to reflect upon Purser Welch. The committee has closed its labors and made its

distribution of money to the Sioux Indians. The
pending question was on the amendment proposed
by Mr. ADAMS, that the Senate appoint a commit-
tee of three to make the proposed examination.

Mr. HUNTER. 1 think the amendment is
better than the original proposition. If we are
to have this investigation, it had better be done in
this way than by sending one individual. But I
object to the policy of having committees sit during
the recess. I object not to this particular commit-
tee, but to any and all committees sitting in the
recess of Congress. I think it involves very grave
considerations. I think it is a practice which is
likely to involve us in disagreeable disputes with
the other House. Sir, the House of Representa-
tives have shown a disposition, for the last two or
three years, to have some concern in the matter of
our contingent fund. Now what powers do we
propose to give this committee, in relation to this
fund? Are they to have power to raise what com-
missions they choose, to send for witnesses in
order to investigate this matter; and how and what
are they to be paid? Are they to pay witnesses for
their expenses? And is all that to be done out of
the contingent fund? Is the President of the
Senate to decide what they shall be paid? Is the
Secretary of the Senate to decide, or is the chair-
man of the committee himself to decide what the
committee shall receive? We see how many em-
barrassing and difficult questions we bring up in
relation to that matter. Suppose we were to con-
tinue all our committees. presume there are few

SENATE.

appoint a committee, or a sub-committee from the Committee on Indian Affairs, consisting of three members, to investigate, during the recess, the charges made against Governor Ramsay.

Mr. ADAMS. The proposition originally was, that one member of the committee be delegated to take the testimony. I moved to strike that out and insert, that the Senate appoint a committee of three.

Mr. COOPER. What I wish to say is, that the Indian Committee is not making any proposition of this kind, and I certainly am opposed to the committee which is proposed by the amendment, whether it is to be detailed from the Committee on Indian Affairs, or from the body of the Senate. I do not think there is any difficulty, if the Senate chooses to confer the power to do this, namely: to authorize the committee to pursue the investigation during the recess, by means of a commissioner to take testimony on interrogatories filed. That has been done in both Houses. During the last recess, one of the committees of the Senate undertook to send, and did send a committee or a commission to Mexico, to investigate certain matters in relation to charges pending against an individual who is now on his trial. I presume they did not, in that, transcend their duties. I think it would be altogether better to authorize the committee to continue the investigation in this way. Do this: authorize them to appoint a commissioner, as the courts appoint a judge or somebody else, to take testimony on interrogcommittees in this body which could not find prof-atories filed; and in order that it may not be lengthitable occupation in the recess. Suppose we do that; would it involve the necessity of paying those committees out of the contingent fund of the Senate, during the recess, and by the action of the Senate alone? Is it to be supposed that the House of Representatives would not claim to interfere when it came to a matter of that sort?

Besides, sir, I believe there is an objection to such things in the country. I believe it is calcu

report; the testimony which I hold in my hand,
cannot therefore be made a part of the report of the
committee; but, in justice to the individual against
whom there seemed to be some implied censure,
I desire that the note of Mr. Kennedy, the late
Secretary of the Navy, explaining his testimony,
may be read, so that it may go upon the Journal.
Mr. BORLAND. Before that letter is read, it
is proper for me to say, that in the investigation of
what were considered abuses, in the practices in
Washington, with regard to getting bills passed
through Congress and obtaining the payment of
claims from the Government, the testimony of
the late Secretary of the Navy, (Mr. Kennedy,)|lated
contained expressions which seemed at first to
reflect unfavorably upon the conduct of Purser
Welch, of the Navy. The committee in exam-
ining that case, however, came to the conclusion
that Purser Welch had done nothing culpable in
itself, nor designed to do so. The letter which is
now offered, confirms that view of the committee,
and explains more fully some of the expressions
used in giving the testimony before the committee.
It was brought to me yesterday by Purser Welch,
with the request that it should be incorporated in
the report of the committee; which would have
been done, had not the committee reported and
been discharged from further duty. I think it is
but just that this public notice should be taken of
the testimony of the late Secretary of the Navy.
The letter was read as follows:

BALTIMORE, March 24, 1853. DEAR SIR: In my testimony before the committee of the Senate in reference to the moneys which were collected by Purser Welch from the officers and crews of the Vincennes and Vandalia, as compensation to be paid for the procurement of the California law, passed at the first session of the last Congress, I took occasion to say that I was convinced, from my examination of the case, that Mr. Welch had no pecuniary interest in the transaction. I regarded his agency in the matter as reprehensible only for the effect such a practice might have on the character of the service and one which might lead to great abuses, and therefore as one that ought to be checked in future. I am persuaded that he acted in this affair solely from motives of friendship and without due consideration of the hazard to which it might expose him of being misrepresented and censured for his participation in it. I told him this in my interviews with him, and I was strongly impressed by everything that occurred at these interviews that he was entirely free from any other share in the agency than that of a disinterested purpose of serving a friend.

I make this statement with a view to guard Mr. Welch against any inference that he had any other concern in the transaction than that which I have mentioned; and I desire that it may be received as an addition to the testimony I have already given.

Very truly, my dear sir, yours, &c., Hon. Senator BORLAND.

JOHN P. KENNEDY.

INDIAN EXPENDITURES IN MINNESOTA.

The Senate proceeded to the consideration of the resolution authorizing the Committee on Indian Affairs to delegate one of their number to proceed, during the recess of Congress, to Minnesota, for the purpose of taking the testimony of individuals in that Territory, in relation to certain charges against Governor Ramsay, connected with his

to bring us into disrepute in the public estimation, and I would regard that as a calamity. We are but sixty-two individuals. It is true we have a voice in the total appropriation for the service of the country-some $50,000,000. We have, when the state of the public business in the House is considered, or rather the manner in which they conduct it, the greatest share in the legislation of the country. How important is it, therefore, to preserve appearances, to preserve the respect and esteem of the community, and to do nothing which shall bring us under a suspicion of seeking by any indirect means, to extend our pay and emoluments. I know that is not the intention of the Committee on Indian Affairs. I believe the committees would not seek employment except when they believed the public interest required it. But I am not the public. I cannot be blind to the mode in which these things are viewed outside of Congress. I believe we should resist everything which would throw us under such a suspicion as I have alluded to. Nor do I see the necessity of having any committee to look into these things. If investigations are to be had during the recess of the Senate, it would be far better to pass laws in respect to them, and to have the investigations made under the superintendence of the Executive, with a limitation by law, than to leave it to the discretion of a committee of the Senate, to be appointed to act in the recess.

Do our legislative powers continue after the Senate adjourns? Can we continue the legislative functions of a portion of this body after the Senate has adjourned? It seems to me very doubtful. I know it has been done in the case of the Library committee on some occasions, and in the case of the printing committee; but those were small matters, and they passed sub silentio, and were acquiesced in. But, to appoint so many committees as we are in the habit of appointing now, to sit in the recess, makes a graver question for consideration. I believe we had, during the last recess, three or four; and unless we put a check to this practice, the number will grow, and we shall see the practice of appointing committees to sit in the recess increase at each succeeding session.

Mr. COOPER. I am a member of the Committee on Indian Affairs; and I am not in favor of the resolution as I understand it will stand if amended as proposed. I believe it is proposed to

I

ened out for a whole year, and increase the expense unnecessarily, let the witnesses be named, as I think we should be prepared to do in twentyfour hours. I think I know, myself, most of the witnesses that it would be necessary to call upon, in order to present the facts of this whole case to the body at its next meeting in December. think this would be the better course to pursue. Certainly I am opposed to having a committee sit during the recess; and I concur in every word uttered by my friend from Virginia, [Mr. HUNTER,] on the general propriety of continuing the functions of certain members of the body during the recess; though I think he was mistaken when he spoke of legislative functions attending them. It would be a quasi judicial function, such as is sometimes exercised by the body during the recess. But I certainly agree in the impropriety of continuing the committees during the recess, and there are many reasons besides those which he has stated, which may be urged against the practice.

Mr. BADGER. Besides the difficulty in the way of this mode of proceeding, thrown out by the Senators from Virginia and South Carolina the other day, it seems to me that there is still

another. It was said that if the resolution in its original form were adopted, there would be no power in the member delegated by the Committee on Indian Affairs to take the testimony to compel the attendance of witnesses, or to punish a witness for contempt in case of his refusal to answer. That is true; but it is equally true with regard to a committee of the Senate, sitting in the recess of the Senate. Such a committee, if a man is called before them as a witness, and he refuses to come, or coming, refuses to answer, have no power to punish him, or compel him to answer. They must report to the House from which their commission is derived, and the authority of the House must be invoked to compel the requisite witness to discharge his duty; and if he still refuses, to inflict punishment. Therefore, if we should adopt this resolution, even as amended in the manner proposed by the Senator from Mississippi, and if the three gentlemen who compose the committee were to go into one of the States to proceed with the investigation, unless a witness was willing to proceed, they could not compel him. If he attended and refused to answer the interrogatories which they thought proper to put, they could not force him to answer. The consequence would be that it would depend entirely upon the pleasure of the persons called upon as witnesses, whether they could attend at all; and if they attended, how many and which interrogatories they would answer.

Now, sir, if this were an inquiry with regard to any general subject before the country as to matters of policy assisting the legislation of the country hereafter, that would not furnish so strong an

32D CONG..... 3D SESS.

Special Session-Reading Secretary of the Senate.

objection; but this is an alleged official delinquency. It is an imputation of crime; and independently of all other objections which have been stated, which would seem to me to be strong, and as far as I see unanswerable, it strikes me that this ought to be sufficient to prevent the Senate proceeding in either of the modes suggested, because when you undertake to examine a charge affecting the honor, and the personal and official character of an individual, that inquiry ought to be directed in such a manner that you can enforce the examination of all who ought to speak, and their answer to all the questions necessary to put to them. If there is no power in a committee of the Senate sitting during the recess, I take it to be perfectly clear that it cannot be devolved upon an individual. If there were no law to that effect we could never confer the power upon our committees to administer oaths. It has been done by law, but the law which authorized the chairman of a select committee or standing committee to administer an oath does not authorize either him or the committee to compel the attendance of witnesses or to punish them for their refusal to attend. Therefore, I suppose the committee would be entirely powerless to perform anything.

Mr. SEBASTIAN. I think, from the discussion which has taken place, that it would be utterly impossible to come to any accommodation which would suit the Senate. I must confess I have been somewhat surprised at the special considerations introduced upon this question, and at the objections which have been raised to it. Now, if the Senate will, by unanimous consent, let the resolution lie upon the table, I have consulted with the Committee on Indian Affairs, and we have come to the determination to submit another proposition to the Senate.

Mr. BRODHEAD. Before the request of my friend from Arkansas is complied with, I would like to know what is proposed to be substituted? If he is prepared now with his substitute, let it be offered before the subject passes from us.

Mr. WALKER. I am satisfied from the character of the discussion into which we have been led, that there is some cause or other on the part of gentlemen for an aversion to this investigation. I know they have said that they have no objection to the investigation; but they think that the Senate is not the proper tribunal to investigate it, notwithstanding that the Senate is the party to which the matter has been referred, and now has it under consideration. I am satisfied that from some cause or other, there is an indisposition to investigate this matter. I therefore hope that the suggestion of the chairman of the Committee on Indian Affairs will be agreed to, that the resolution will be ordered to lie on the table; and I then hope that he will follow it by a motion which will doubtless be gratifying to the Senate, that the committee be discharged from the further consideration of the subject, so that gentlemen will have the satisfaction of witnessing that going on to a greater extent, which is now going on; which is-and letters in the city prove the fact that the Indians have entered houses of private individuals and ravaged them. I can feel on this subject because I am a frontier man.

Mr. HUNTER. For one I have opposed the proposition to raise the special committee. I have no objection to the investigation, nor do I believe that the laying of this resolution on the table will prevent it. I have no doubt that the proper Executive authority will make it. I believe a Governor of the Territory will be appointed who ex officio will be Superintendent of Indian Affairs, and he will investigate the matter. I have no objection to that; but I am opposed to the policy, and I have endeavored to show that my opposition was not to this particular proposition, but that it was one of opposition to the policy of raising select committees to sit during the recess of the Senate. That is the matter at which I am striking, and not at this particular investigation. I not only have no objection to the investigation, but I wish it to go on when it can be conducted properly. But I do not believe it is safe to pursue this practice of raising special committees, and if I had permitted this one to pass without opposition, I could not have objected to any other. I wish, if I can, to take the sense of the Senate in regard to the matter, for if we raise such committees at

all I would as soon have it done in this case as in

any other.

Mr. BUTLER. I made a few remarks the other day against this procedure with no aversion to the investigation, but from the belief that it would be an unconstitutional mode of proceeding. If the Senate creates a tribunal for the investigation of this matter, what can be the end of it? We cannot impeach. We cannot dismiss. We may pronounce a censure, and that is a judgment. If such a proceeding was to originate in the House of Representatives, I could understand that it would look to a purpose, or if it was laid before the Executive, I could understand that there might be some purpose in view. As to having any aversion to the investigation I have none, for I know nothing about Governor Ramsay or the other persons implicated; and in fact, if there has been a delinquency, I would like the prosecution to go on; but for the Senate to undertake the investigation is inverting everything like the usage contemplated by the Constitution in proceeding against delinquents in office. The House of Representatives ought to originate and prosecute such proceedings; and if the inquiries are to go on with the view to the removal of the man censured, it ought to be in the popular branch of the Government. That was my reason for opposing the resolution. I did not oppose it because of any aversion to the investigation.

Mr. SEBASTIAN. The Committee on Indian Affairs had not any agency whatever in the starting of this investigation. The motion by which the duty was conferred upon them, came from a member of the body in no way connected with that committee. They have proceeded to a certain point in the investigation, and the only reason why the resolution was proposed to the Senate, is that they have arrived at a point in the investigation further than which it is impossible go without the authority proposed, and we cannot cease the investigation without compromising the character of the Senate, and appearing to justify a disposition to avoid bringing the act of delinquency to light.

But in view of the considerations which I have heard adverted to, I will renew the motion that the resolution lie upon the table for the present, and then I will submit a motion that the Committee on Indian Affairs be discharged from the further consideration of the subject.

Mr. MALLORY. Will the Senator withdraw the motion for one moment?

Mr. SEBASTIAN. I withdraw it.

Mr. MALLORY. I made some slight opposition, the other day, to the appointment of a member of the committee to prosecute the investigation in the manner proposed. In doing that, 1 certainly had no opposition to the investigation proposed. I could have none, for I know nothing of the subject; and it was sufficient for me to know that the Committee on Indian Affairs believed that some frauds had been committed, and desired the investigation; but my opposition was made from the conviction that the mode proposed would not only be ineffectual but would interfere with the very object which the committee had in view. I will only refer to the fact that one of our special committees, of which the Senator from Texas [Mr. HOUSTON] was chairman, during the last session reported to the Senate that one of the witnesses in the city of Washington refused to testify; and the committee found itself without the means of enforcing his answering their questions, as suggested by the Senator from North Carolina. The committee then appealed to the Senate to enforce its authority. My opposition, therefore, was based upon the fact that the committee would go on and the time between this and the next session would be exhausted in proving that which we now know. I thought that no useful result could be accomplished, and therefore opposed it. I now renew the motion that the resolution lie upon the table. The motion was agreed to.

Mr. SEBASTIAN. I now report back from the Committee on Indian Affairs the resolution which was referred to them in relation to the charges against Governor Ramsay, and ask to be discharged from its further consideration, in order that the Senate may take such steps as it thinks

[blocks in formation]

SENATE.

pursue in regard to this matter. The Senator from Arkansas has expressed his surprise at the opposition which has been made to the resolution. I am glad that the Senator from Virginia has thought it his duty to oppose the practice which has commenced in the Senate of appointing special committees to sit during the recess. I have opposed this proposition not from any special opposition to it, but I have uniformly opposed the delegation of power to a single individual to be exercised during the recess. I have not believed that it was in the power of any committee to do it. I have not believed that it was in the power of the Senate to confer the authority upon its committee. It is, therefore, distinctly from no objection to the investigation, but from the belief that the power to grant the authority did not exist, and because I think the practice which has commenced of appointing special committees is a bad one and ought to be discontinued, that I have opposed it. I will suggest that so far as the motion to discharge the committee is concerned, at the expiration of the session the power of the committee will expire; but at the same time I have no objection to the motion.

Mr. PHELPS. I desire to know how the Committee on Indian Affairs came to have this matter under consideration. It is not worth while to vote to discharge the committee unless the subject came before them under the authority of the Senate.

Mr. MASON. I would inquire of the chairman of the Committee on Indian Affairs if the subject was referred to the committee at the last session? Mr. SEBASTIAN. It was.

Mr. MASON. Has it been renewed at this called session?

Mr. SEBASTIAN. It has.

The motion to discharge the committee was agreed to.

CORRESPONDENCE OF MINISTER TO BRAZIL. Mr. SEWARD submitted the following resolution; which was considered by unanimous consent, and agreed to:

Resolved, That the President of the United States be requested, if compatible with the public interest, to communicate to the Senate the correspondence between the honorable R. C. Schenck, Minister of the United States at Brazil, and the Secretary of State.

READING SECRETARY OF THE SENATE. On motion by Mr. ADAMS, the following resolution, submitted by him yesterday, was taken up for consideration:

"Resolved, That the Secretary of the Senate be, and he is hereby, authorized and directed to appoint a reading secretary, whose duty it shall be to attend in the Senate and assist the Secretary, and to do such duties when the Senate is not in session as the Secretary may require; and he shall receive per annum, out of the contingent fund of the Senate, the same salary as the Chief Clerk of the Senate."

Mr. ADAMS. My object in calling up that resolution this morning is for the purpose of making an explanation. I am not anxious that it should be considered now. I only desire, as a matter due to the Secretary of the Senate, and the motives which induced me to offer the resolution, to explain why I did so. I understood from the Secretary that he had no regular reading clerk, and it was legitimately the business of the Chief Clerk to keep a minute of the proceedings of the Senate. The other clerk at the desk-Colonel Hickey-has duties to perform elsewhere, and his duties performed here are extra. It is necessary that there should be a reading clerk, in order to the proper organization of the desk. When I drew up the resolution it was not intended to reflect in the slightest degree, in any shape, upon our long-tried and faithful Secretary.

Mr. PETTIT. Has not the Secretary the power now to appoint the necessary clerks?

Mr. ADAMS. He has that power, I know; and the clerk whom he may appoint for the purpose indicated by the resolution, would be entitled to a compensation of $1,500 a year. The proposition which I make is to place the person to be appointed on an equality with the Chief Clerk; that was done at my own suggestion; the Secretary was not in the Chamber when I offered the resolution, or I should have consulted him about it. As the dignity of clerkships, and all other offices seems to depend very much on the amount

32D CONG.....3D SESS.

of salary, I desired the reading secretary to be placed on an equality with the Chief Clerk, and not in a secondary position. I thought he deserved it. I believed it was necessary to enable the Secretary to procure the services of a suitable man. I do not believe a suitable man could be procured for a less compensation; and among the various extravagant expenditures of the Federal Government, we ought to expend at least a sufficient sum to have the proper organization of our desk. This was my view and no other. I am not tenacious about it. I do not wish to interfere with the Secretary in any way. As an evidence of the fact, I provide that he shall make his own selection. If had been dissatisfied with him in any way, and had desired to supersede his rights, I would have submitted a resolution to elect the officer. I have considered it due to the Secretary, on account of the construction which I understood some gentlemen have placed upon the resolution, to make this explanation.

Mr. MASON. I move to postpone the further consideration of the resolution until Monday. We want an Executive session.

The motion was agreed to.

RINGGOLD'S COAST OF CALIFORNIA. The following resolution, submitted by Mr. GWIN on the 17th instant, was taken up for consideration:

"Resolved, That the Secretary of the Senate be authorized to purchase one thousand copies of Ringgold's maps, charts, and sailing directions of the coast of California, for the use of the Senate: Provided, The price shall not exceed four dollars per copy."

Mr. BADGER. I have no other objection to the resolution except that we have not power to pass it. I do not know whether the Senator from Arkansas [Mr. BORLAND] recollects it; but by a provision contained in the deficiency appropriation bill of last session, it is expressly provided that no books shall be distributed to members of Congress, except such as are published by Congress as public documents, unless an appropriation had been by law previously made for the purpose.

Mr. MASON. The resolution will evidently lead to debate. I move to postpone its further consideration until Monday.

Mr. BORLAND. My attention has not been particularly called to that provision of the law. I had considered the subject only in reference to the value of the chart, of which I have very strong evidence before me. I have the testimony borne by the Coast Survey and from other sources as to the accuracy and value of the charts, which shows that they are now regarded by navigators as indispensable to ships which are navigating the ocean upon the Pacific coast. Whether they will come under the head of books or not, I do not know. We have procured a limited number of them, and they are in very great demand. The gentlemen from California attach very great value to them, and deem them of great importance. Navigators of established character deem them of very great importance, indispensable indeed. The Coast Survey, under whose examination they are passed, and who have made use of them in perfecting their reports, bear the very highest testimony as to their character and their indispensable necessity to all persons navigating the Pacific coast.

Mr. BADGER. I will read the provision of law:

"Be it further enacted, That hereafter no books shall be distributed to members of Congress, except such as are or dered to be printed as public documents by the Congress of which they are members: Provided, That this section shall not prohibit or interfere with the distribution, to all mem bers who have heretofore received books under the order of either House, of the remaining volumes or parts, so as to complete the sets which they have received."

Mr. GWIN. That does not refer to these charts, and most valuable ones they are. They are not books. They are nothing but charts.

Mr. PETTIT. With the leave of the Senator from California, I will obviate all that difficulty. The resolution is to authorize their purchase for the use of the Senate. I propose to amend it so that it shall be for the use of the navigators upon the Pacific coast. That certainly will obviate the difficulty. [Laughter.)

||

Special Session-Duties on Iron.

Mr. BADGER. These are new ones. Mr. CHASE. I know it; and I have no doubt of their value as stated by the chairman of the Committee on Printing; but if they be of such value, undoubtedly those who navigate the coast can obtain them. I see no reason why the Senate should purchase them more than any other book designed for general circulation.

But a more serious objection to it is that it would be violating, if not the letter, the spirit of the law. The law was designed to prevent the purchase of books, not reports to Congress, for which no special appropriation was made; and every lawyer knows that under the general term books,' maps and charts are included. I therefore move that the resolution lie upon the table.

[ocr errors]

Mr. GWIN. Let it go over until Monday. I do not wish to interfere with the Senator from Virginia; but I am prepared to show that it is not a violation of the law, and that the charts are of great value.

Mr. CHASE. I withdraw my motion.
The motion to postpone was agreed to.
EXECUTIVE SESSION.

On motion by Mr. MASON, the Senate proceeded to the consideration of Executive business; and after some time spent therein, the doors were reopened, and

The Senate adjourned.

MONDAY, March 28, 1853.

Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. C. M. BUTLER. On motion by Mr. SHIELDS, it was Ordered, That C. A. Woolley have leave to withdraw his papers from the files of the Senate.

DUTIES ON IRON.

tion: Mr. HUNTER. I offer the following resolu

Resolved, That the Secretary of the Treasury be directed to report to the Senate at its next annual session, the average prices annually of bar-iron, merchantable, manufactured by rolling; bar-iron, merchantable, manufactured otherwise than by rolling; railroad iron, manufactured by rolling, and pig-iron, for the last ten years preceding 1853, in the foreign markets of production or shipment; also the average prices annually of the same description of iron at New York and Pittsburg for the same period, together with the charges for freights, insurance, and commission.

It has been suggested to me by practical men that the true basis of a compromise between the producers and consumers of iron in this country would be to establish a point in the price after which no duty should be charged. It has been said that it is probable some point could be ascertained after which the duty could be taken off without injuring the producers of iron, and which would be for the benefit of the consumers-the protection being that the duty would be applied upon the iron whenever it ranged below the price named by law. For the purpose of ascertaining if such a thing be possible, inasmuch as it is very desirable producing and consuming interests, I have introto produce some sort of compromise between the The question will come up at the next session. By that time the Secretary which we may act in regard to the subject. It will be enabled to give us the information upon produce harmony between the great industrial inseems to me exceedingly desirable that we should

duced the resolution.

terests of the country, and whenever the subject is capable of compromise we should begin in time and collect information to enable the Government to make some arrangement which may enable them all to go on harmoniously. I trust that something like this may be done. It seems to me to be a plausible idea; and without committing myself to it, I think there is so much in it as to make it desirable to have the information to enable us to act upon it hereafter.

Mr. BRODHEAD. Since 1846 or 1847, the manufacturers of railroad and other iron generally have been asking for some compromise. They have appealed more than once, I believe, to the honorable Senator from Virginia, and I am very happy to learn now that he is willing to have some compromise on the subject. I should have been much more pleased to have heard it from him some two or three years ago when those engaged in the manufacture of iron, especially of railroad Mr. CHASE. I think we have already voted iron, were suffering so terribly, and calling loudly about enough for charts.

Mr. GWIN. I accept that.

for relief.

SENATE.

Mr. HUNTER. I think the Senator from Pennsylvania is not exactly aware of my purpose and agency in regard to this matter. I introduced the resolution for the purpose of seeing if something cannot be done which may satisfy the consumers of iron without injuring the producers. It has been suggested to me that here was the idea upon which some such compromise could be made. I do not know whether it can be done or not; but it is certain that at the next session we shall have to meet the question; and I submit to the Senator whether it is not better in every point to have all the information which we can obtain in regard to the subject. That is the end and object of the resolution.

I will say in relation to my own opinions, since the gentleman has referred to them, that I am a free-trade man. It is known to everybody who knows me that I am a free-trade man to this extent that I go for duties upon revenue principles, and for the lowest duties which will bring in sufficient revenue for the purposes of the Government; but at the same time, I believe that when interests are called into existence, whether by improper legislation or not, by the action of the Government, those interests ought not to be suddenly and wantonly destroyed; and whenever the Government may choose to take the direction of reform, it should do it as gradually and slowly as may be consistent with the existence of the interests which it has called into being. My object is a kind one. Mr. BRODHEAD. My friend from Virginia says he is a free-trade man. It is difficult to understand in what sense he is so, because not four weeks ago, he advocated upon this floor the worst kind of discrimination. He advocated a proposition to take the duties off railroad iron entirely. Is he in favor of taking them off cotton, woolen, and other species of manufactures in the country? Where, then, do we obtain the revenue? I would like to know what my friend from Virginia means by saying that he is a free-trade man? Does he mean that he is in favor of the repeal of all duties, and a resort to direct taxation? It would seem so from the fact of his advocating the abolition of duties upon railroad iron entirely; because I can see no reason whatever for taking the duty off railroad iron and not off the other articles which I have named.

Mr. HUNTER. The Senator from Pennsylvania says he is at a loss to know in what sense I pronounce myself a free-trade man. I said in what sense it was. I said I was in favor of laying on duties only on revenue principles, to raise as much revenue as would be necessary for the proper administration of the Government. That defined my opinion in that respect. He says, though, that I must be for direct taxation, because I voted to t: ke the duty off railroad iron. That does not follow. Here is a question, if I chose to go into it, in relation to the propriety of taking the duty off railroad iron, which involves the question in regard to the true principles of taxation; but I do not choose to enter into it. The Senator might have remembered, that on the occasion to which he alluded, I voted under the instructions of my previously I had declined meddling with the subState Legislature, and that during the whole time that I made no speech in regard to it. I gave a ject of duties upon iron, in any way. He knows

vote in accordance with instructions. And now what is the object I have in view? It is to obtain information, to see whether we may not ascertain some point in the price after which the duty may be taken off iron, not only for railroad, but for all reserving a provision in the law by which duties purposes, without injury to the producing interest, shall be laid upon iron when its price ranges below the point. I have it from good authority that there are many iron-masters who believe that this would afford the basis of a compromise. I know there are many railroad men who believe it. I do not yet pronounce upon it. I cannot do so until I have the information; but, as I said before, 1 think the idea is plausible enough to justify us in the effort to obtain testimony to see how far it is practicable.

The question was then taken on the resolution, and it was agreed to.

NAVAL DEPOT AT NEWPort. Mr. JAMES submitted the following resolution;

« PoprzedniaDalej »