walks at all necessary. We are told, to be sure, by the gentleman from Maine, who deals so much in gallantry, that he is afraid the ladies may muddy their toes in coming up to the Capitol to hear the members make speeches. But, for his part, Mr. C. said, he thought the present walks were quite sufficient for all useful purposes.

Mr. KREMER thought with the gentleman from Tennessee. He had, for one, found no difficulty whatever in going about the city, or in getting up to the House; and, if ladies do muddy their toes, why let them e'en stay at home, and not come crowding the galleries of this House. For his part, the travelling was convenient enough for him-he found no difficulty from the mud. Nothing in life was, in his opinion, valuable, but as it was useful. The nation wants money, and how do gentlemen propose to get it? By loans? No. By direct taxes? Not at all. But by transfer, the most iniquitous of all modes of paying debts. Look at England. It was not long since her debt was only a small sum, and now it was grown to the enormous amount of upwards of a thousand millions of pounds sterling; and so heavy was her load of taxes that land in that country would not fetch half its value. This course was beginning to be pursued here; nay, it had been pursued, and that too long already.

Mr. COCKE called for the reading of an act relating to the proceeds of the sales of public lots in Washington; and it was read accordingly.

Mr. TAYLOR, of New York, thought that this act, instead of weighing any thing against the proposed appropriation, rather showed that Congress is bound to make the pavement. There is an unexpended balance of the proceeds of these sales now in the Treasury, and it ought, according to the provisions of this act, to be applied to objects of this description. The act passed two years since, and to which the gentleman from Tennessee had alluded as a proof of our liberality to the citizens of Washington, was merely to change the location of a canal, and, when that is completed, the balance of the proceeds of sales must return into the Treasury, &c.

Mr. COCKE explained. Nearly two millions of dollars had arisen from the sales of public property in this city, and what had become of it was not easy to tell, unless it had been divided among the citizens of Washington. Only $18,000 of it, he believed, ever reached the Treasury; and that has no sooner got in than we have a plan to draw it out again.

Mr. CUSHMAN replied to Mr. COCKE. He had not said, we have an "overflowing Treasury." There were, he believed, about six millions in the Treasury, and the sum he proposed to draw from it, for the portico, was only $26,000, which would not make any great hole in it. As to what had fallen from the gentleman in relation to his speech, he did not profess to deal in wit, and therefore he should not attempt to answer it. He was a plain man, and aimed only at speaking common sense. In relation to the particular item now under consideration, he said he thought the citizens of Washington had expended much, both of money and

MARCH, 1824.

labor, to improve their city and to accommodate the members of Congress; and, as they had to make these walks in front of their own property, it was fit that Government should do as much for property which belonged to the public.

Mr. Buck, of Vermont, wished to know whether the $18,000 referred to as proceeds of sales, is still in the hands of the Commissioner, or has been paid into the Treasury; in the former case, let the Commissioner apply it at once to this object; in the latter we must put an appropriation for it into the bill. The object of the appropriation now under consideration, Mr. B. thought, was a proper one.

Mr. TAYLOR called for the reading of a statement from "Burch's Digest," showing how the moneys from the sale of public property in Washington had been applied. [The statement was read; from which it appears that the money has been expended in building the Capitol, &c.]

Mr. MERCER, of Virginia, agreed with the gentleman from Vermont, (Mr. BUCK,) that the whole question was, whether the money still remained in the hands of the Commissioner, or a special appropriation was necessary. This, the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. COCKE) had not told the House. Mr. M. also suggested that the charter, granted to the city, ought to be examined, to see how far Congress has bound itself to improve the ground in front of public property. It still holds, he believed, five thousand lots in the city, the extent of whose fronts would probably amount to thirty miles. Mr. M. entirely coincided in the sentiment of the honorable gentleman from Maine, that there was not the least ground of complaint against the inhabitants of Washington-they were not his constituents-he had no more interest in them than other gentlemen; but he sympathized with them, from the bottom of his soul, in the burdens they had to sustain, and he thought they had shown an enterprise in improving the city, highly honorable to their character, and entitling them to the consideration of Congress, their only guardians.

The question was then taken on this item of appropriation, and it was carried in the affirmative yeas 94, nays 49.

On the clause introduced by Mr. COCKE, which provides, that no person receiving an annual salary from the United States shall receive any thing in addition thereto for any service whatever, by way of perquisite or extra compensation, except fees of office established by law, a debate arose, which occasionally grew very warm.

On the suggestion of Mr. FORSYTH, of Georgia, the proviso was modified by the addition of the word "official," so as to make it read "for any official service," &c.

Mr. Cook, of Illinois, was of opinion that the proviso, as modified, was a bad one, and, without the modification, a very bad one. If he understood its operation, it would be to prevent any person holding an office, such, for instance, as a Governor of a Territory, from being temporarily employed to discharge any other function to which emolument was attached-such, for example, as nego

tiating an Indian treaty-although that person might, of all others, be the best fitted to discharge that duty.

Mr. FORSYTH replied, in explanation, that the proviso would not have this operation. It applied only to the receiving of extra pay or perquisites for the discharge of duties which belong to the very office held, and not to those of another office. Mr. Cook thought it would be found to bear on a part of the system now sanctioned for the compensation of the officers of the Navy, and to some of those of the Army also.

Mr. CockE explained, that it could touch none of those persons, as they did not receive "an annual salary," but monthly pay and perquisites, and even those latter were all regulated by law.

Mr. Cook rejoined. He still thought it would prevent the temporary employment of salaried persons in the discharge of other duties, unless they would consent to perform the duty for nothing.

Mr. COCKE thought it was strange that the member from Illinois should be so zealous on this subject, when he had formerly been equally zealous in opposing a measure of the kind he now advocates, in relation to the investigation of the affairs of certain land offices in his own State.

Mr. Cook repelled the insinuation. The member from Tennessee talked, as usual, about what he did not understand-but he had been in the habit of doing this so frequently, that the House had given him a sort of prescriptive right to speak about matters of which he was ignorant. Yet the member ought not to mislead the House on points of facts which he did understand. [Mr. Cook then explained the circumstances to which the gentleman from Tennessee had alluded, and defied and invited scrutiny.] He insisted that the proviso could be productive of no economy; for, as these extra duties must be performed by somebody, and that somebody must be paid for performing them, all that this proviso would do, would be to tie the hands of the President from employing the most suitable person to perform them, because such person might happen to enjoy an annual salary, for something else, not incompatible in its

nature.

Mr. COCKE replied, and declared that his only object, and the only effect of the proviso would be to cut off perquisites, which rested on custom and not on law, from certain salaried officers who now received them. By this he believed the public good would be promoted, which was his sole inducement in offering the amendment.

Mr. FOOT, of Connecticut, understanding that the gentleman meant to exclude extra pay only when given for duties properly belonging to the office of the person who performed them, offered an amendment to make the proviso read in the words following: "for any official duties whatsoever, appertaining to the office for which said salary shall be received."

Mr. Buck thought that nothing would be gained by the proviso. It would only prevent clerks in the offices from being employed out of office hours in duties to which, of all other persons, they were most competent, but which it would be un

H. OF R.

reasonable to expect them to perform without extra allowance. If the proviso was adopted, these duties must be given to somebody else to do, not, probably, half so well acquainted with the performance of them. It has besides a squinting towards restricting the powers of the President in the proper discharge of his duty.

Mr. GAZLAY, of Ohio, wishing better to understand the proviso and its operation, moved to lay the bill on the table, and to order the amendment to be printed.

This motion was not agreed to.

Mr. TRACY, of New York, apprehended that the mover of the amendment was hardly aware of the extent to which its terms would operate. No doubt there existed some abuses, which it might remove; but, before he, for one, could consent to its adoption, he must have a clearer knowledge of the cases to which it would apply. It appeared to him to be too crude-it embraced too much, and was too indefinitely worded, to be adopted in its present shape. There are certain allowances to some of the officers, both of the Army and Navy, he believed, which, having been sanctioned by usage, form a part of their support, and did form a part of it when they accepted their commissions, but which probably have never been expressly sanctioned by law. He would not say whether these ought all to continue, but it was very possible that many of them were right and proper. At all events, he wanted a fuller view of the facts before he was prepared to legislate upon the subject.

Mr. COCKE explained.-the proviso was not intended to touch the proper emoluments of either the Army or Navy. It might reach the case of certain Generals, who, besides their annual salary, received rations, quarters, &c., not sanctioned by any law. It would reach the case of the Attorney General, who, whenever he performed any duty out of court, and at his own lodgings, must have extra fees, &c. He was sure that his friend from New York, who had rendered him such important aid on a former occasion, in preventing defaulters from receiving their salaries till their accounts were adjusted, would, if he rightly understood the present proviso, give it his hearty support.*

To the Editors of the National Intelligencer : The Intelligencer of this morning contains a debate in the House of Representatives, on a clause proposed by Mr. Cocke, of Tennessee, to be introduced into the appropriation bill, and providing that no person receiving an annual salary from the United States, shall

receive any thing in addition thereto, for any service whatever, by way of perquisite, or extra compensation, except fees of office, established by law. On the sugthe addition of the word official, so as to make it read, gestion of Mr. Forsyth, the proviso was modified by "No person receiving an annual salary from the United States, shall receive any thing in addition thereto, for any official services." In the course of the debate, Mr. Cocke is reported to have said, among other things, that "this proviso would reach the case of the Attorney General, who, whenever he performed any duty out of court, and at his own lodgings, must have extra fees," &c. The remark, taken in connexion with the subject-matter, is calculated to make the

Mr. TRACY replied, that he had supported the former measure, and was happy in perceiving that its adoption had led to beneficial consequences. But, he was not prepared to strip salaried persons of all that part of their income which was derived from perquisites and extra pay for extra duty, without investigation, and without giving them some permanent equivalent.

The question was then put on the amendment to the proviso which had been moved by Mr. Foor, and it was negatived.

Mr. WHIPPLE, of New Hampshire, suggested that the object of the gentleman from Tennessee might be accomplished without adding the proviso to this bill, as a bill was shortly to come from the Senate on the subject.

MARCH, 1824.

rial of the Commissioners of the town of Newcastle, in that State, praying for the aid of the General Government in erecting additional piers in the harbor of said town.-Referred.

Mr. McLANE, of Delaware, from the Committee of Ways and Means, reported a bill authorizing the employment of additional clerks and certain messengers and assistants, and other persons, in the several Departments, which was read twice, and committed to a Committee of the Whole.

Mr. McLANE, from the same committee, made a report on the petition of Mary H. Hawkins, accompanied by a bill for her relief; which was read twice, and committed to a Committee of the Whole.

The question then being on the amendment of the committee to the item respecting our Ministers and Chargés des Affaires at foreign Courts

Mr. GAZLAY moved further to amend the item by striking out the words "Madrid" and "Lisbon." While this motion was under discussion, the House adjourned.

MONDAY, March 15.

Mr. HERRICK, presented a petition of John White, a Revolutionary pensioner, praying to be allowed arrearages of pension.

Mr. TOMLINSON presented a petition of sundry owners and masters of vessels, in the State of Connecticut, praying that buoys may be placed on a reef of rocks in Long Island Sound, called the "Hen and Chickens."-Referred.

Mr. McLANE, of Delaware, presented a memo

impression, that, whenever the Attorney General performed any official duty out of court, and at his own lodgings, he must have extra fees. This could scarcely have been the sense of the speaker: because, in this sense, the remark is incorrect. The present Attorney General never did receive an extra fee for any official duty, in court, out of court, at his lodgings, in his office, or any where else. For the performance of all his official duties, his sole compensation has been the salary of his office. He has, on a very few occasions, (four, only, are remembered, in the course of the six and a half years during which he has been in office,) been employed by the Government to render professional services, wholly out of the line of his official duties; and, for these, he has been compensated as any other professional gentleman, who might have been employed by the Government to render the same services, would have been compensated. But he has never received an extra fee for any official duty whate er, or wheresoever performed; and, consequently, the proviso does not reach the case of the Attorney General, nor has it the most distant bearing on any part of his conduct.

WASHINGTON, Tuesday, March 16, 1824.

Mr. WILLIAMS, of North Carolina, from the Committee of Claims, made a report on the petition of Thomas L. Ogden, and others, accompanied by a bill for their relief; which was read twice and committed to a Committee of the Whole.

On motion of Mr. Cook, the Committee on Public Lands were instructed to inquire into the expediency of allowing Matthew Duncan to change his location of the southwest quarter of section No. 22, in township No. 9, south of range No. 4 west, to some other quarter section, it having been located through mistake.

On motion of Mr. GURLEY, the Committee on Military Affairs were instructed to inquire into the expediency of providing, by law, for removing the obstructions to the navigation of the river Iberville, in the State of Louisiana, placed in said river during the late war, by order of the Commanding General of the Southern division of the Army of the United States.

On motion of Mr. JENNINGS, the Committee on Roads and Canals were instructed to inquire into the expediency of aiding the State of Indiana to open a canal at the falls of the Ohio, in conformity to an act of the General Assembly of said State, approved January 31st, 1824.

Mr. COCKE offered the following resolution: "Resolved, That the Committee on Post Offices and Post Roads be instructed to inquire and report whether any arrangements can be made by which the letters addressed to the members of Congress while in session can be supplied at an earlier hour, and at a less expense."

Mr. BRENT moved the following amendment, which was accepted as a modification: "And whether the privilege given to members of Congress to frank letters ought not to be extended." And the question being put, the resolution, as modified, was adopted-ayes 72, nays 56.

Mr. RANKIN laid the following resolution on the table for consideration on to-morrow,

viz:

Resolved, That the President of the United States be requested to inform this House if any of the Commissioners appointed for the examination of titles and

own Constitutional discretion. The long practice which gave sanction to the course he proposed, was, to his mind, a sufficient proof of its cor

rectness.

He wished the sum reduced for two reasons, viz: because he believed that there were many national objects to which it could be more advantageously appropriated; and, because he saw no good reason for maintaining Ministers of the first grade at the Courts of all the despots in Europe, when there was no national object for them to accomplish. Mr. G. said, he had always understood that foreign Ministers were intended for the making of treaties, or for settling some great national question; and, as we had neither of these now on hand, with the great crowned heads, he must presume that ours had no other design than the maintenance of a system of espionage; and, although this might do well enough for one tyrant to watch another, he thought it totally inadmissible for a great republic. What have we now, said Mr. G., to do in Europe to justify the number and expense of foreign Ministers? and how many great objects have we which demand all our resources? Mr. G. said, he did not believe that this course had, or would meet the wishes of the American people, and he could not reconcile it with any sound principle of democracy.

Mr. McLANE advocated the amendment of the committee, and replied to Mr. GAZLAY. The question being put, the amendment was adopted, as reported by the Committee of the Whole.

The remaining amendments having been, also, concurred in, the bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, and was subsequently read a third time, passed, and sent to the Senate for con

currence.

THE TARIFF BILL.

On motion of Mr. Top, the House then went into Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union, (Mr. CONDICT in the Chair,) and resumed the consideration of the bill for amending the several acts laying duties on imports.

Mr. BAYLIES, of Massachusetts, moved to amend the bill by striking out the word "one" and inserting "three," in the 65th and 66th lines, so as to make that clause of the section read as follows:

"On all Leghorn hats or bonnets, and all hats or bonnets of straw, chip, or grass, and on all flats, braids, or plats, for making of hats or bonnets, a duty of fifteen per centum ad valorem: Provided, That all Leghorn hats and bonnets, and all hats or bonnets of straw, chip, or grass, which, at the place whence imported, with the addition of ten per centum, shall have cost less than three dollars each, shall, with such addition, be taken and deemed to have cost three dollars, each, and shall be charged with duty accordingly." Mr. BAYLIES Supported this motion by a speech, in which he stated the benefits that would result, and gave a succinct history of this branch of manufacture, in this country, from its earliest origin till it had grown to an annual amount of a million and a half of dollars. He stated the manner in which it had been ruined by the im

MARCH, 1824.

portation of Leghorn bonnets, to the amount last year of $800,000.

The motion was further advocated by Mr. RICH, and opposed by Messrs. CAMBRELENG, SHARPE, MARVIN, and FLOYD. And the question being put, it was lost.

Mr. Cook, of Illinois, moved to amend the 82d line, by striking out "two," and inserting "three," so as to make it read "On lead, in pigs, bars, or sheets, three cents per pound." And he supported the motion in a speech of considerable length. It was opposed by Messrs. SHARPE and CAMBRELENG, of New York-advocated by Mr. STEWART, of Pennsylvania, and further opposed by Mr. SANDFORD, of Tennessee, to whom Mr. Cook replied-when the question being taken, the motion was not agreed to.

Mr. Foor, of Connecticut, moved to amend the bill in the 148th line-"On muskets, one dollar and fifty cents per stand," by adding the words following: "And on all other fire-arms, and on side-arms, thirty per cent. ad valorem." The motion being explained by Mr. Foor, was adopted without opposition.

Mr. McKIM then moved to strike out the 177th line, viz: "On tallow, four cents per pound." He supported his motion by a short speech, to which Mr. Top replied. When, on motion of Mr. FOOT, of Connecticut, the Committee rose, and the House adjourned.

TUESDAY, March 16.

The Committee on the Judiciary were discharged from the consideration of the petition of Thomas Collins, as, also, from the petition of the Pennsylvania Society for promoting the abolition of slavery, for the relief of free negroes unlawfully held in bondage, and for improving the condition of the African race; and they were laid on the table; also, from the consideration of the petition of sundry inhabitants of East Florida, upon the subject of negroes claimed by Indians; and it was referred to the Secretary of War.

Mr. RANKIN, from the Committee on the Public Lands, who were, on the 31st December last, instructed "to inquire into the title and right of the United States, in and to one township of land, reserved for certain purposes in the contract entered into with John C. Symmes, as mentioned in the laws passed in 1792 and 1803, relating thereto," made a report thereon, which was laid on the table.

Mr. RANKIN, from the same committee, to which was referred the petition of John Johnson, Indian agent in the State of Ohio, reported a bill reserving to the Wyandot tribe of Indians, a certain tract of land, in lieu of a reservation made to them by treaty; which was read twice, and committed to a Committee of the Whole.

Mr. RANKIN, from the same committee, to which the subject was referred by resolution, on the 10th of February ultimo, reported a bill confirming certain claims to lands in the western district of Louisiana; which was read twice, and committed to a Committee of the Whole.