I do not rise for the purpose of entering into this fight between my colleagues upon the other side of the House. I trust that when this committee shall again have under consideration the bounty land bill they will provide that these gentlemen shall have bounty land for services rendered the country, fighting in this buck-shot war. [Laughter.] My friend from the Scioto district, [Mr. TAYLOR,] being a wily politician, has made some insinuations at this time which I am called upon to notice, being from the same State. I propose to notice his great devotion to the names of General Jackson and James Madison. He made the remark, that if these illustrious dead should rise and appear before the American people, there would not be the same exertion to tender honors to them as in the case of Kossuth. Why has my friend from the Scioto district become so devotedly attached to the names of Madison and Jackson as this, that he places them among the great men of the country? The gentleman has been a party man-he has always given his allegiance as a party man; and when the illustrious Jackson was alive, and a candidate for the highest honors before the American people, he belonged to the party that carried the coffin hand-bills to blacken the name of that great man. Why does he rise now and place him before the American people as one of those to whom they will not pay honor before they would to the name of Kossuth? It is not to that remark particularly to which I wish to call the attention party man. He knows the condition of his party now. He sees the handwriting upon the wall, and he knows full well what the interpretation of that handwriting is. Does he stand here for the purpose of giving information Mr. TAYLOR, (interposing.) Will the gentleman allow me to ask him a question? 1 will ask him if he was not opposed to Jackson, and if he did not at one time belong to the Whig party in Ohio? Mr. OLDS, (resuming.) I will reply to the gentleman. I once belonged to the Whig party; but I have done works meet for repentance. Has my colleague changed his views relative to General Jackson and James Madison, as I have mine. Sir, what I wish to call the attention of the committee to at this time is this: the gentleman being a party man, and seeing the handwriting upon the wall, and knowing well the interpretation, wishes to speak upon this floor, not for the ears of members, but so that it will reach the ears of Southerners-men who will be called before a year shall have elapsed to vote for another presidential candidate. What is the insinuation of my colleague? It is, that these Northern fanatics-Free-Soilers and Abolitionists-are uniting with the Democracy for the purpose of getting the ascendency in this country. How long is it since my friend from the Scioto district [Mr. TAYLOR] has eschewed all connection with abolitionism and free-soilism in Ohio? How long is it since his party has eschewed all connection of that kind? Has not his party, in Ohio, been united with every ism in the country? Did not his party unite with Anti-Masonry for the purpose of political ascendency? Has not his party in Ohio for years perambulated that State, cajoled, coaxed, and courted Abolitionism and Free-Soilism, for the purpose of gaining the power of the State? Did they in their convention of the 3d July dare to come out and express any opinion upon the compromise measures, on one side or the other? No, sir. They did not dare do it: an important election was soon to come off. FreeSoil votes were necessary to their success. They evaded the question by merely saying the "compromise was not a Whig measure. But in order to conciliate the Free-Soil vote of Ohio, what did they do? They nominated as one of their candidates for the supreme bench of the State, a man who declared in the convention that amended the constitution of our State, that office should not be bestowed upon or withheld from any man on account of the color of his skin, and that if there was a black man in his county qualified to discharge the duties of magistrate, and the people approved of him for that office, he had no objection to his filling it. They took this man as one of their candidates for the bench of the supreme court of Ohio, in order to conciliate the Free-Soil party. But the bait did not take. The Free-Soilers held their separate convention, and nominated a full ticket. What then, sir, did the gentleman's party do? || have a letter in his pocket from General Taylor to the Free-Soilers of Ohio, pledging the General to the maintenance of the Wilmot proviso, though he was never willing to show the letter. Such was the man who had been elected Senator by the Whigs, and Tom Ewing was no better; and the Democrats of Ohio, by a combination with the Free-Soilers, elected a man who, although at Free-Soiler, was a thorough, radical Democratright upon the tariff-right upon the currencyright upon all the great radical questions of the Democracy of Ohio, with the exception, perhaps, of this slavery question. There was, perhaps, one point on which he may have differed from the Democrats of Ohio, but being right on all others, what were the Democrats to do? Were they to sit still and see "Butcher Tom" sent to the Senate rather than vote for Mr. CHASE, who is a thorough, radical Democrat upon all questions but upon the question of slavery? But pray, who is the junior Senator from the State of Ohio [Mr. WADE] who was elected last winter by a combi Why it was said-though I do not make the charge not go the same length as Mr. CHASE upon the slavery question? But such has been the state of things in Ohio, that the Free-Soil party have held the balance of power, and both parties have been obliged to coalesce with them. Mr. GIDDINGS. I want to know of my colleague, whether he intends publicly before the nation to declare, that both parties are under the Mr. CAMPBELL, of Ohio. Will my col-control of, and obligations to, the Free-Soilers? league give way for a single question? Mr. OLDS. Certainly. Mr. CAMPBELL. do not undertake to say that some of the remarks of my colleague in relation to the Whig party of Ohio are not true. It is very true that the Whig party of that State have uniformly declared themselves opposed to the extension of slavery, &c.; but if I understand the current of the gentleman's remarks, he desires to cast some sort of odium upon the Whig party for having taken that position. Now, I rise merely for the purpose of making an inquiry of the gentleman, as he is going over in detail the political proceedings of our State, and that is, whether it was not the Democratic party of Ohio who elected to the Senate of the United States the present senior Senator, Mr. CHASE? I put that question to my colleague for the purpose of showing that the Democratic party, as well as the Whig party, has been indulging in that way somewhat. [Laughter.] Mr. OLDS. I am glad to have an opportunity to reply to that point, for it appears to me that there is a point there, and if the House will indulge me a moment, I will tell an anecdote in relation to it. The anecdote was told me by Colonel Powell, of Kentucky, now the Democratic Governor of that State. There was an old man away down in his neighborhood who was always a candidate for office, and when a candidate published long political essays to the country. His name was Jones, and he had been so long a candidate for office that they called him " Live-forever Jones." One fine day he came to Colonel Powell and said: "Colonel, I have got a political essay that I wish to have your opinion upon. The Colonel took it and read it through, and then remarked that it was very well written, but that he could see no point in it. You cannot see any point in it?" said Jones; and then he took the essay and read it over paragraph by paragraph. Still the Colonel said that although it was very well written, excellent grammar, good rounded periods, still he could see no point in it. "Well," said the old man, "that's just what I want; now I've got my essay without any point; for when I make a point, they always get me on a point." [A laugh.] It strikes me that my friend over the way has made a point, and I should not be surprised if I got him on that point. Now, who was the alternative offered to the Democrats when they elected Mr. CHASE to the United States Senate? Who was the candidate of the Whig party? Why, Tom Ewing "Butcher Tom," as he is called-was a candidate, and Tom Corwin was a candidate. Mr. CAMPBELL. Oh no; he did not need to be a candidate, for he was then in the Senate of the United States, and his term had not expired. Mr. OLDS. My friend is right: Mr. Corwin had already been rewarded, by an election by the Whigs and Free-Soilers of Ohio, in part payment of important services rendered his party in perambulating the Western Reserve, pretending to | [Laughter.] Mr. OLDS. That is the very point at which I was about to arrive, and the very point that my friend from the Ross district [Mr. TAYLOR] is trying to avoid now, by severing the connection between the Whigs and Free-Soilers. Yes, the Free-Soilers have held the control of the State elections. The Legislature was so organized that neither the Democratic party nor the Whig party had a majority of all the votes upon joint ballot, and therefore, in the election of a United States Senator or a State officer, the Free-Soilers held the balance of power, and the Democrats could not elect a United States Senator, unless they selected a man who was a Democrat, it is true, but holding free-soil doctrines. Sir, the Whigs had taught us the potency of such means; they had often practised them. They have always been more adroit in their use than the Democracy. They out-generaled us last winter; as manifested in the election of the junior Senator from Ohio, [Mr. WADE.] They tried by skillful manœuvres to use the Free-Soilers in our last fall's election; but they failed. The day, as my friend from the Ross district [Mr. TAYLOR] well knows, has gone by when the Free-Soilers can be of any use to the Whigs of Ohio. The people of the State have spoken through the ballotboxes, and given ten thousand majority for the Democrats, over both Whigs and Free-Soilers, and now my colleague [Mr. TAYLOR] is willing to coalesce with Southern gentlemen, and would have Southern Democrats believe that the Northern Whigs are with them. Let me raise my warning voice, and say to my Southern friends, Beware of these Birney Roorbacks! Beware of the Whigs of Ohio, who have been wedded to the Free-Soilers and Abolitionists, from the first dawn of political Free-Soilism in Ohio! But now, when they can no longer be of any use in obtaining State power, the gentleman wishes to sever, the connection, and he calls upon this House to divorce the Whig party from that marriage contract made with the Free-Soil party of Ohio. He wishes now to take to his bosom the Southern people, and to make them believe that the Whigs of Ohio have been standing up for the peculiar institutions of the South. The gentleman would give the impression, by his argument on this floor, that the Northern Democrats are against the people of the South, and that the Northern Whigs are on their side, and yet when you look at the record of the vote on the passage of the fugitive slave bill, you will find twenty-seven Northern Democrats to three Northern Whigs, voting for that measurealthough I admit that my colleague was one of those three. I care nothing about this Kossuth vote; it is a mere matter of moonshine with me. I care nothing about the quarrel between my two colleagues; but let me give the cheering intelligence to the House, that my colleague from the Ashtabula district [Mr. GIDDINGS] holds a decided advantage over my other colleague from the Ross district, [Mr. TAYLOR.] Our State will be redistricted for Congressional purposes this session of our Legislature. The Democracy will do this work; and I doubt not that it will be well done. The gentleman from the Abolition district [Mr. GIDDINGS] will come back to this House again. His district is so situated that we cannot attach enough democracy to it, to oust him from his seat. He holds a life tenure upon this floor; but my colleague from the Ross district has no such tenure. Mr. BAYLY, of Virginia, next obtained the floor. Young, of York county, Pennsylvania, praying compensation for disability incurred in the service of the United States during the war with Mexico. which was referred to the Committee on Naval Affairs. By Mr. KUHNS: The petition of Frederick Willyard, of By Mr. LANE: The petition of citizens of Oregon relative to the custom-house at Pugit's Sound. By Mr. THOMAS M. HOWE: The memorial of Lewis Peterson and others, citizens of Alleghany county, Pennsylvania, praying for such a modification of the present rates of duty as will afford adequate protection to the manufac turers of salt. Also, the petition of R. Moyle and others, praying for a national canal at the Falls of St. Marie, Michigan. By Mr. ROBBINS: A memorial of the citizens of Pennsylvania, signed by Robert M. Lee and 31 others, praying Mr. MARSHALL, of California. Will the gentleman from Virginia yield me the floor for Congress to modify the bounty land act of September 24th, moment? I desire, before the committee rises, to offer an amendment to the bill. Mr. BAYLY. I have no objection to yield it for that purpose. Mr. MARSHALL. I wish to offer an amendment to the bill which has been under discussion, or ought to have been under discussion, all morning. My amendment is in these words: Provided, That the President may cause the payment to be made at such time and in such manner as will be most acceptable to the Government of Mexico. I do not, of course, wish to discuss this amendment now, but I have some few observations upon it, which I shall wish to submit at a more suitable time than the present. I now move that the committee rise. The question was put and agreed to. The committee accordingly rose, and the Speaker having resumed the chair, the Chairman [Mr. JONES] reported that the Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union had had under consideration the state of the Union generally, and particularly House bill No. 46, providing for carrying into execution in further part the twelfth article of the treaty concluded with Mexico at Guadalupe Hidalgo, but had come to no conclusion thereon. Mr. BARRERE, from the Committee on Enrolled Bills, reported back as correctly enrolled An act authorizing the Secretary of the Treasury to issue a register to the brig Ada; and An act to provide a room for the Congressional library. On motion by Mr. FOWLER, the House then adjourned. NOTICE OF BILL. Mr. MACE gave notice that he would on to-morrow, or some subsequent day, introduce a "Bill to provide for the settlement of claims against the United States." PETITIONS, &c. The following petitions, memorials, &c., were presented under the rule, and referred to the appropriate committees: By Mr. FLORENCE: The memorial of Samuel W. Jones, William R. White, Charles Macalester, and others, interested in the claims upon the United States for spolia tions on the property of American citizens prior to the year 1801, petitioning Congress to pass a law for their speedy liquidation. Also, the memorial of Edward A. Lowder & Co., Michael Errickson, John S. Newlin, and others, citizens of the States of Pennsylvania, Delaware, and New Jersey, petitioning Congress to make appropriations, at the present session, for the erection of a suitable pier and harbor in the Delaware river and bay as will afford shelter to vessels navigating them. Also, the memorial of John H. Parker, Henry M. Zollickoffer, Nicola Manachesi, and others, citizens of the State of Pennsylvania, petitioning Congress to pass a law to prohibit the banishment, deportation, or immigration, from foreign countries to the United States, of all convicts, felons, and paupers, publicly recognized as such in their By Mr. PORTER: The petition of Lloyd Dorsey, of Missouri, asking permission to enter, at the minimum 1850, so as to give to each of the persons intended to be benefited by the said act, and to seamen and marines who served in naval war, not less than 160 acres of land. By Mr. CHANDLER: The memorial of the Presidents of the Marine Insurance Companies of Philadelphia, asking that a light ship," with a "fog bill," be placed in the Slur near Cape Roman, South Carolina. Also, the memorial of the Presidents of the Marine Insurance Companies of Philadelphia, asking Congress to increase the salary of the judge of the United States court at Key West. By Mr. SCUDDER: The petition of Charles West and others, of Massachusetts, asking that the appropriation måde by the Thirty-first Congress for a light-house at Holmes's Hole, may be applied, by the Secretary of the Treasury, to the erection of three beacon or bug lights, according to the recommendation in the report of the Superintendent of the Coast Survey. By Mr. ROBBINS: The memorial of John S. Mayne, of Philadelphia, one of the heirs of Dr. Samuel McKenzie, Surgeon of the Pennsylvania Continental Line in the revolutionary war, claiming commutation or five years' full pay. By Mr. WELCH: The petition of A. S. Tidd, asking to have his road from Long Bottom to Tupper's Plains, in Meigs county, Ohio, declared a post route. By Mr. CABELL: The memorial of Joseph R. Croskey, Consul at Cowes, England, for reimbursement for extraordinary expenses incurred in the public service. IN SENATE. EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS. The PRESIDENT pro tempore laid before the Senate a communication from the President of the United States, transmitting a report of the Department of State, containing copies of the correspondence which has taken place between that Department and the Minister of the United States in Paris, respecting the political occurrences which have recently taken place in France; which was read.. On motion by Mr. MANGUM, it was Ordered, That it be referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations, and printed. The PRESIDENT pro tempore laid before the Senate a report of the Secretary of War, communicating, in compliance with a resolution of the Senate of the 11th December, 1851, a copy of the proceedings of the general court-martial convened in this city the 23d of June, 1851, for the trial of Brevet Brigadier General George Talcott, Colonel of Ordnance; which was read. On motion by Mr. CLARKE, it was Ordered, That it be referred to the Committee on Military Affairs. The PRESIDENT pro tempore laid before the Senate a report of the Secretary of War, communicating, in compliance with a resolution of the Senate of the 9th December, 1851, a report of the Chief Topographical Engineer, in relation to inundations of the Mississippi river, with estimates of the appropriation required to complete the surveys and investigations heretofore directed; which was read. Mr. DOWNS moved that it be printed, and that two thousand additional copies be printed, three hundred of which for the use of the Topographical Bureau. Mr. SEWARD submitted a document in relation to the claim of the widow of Brigadier General Belknap to a pension; which was referred to the Committee on Pensions. Mr. PEARCE presented the memorial of Sarah A. Watson, widow of Lieutenant Colonel William H. Watson, praying a continuance of her pension; which was referred to the Committee on Pensions. Also, a memorial of merchants, underwriters, and others, of Baltimore, Maryland, praying Congress to authorize a survey of certain shoals in the China Seas, the Straits of Gaspar, and Java Sea, which lie in the tracks of vessels proceeding to and from China; which was referred to the Committee on Commerce. Mr. UNDERWOOD submitted an additional document in relation to the claim of William S. Waller; which was referred to the Committee of Claims. Mr. MALLORY presented the petition of H. S. Kenny, praying compensation for subsistence, forage, and other supplies, furnished to a company of Texas volunteers in 1849; which was referred to the Committee on Military Affairs. Mr. DODGE, of Iowa, presented a petition of citizens of Jasper county, Iowa, praying the correction of an error in the entry of certain lands by Meshech Dearinger and William Dearinger; which was referred to the Committee on Public Lands. Also, a memorial of citizens of Iowa, praying a grant of land to that State for the construction of a railroad from Burlington to the Missouri river; which was referred to the Committee on Public Lands. Mr. WADE presented the proceedings of the City Council of the city of Cincinnati, in favor of an appropriation for the purchase of the private stock of the Louisville and Portland Canal, a reduction of the tolls, and an enlargement of the Canal; which was referred to the Committee on Roads and Canals. CLAIMS AGAINST MEXICO. Mr. DOWNS. I have in my possession a petition of Daniel N. Pope, one of the claimants for indemnity against Mexico, who prays that some provision may be made for the reinvestigation of his claim. I have also a similar petition from Andrew J. Brame. There are now several petitions before the Senate on this subject, which have been presented by myself and other Senators, of which the Senate has made no disposition. I see that the honorable Senator from New Jersey, [Mr. STOCKTON,] who made the motion the other day to refer these memorials to a select commit tee, is now in his seat. I now make the same motion which he then made, and I will state that I was mistaken the other day in relation to that matter. I understood the Chair to say that the motion at that time pending was to refer the memorial which he presented to the Committee on Foreign Relations. I have since understood that the Senator from New Jersey moved to refer it to a select committee. Mr. BRODHEAD. I understood the Senator from New Jersey to move to refer to a select committee. The PRESIDENT. No, sir; he suggested that he would make that motion at the proper time. Mr. DOWNS. Then I make the motion now. I will state that I have looked into these memo That motion goes to the Committee on Printing. price, certain pieces of land in St. Charles county, Missouri communicating, in compliance with a resolution within the unconfirmed claim of Francis Smith, deceased. By Mr. ROBBINS: The petition of John H. Scott and 84 others, citizens of Pennsylvania, praying Congress to pass a law to prohibit the deportation of all convicts, felons, and paupers, publicly recognized as such at home in their own countries. By Mr. AVERETT: The petition of 303 citizens of the third Congressional district in Virginia, praying that the office of Chaplain be abolished. By Mr. THOMAS M. HOWE : The memorial of Charles Avery and others, citizens of Pittsburg, Pennsylvania, praying for the construction of a ship canal around the falls of the river St. Marie, Michigan. of the Senate of March 12, 1851, a report on the statistics and history of the steam marine of the United States; which was read. Ordered, That it be referred to the Committee on Com merce. PETITIONS. Mr. CLARKE presented the petition of Julia M. Lawrence, widow of James Lawrence, a naval officer, and one of the captors of the frigate Phil to which they relate is important, and that it requires serious and laborious examination. The memorialists make complaints of so serious a nature, that I think it is indispensably necessary, in justice to them, that a full investigation should take place. The only objection I have to these memorials going to the Committee on Foreign Relations is, that their other avocations are so important that the committee will not be able to devote the necessary time to the consideration of this sub By Mr. KURTZ: The petition and papers of Henry || adelphia, praying to be allowed prize money;ject. As I said the other day, these memorials are very similar in their nature to those in relation to the claims for French spoliations, and are not properly referable to any of the standing committees of the Senate. Hence I think that, like the memorials in reference to French spoliation claims, they should go to a select committee. Besides, the petitioners request that a select committee be appointed with power to send for persons and papers. I would state that there are some things in the proceedings of this board which seem to me astonishing. I find that several memorialists represent that their claims on being presented were stated to be admitted, subject to the future order of the board, and afterwards some of them had been reduced to one half of the sum which they had claimed, and that some were rejected altogether. The first idea was, that they had perhaps reserved them in order to make a pro rata distribution, but on examination I find that that discretion was not left to the board, but to the Secretary of the Treasury after the returns were made. There is another very serious matter set forth by the memorialists, and that is, that when the decisions were made they were never informed of their nature. They say that in some particular cases this information was given, but that although application was repeatedly made to know the grounds on which their claims were rejected, in order that if there were any errors a reconsideration might be obtained, and although they were promised from time to time that such opportunities would be afforded, yet that until the commission was closed they were not allowed to examine and see the grounds on which their claims were rejected. Not only was that the case, but it was attended with this very singular circumstancethese papers were all returned to the office of the Secretary of State and there sealed up. There is no reason that I know of, why they should be kept secret; certainly after the Board examined the claims, the claimants ought to have an opportunity of looking into the grounds of the decision, and see what was done in relation to their claims. Yet I am informed, on good authority, though not officially, that these papers, since they have been returned, have been put under seal; so that the parties cannot get any information which may be necessary for the further investigation of their claims. These things may all be very right, but they seem to me very strange; and I think that when so many persons are calling for relief, an investigation ought to take place. I therefore move that these memorials which I have presented be referred to a select committee of five, with power to send for persons and papers. I wish also to include those memorials which have heretofore been presented in relation to this subject, but which have been laid upon the table. The PRESIDENT. That cannot be done without moving to take them from the table. Mr. DOWNS. Then I confine my motion to the memorials which I have now presented. Mr. MANGUM. Mr. President, I hope that the motion of the honorable Senator from Louisiana will not be acceded to by the Senate. I suppose that the standing committees of this body are capable of passing upon all questions which may arise. This is a question which is appropriate to the Committee on Foreign Relations. I would not say anything upon this subject, but for the fact that the chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations [Mr. MASON] is absent. In all the numerous commissions which have originated in this country during the time I have served in the Congress of the United States, I have never known a case where persons disappointed in their expectations with regard to claims, have not complained of the injustice and unfairness with which they were treated. But when we have deputed and delegated to these commissioners the adjustment of claims, nothing but a most flagrant case should tempt or induce Congress to interpose. I move that the memorial be referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations. The PRESIDENT. As the Committee on Foreign Relations is a standing committee, the first question will be on the reference to that committee. Mr. DOWNS. I should perhaps have no very serious objection to the reference of the memorials to that committee, but for the fact that a prominent member of that committee has expressed a very decided opinion in reference to this matter, and seemed to have very much the same idea about the claims that the Commissioners had, that is, that all the injustice was done to Mexico, and none to the claimants, and that it was a duty to oppose them, and cut their claims down as much as possible. I think, if gentlemen will look into these claims, they will find them to be of a very different character. Many of these claims, and one which I presented some time ago, were admitted by a former Board of Commissioners of at least as high authority and dignity as the last Board, but were referred on some points to the umpire, and were not decided by him. These claims, I take it, are clearly recognized as being entitled to be liquidated by a subsequent treaty. In the case to which I have alluded as having been presented by me some time since, an order was made by the Board that the claim should be allowed, subject to the future order of the Board, yet when the future order of the Board came, they rejected the claim altogether. I think that a matter of this importance requires some investigation. It may be all right; and if it is, it will not suffer by investigation. The gentleman seems to think that these complaints should not be listened to, and that there will always be complaints of this character. Perhaps the Senator is not aware that it was never expected by our negotiator in Mexico, or by the Government here, or by the people generally, that the amount of three millions and a quarter of dollars stipulated in the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo should be the only compensation which the United States would make. That was urged as an objection by the Mexican negotiators when the treaty was made; but Mr. Trist replied to them, that although that amount was fixed, still that was not necessarily to be the limit to which the United States would go-that there was no reason why they should not pay a greater amount if claims to a greater amount were justly due. And when we take into consideration the fact that these claims were presented against Mexico, and that when we were enforcing them against that Government we did not fix them at three millions and a quarter, but at some eight millions of dollars, it is very strange indeed that we should now confine the claims to that limit of three millions and a quarter. But I understand, further, that the Board, so far from going beyond the three milfions and a quarter, which was evidently contemplated by the treaty, have fallen short of it, and that forty thousand dollars of that amount has not been absorbed, and that Mexico has perhaps already laid claim to that surplus as belonging to her, because this Government stipulated to pay that amount, and she claims that she is entitled to any surplus which may remain if the amount is not paid. She is certainly entitled to it, if the Board have acted fairly and justly, but she is not entitled to it if these claimants have not been fairly treated. All I ask and all I wish is, that a thorough investigation of this matter shall take place; and I am more anxious that these memorials should now be referred to a select committee, because the gentleman from North Carolina seems to intimate very clearly that they will receive very little quarter from the Committee on Foreign Relations, because he thinks that all such claims are apt to be wrong. Mr. MANGUM. I was not present when this motion was made on a former day; but I understand that the chairman of the committee on Foreign Relations then gave some indications of an opinion upon this subject. I know not what his opinions were; but there is not a Senator in this body who is acquainted with the ability and remarkable liberality of the chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations who would not be willing to trust anything to his judgment, no matter what might have been his first impression. The honorable Senator from Louisiana says that this subject requires some investigation. I need not say anything as to the capability of the Committee on Foreign Relations to investigate the subject. At its head stands one of the most eminent and able lawyers of this body, [Mr. MASON.] The second member on that committee [Mr. DOUGLAS] is a prominent candidate for President of the United States. There are others of us on that committee, very humble, to be sure; but yet I think that that committee may be trusted as capable of investigating almost any question relating to their appropriate sphere of duty. Sir, this practice of raising select committees in this body is of very recent origin. It is only on rare occasions, when the Union is shaking to its foundation, that the Senate have decided to depart from its usual and settled practice, and appoint select committees. The Union will suffer no detriment if these claims should never be allowed. I hope the country will do justice to all claimants. But the Senator entirely misconceives what I said, if he understood me as having expressed an opinion that these claims which have been rejected ought not to have a fair hearing. So far from it, when the interposition of this body shall become necessary for the purpose of setting the matter right, I trust I shall be found ready to go as far as anybody. The aggregate amount of ability of the Committee on Foreign Relations is well understood by this body. The two first members of it ought at least to give it currency in this body, and place it on an equal footing with any select committee which can be raised. I trust that on a mere question of private claim we shall not depart from the usual and dignified course of the Senate by appointing a select committee to pay money to persons who it has been decided are not entitled to it. Mr. DOWNS. I hope that the Senator from North Carolina will not understand me as objecting to the reference of these memorials to the Committee on Foreign Relations. I have no objection to that committee. I disclaim any such idea. I have as much respect and as much confidence in the members of that committee as any Senator. But I stated before that I wished this subject to be referred to a select committee, because I thought the labors of the Committee on Foreign Relations in reference to other questions were so great that they could not devote the time and attention to the consideration of this subject which it seems to me to require. I think the honorable Senator is entirely mistaken in one point. He says that it has not been the custom of the Senate to refer questions to select committees, except in the case of great questions, where the Union has been in danger. I need only remind the Senate of a case which happened at the last session of Congress, and at this session in reference to a question which did not affect the Union at all. I refer to the claims for French spoliations. These are exactly such claims as those. They are claims against a foreign Government, which have been relinquished against that Government and preferred against our own; and, therefore, they cease to be connected with our foreign relations, because we have taken their payment upon ourselves. Mr. MANGUM. The French spoliation claims involve the payment of from $5,000,000 to $10,000,000. How does the Senator know involve the payment of Mr. DOWNS. that this may not $5,000,000? Mr. MANGUM. If it should involve that amount it would be very astonishing. Mr. DOWNS. It might not be so astonishing as the Senator seems to suppose, because the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo has made provision for $3,250,000, whereas our Government asserted, when prosecuting these claims against Mexico, that there should be paid $8,000,000. It may turn out that this difference of $5,000,000 is due to these claimants. I do not know how the fact may be. Hence, it cannot be so astonishing as the Senator seems to suppose. However, that is not material. This is a case very analogous to that of the claims for French spoliations; and, therefore, I would have moved to refer these memorials to a select committee. The Senator from North Carolina is mistaken in saying that the chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations said anything on this subject when it was before us a few days ago. I recollect that he was not here at that time, and that his colleague [Mr. HUNTER] suggested that the memorials upon this subject ought to go to the Committee on Foreign Relations. I suppose it was that to which the Senator had reference. Again: it would be no want of confidence in the Committee on Foreign Relations to refer those memorials to a select committee. I made the motion because I thought that a more thorough and sifting investigation could be had by a committee specially charged with this business. I cannot see with what propriety the Senate should send those old claims for French spoliations committed prior to 1801 to select committees, session after session, and now refuse a select committee to another set of claimants standing very much in an analogous position. I do not see why we should make this distinction. I hope, therefore, that these memorials will be referred to a select committee. Mr. HALE. I have not heard any of these petitions read. In order that I may vote understandingly on the subject, I would like to hear one of them read. The PRESIDENT. There are a number of petitions on this subject. Mr. HALE. Let one of them be read. Mr. BRADBURY. It would occupy an hour. Mr. HALE. Well, can any one give me an abstract of one of the petitions? Do they allege corruption? because if they do, I believe it. If there were three millions of money to be disbursed by the Government without there being corruption in the transaction, it would form an exception to the general rule. And if there was not corruption, if these claims were honestly investigated, whoever heard of parties litigant going before a tribunal, and both plaintiff and defendant being satisfied with the result? You have instituted this Commis sion, and the money has been, or is about to be paid out. Some of the parties are dissatisfied and complain of gross injustice. I have no doubt of it in the least. And if you were to institute another commission, and disburse three millions more, there would be twice as many dissatisfied then as there are now, and the number of claims would be increased. Instead of lessening the amount of the claims, you would increase them; and you would increase the dissatisfaction. If it is supposed that by multiplying commissions and increasing the amount of payments, you would decrease the amount of dissatisfaction, it will be found to be a great mistake. If there be a charge of corruption, I hope it will be made definite; and I hope the Senate will take some course to vindicate the Government against abuses of that sort. But I can tell these claimants, that if they are suffering under corruption, they are not alone. Why, it is said that when the late President of the United States, General Taylor, came to take his seat at the head of the administration of the Government, the poor old gentleman came with the idea that he was going to drag this Government back to its original purity. The task proved too strong for his Herculean powers, and he fainted and died under it; and so would any man. It cannot be done. Corruption is the history of the day, and it will be found not only in this commission, but in a great many other places. If there is a charge I hope it will be made definite. If there is not general dissatisfaction; but if there is a definite charge made of corruption, perjury, forgery, or anything of that sort, then I would be willing to investigate it, and go as far as anybody. But if this is merely a case where there is dissatisfaction on the part of claimants on account of their claims not being paid, it is an idle task, it is perfectly useless, to undertake to satisfy them. It is for this reason that I asked for the reading of some one of the petitions, that I might see whether a specific charge of corruption was preferred against anybody. The PRESIDENT. One of the memorials will be read if the Senator desires it. Mr. DOWNS. I can state briefly the nature of the memorials. Mr. HALE. I am willing to take the statement of the honorable Senator from Louisiana. Mr. DOWNS. The honorable Senator from New Hampshire is mistaken in supposing that the memorialists charge corruption. Tunderstand them to charge no such thing. But they do charge that injustice has been done them; that there is a mystery about the matter; that the investigation has not been as public as such things ought to be; that they were never informed until the Board had closed its sessions of the nature of the objections to their claims, although they were promised an opportunity; and that, finally, the grounds of the decisions and all the papers were sent to the office of the Secretary of State, and there sealed up. These memorialists do not ask that their claims should be paid as they represent them; but they state the circumstances under which the awards of the Board were made; and that previously some of those claims which have now been rejected, were allowed by Boards of Commissioners of as high respectability as any board that ever sat on similar claims. They complain that claims have been rejected by the late Board of Commissioners, and that no reasons for their rejection had been made public, or placed in a form to be accessible to the claimants. They ask that this veil of secrecy, which is so inconsistent with our course of proceedings generally, in courts of justice and everywhere else, should be removed, and that the matter should be looked into. It may turn out that these claims were properly rejected. If so, the first duty of a select committee, if one should be appointed, would be to report that fact. In my. opinion these memorialists are justly dissatisfied with this state of things, and they merely ask that a committee should look into the matter, and see if their complaints of injustice are not well founded. If they are well founded, certainly it is the duty of the Government to interpose and render them justice. The Senator from New Hampshire says that when parties go before a tribunal, the disappointed party will be dissatisfied. But I would ask, have these parties not a right to be dissatisfied, since these investigations have not taken the usual course? Where was the necessity for the proceedings of the Board to be kept secret? Why were not the decisions made as in all other courts? Why were not the records open to those persons, that they might see upon what grounds their claims were rejected? In all our courts, even in the highest courts, there is always an opportunity for a reconsideration and revision of opinions. What would we think of one of our courts of justice, whether a subordinate or a supreme court, if, when they rendered a decision, they should keep it secret, and keep the records and documents in the case a sealed book, not allowing the parties interested to look into them until the proceedings of the court were closed, and then to say that their decision was final and irrevocable, and could never be looked into? What sort of justice would that be? I know nothing of this transaction except what I learn from the representations of the memorialists, who are most of them respectable persons; and I say that they do make out a very strong case for the investigation of a select committee. That is all I ask. If the committee, after investigation, shall report that these claims were rightly disallowed, I shall not have a word to say. But I think that the memorialists make out a case which entitles them to have the subject considered by a select committee. The PRESIDENT. The Chair must interpose. This discussion is not in order. It is not in order to go into the discussion of the merits of a case upon the simple question whether the memorials shall be referred to a select committee or to a standing committee. Mr. MANGUM. I rose for the purpose of making, in substance, that very remark. No one present, that I have yet heard, has hinted the slightest degree of opposition to the reinvestigation of this matter. The only question before the Senate is, whether these memorials shall go to a regular committee or to a special committee. The PRESIDENT. The question is on the motion to refer these memorials, which have been presented by the Senator from Louisiana, to the Committee on Foreign Relations. Mr. DOWNS. My motion was to refer them to a select committee of five. The PRESIDENT. The Chair is aware of that, but a motion having been made to refer them to the Committee on Foreign Relations, that motion has precedence, and is first to be put. The motion to refer the memorials to the Com mittee on Foreign Relations was agreed to-ayes 25, noes 12. On motion by Mr. DOWNS, it was Ordered, That all similar memorials on the files, presented during the present session, be referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations. PAPERS WITHDRAWN AND REFERRED. On motion by Mr. WADE, it was Ordered, That the petition and papers of Bryan Callaghan be withdrawn from the files of the Senate. On motion by Mr. BELL, it was Ordered, That the petition of Arabella J. Strong, widow and executrix of Lorenzo N. Clarke, on the files of the Senate, be referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs. On motion by Mr. DODGE, of Iowa, it was Ordered, That the papers in the case of the Iowa militia claim, on the files of the Senate, be referred to the Commit tee on Military Affairs; and that the letters of the Secretary of War and the Adjutant General, accompanying the same, be printed. On motion by Mr. GWIN, it was Ordered, That the petition and papers of McKean Buchanan, a purser in the Navy, on the files of the Senate, be referred to the Committee on Naval Affairs. On motion by Mr. WHITCOMB, it was Ordered, That the papers relating to the claim of the administrator of Major Wade, a quartermaster of marines, be referred to the Committee of Claims. On motion by Mr. DOWNS, it was Ordered, That the heirs of Andrew D. Crosby have leave to withdraw their petition and papers. On motion by Mr. FELCH, it was Ordered, That the petition of George Barrell and S. V. S. Wilder, on the files of the Senate, in behalf of them selves and the other heirs of the owners of the ship "Columbia" and sloop "Washington," be referred to the Committee on Public Lands. On motion by Mr. FELCH, it was Ordered, That the petition and papers of John Watson, on the files of the Senate, be referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs. Mr. UNDERWOOD. I have been requested Zollikoffer, who petitioned Congress at the last to ask leave to withdraw the papers of William session for a pension. I am informed that there was an unfavorable report in that case, but that it was not acted upon. These are the facts under which the petitioner desires to withdraw his pa pers. The PRESIDENT. them? Simply to withdraw Mr. UNDERWOOD. Yes, sir. Mr. PEARCE. Am I to understand that the report made in this case was unfavorable? Mr. UNDERWOOD. It was unfavorable, but it was never acted on, according to the information which I have on the subject. Mr. MANGUM. It will be a very bad precedent to allow papers to be withdrawn in such cases. If there be additional testimony, and there is any purpose on the part of the petitioner to apply to the Senate for that relief, let the question be decided when it comes, for on its coming, if I understand the rule, the case may again be re ferred to a committee. Mr. UNDERWOOD. I withdraw the motion. I think myself that in general it is a bad thing, and I would like to ascertain more as to the motives which induced the petitioner to make the request. The motion was accordingly withdrawn. REPORTS FROM STANDING Committees. Mr. DODGE, of Wisconsin, from the Committee on Commerce, to whom was referred the memorial of Charles S. Jackson, submitted a report; which was considered by unanimous consent, and, in concurrence therewith, Ordered, That the Committee be discharged from the further consideration thereof. On motion by Mr. DODGE, of Wisconsin, it was Ordered, That the report be printed. Mr. HAMLIN, from the Committee on Commerce, to whom was referred the petition of the citizens of Martinicus, reported a bill to annex the Island of Martinicus, in the county of Lincoln, State of Maine, to the collection district of Waldo boro', in said county; which was read and passed to the second reading. Mr. SOULE, from the Committee on Commerce, to whom was referred the petition of John S. Maunsell, reported a bill to admit the Hermaphrodite brig Sylphide to registry; which was read and passed to the second reading. imous consent, and considered as in Committee of The said bill was read the second time by unanthe Whole; and no amendment being made, it was reported to the Senate. Ordered, That it be engrossed and read a third time. Mr. SEWARD, from the Committee on Commerce, reported a bill to authorize an exploration and reconnoissance of the courses of navigation used by whaling vessels in the regions of Behring's Straits; and also, of such parts of the China seas, Straits of Gaspar, and Java sea, as lie directly in the route of vessels proceeding to and from China; which was read and passed to the second reading. The report accompanying the bill was ordered to be printed. Mr. FOOT, from the Committee on Pensions, 18 to whom was referred the petition of William Miller, submitted a report, accompanied by a bill for his relief. The bill was read and passed to the second reading. Ordered, That the report be printed. Mr. BAYARD, from the Committee of Claims, to whom was referred the memorial of Ezra Williams, submitted a report, accompanied by a bill for his relief. The bill was read and passed to the second reading. Ordered, That the report be printed. Mr. BRADBURY, from the Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the bill authorizing the payment of interest to the State of New Hampshire for advances made for the use and benefit of the United States in repelling invasion and suppressing insurrection at Indian Stream, in that State, reported it without amendment. On the motion of Mr. HALE, the Senate pro. ceeded to consider the bill as in Committee of the Whole; and no amendment being made, it was reported to the Senate, ordered to be read a third time; and it was read a third time and passed. NOTICE OF A BILL. Mr. SEBASTIAN gave notice of his intention to introduce a bill to be entitled "An act to revive for a limited time An act in relation to donations of lands to certain persons in the State of Arkansas."" BOOKS FOR NEW SENATORS. Mr. BADGER submitted the following resolution for consideration: Resolved, That each of the new members of the Senate de supplied with the same number and description of books as were furnished to each of the members of the Senate of the last Congress. CENSUS RETURNS The Senate proceeded to consider the resolution submitted by Mr. HAMLIN on the 20th instant, in relation to the Census returns; and, having been amended, was agreed to, as follows: Resolved, That the Secretary of the Interior be requested to furnish the Senate with an estimate of the number of pages which the Census Returns will contain, if the same shall be completed on the plan now pursued by the Census Bureau. Also, what part of the same will be composed of statistical tables, and what part of other matter; and whether there are any tables accompanying the same not designated by law. WILLIAM K. LATIMER. On the motion of Mr. HALE, the following resolution was.considered and agreed to: Resolved, That the charges and specifications, and also the report and opinion of a court of inquiry in the case of William K. Latimer, and the letter of the Secretary of the Navy transmitting the same, and the general order in said case, dated July 1, 1851, be printed for the use of the Sen ate. ASSIGNABILITY OF LAND WARRANTS. The bill to make land warrants assignable, and for other purposes, which was ordered to a third reading yesterday, was read a third time and passed. GENERAL ORDERS. Mr. GWIN. As I understand that the Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. DAVIS] is not particularly anxious to address the Senate to-day on the special order, I move that the Calendar be taken up, and that we commence our work to-day and clear it if possible. I believe that some of the questions which were made special orders cannot be conveniently proceeded with to-day, and I trust that there will be no objection to the course I have proposed, and that we may go on and clear the Calendar of its business. The PRESIDENT. The Chair must call for the special order unless some motion is made to postpone it and take up the Calendar. Mr. GWIN. I make that motion, especially as I learn that the Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. DAVIS] will not object to it. Mr. DAVIS. I shall not object if the special order will still occupy its place and come up to Arkansas, therefore, has no such power. The granted to the State of Wisconsin for saline pur- The bill was reported with an amendment to extend the time to the year 1854. The amendment was agreed to, and the bill was Mr. DAWSON. I wish the Senator from tled. Mr. BADGER. The bill is merely to give The bill was ordered to be engrossed for a sec- LANDS IN MICHIGAN. The PRESIDENT. The next general order is a bill to extend the time for selecting lands granted to the State of Michigan for saline purposes. Mr. FELCH. I move that that bill be passed over informally. There is another proposition of a similar nature before the Committee on Public Lands, and I wish that the two propositions may be considered together. The motion was agreed to. SAFETY OF PASSENGERS ON STEAMBOATS. Mr. DAVIS. I think that bill contains some provisions which are rather novel. I do not object to the principle of the bill, if the honorable Senator from Arkansas [Mr. BORLAND] deems it necessary for the accommodation of boats upon the rivers in his State; but it takes away what has hitherto passed through the collector's office. I do not precisely see what disposition is to be made of the certificate, unless it is to be used as a license. If it is to be used as a license for the vessel, it is entirely novel, and a departure from the old system. I should be glad if the Senator would con sent to let it lie over long enough to afford an opportunity to examine it. I do not think I shall throw any obstacle in the way of the wishes of the Senator from Arkansas finally. cation, had this bill drawn up, saying that there was no necessity for the establishment of a new collection district and a new port of entry there, and that the whole object could be accomplished by giving the district judge the same power to appoint inspectors, that the judges have in collection districts. The general law, then, is not altered at all by this bill, with regard to the regulation of steamDoats; it simply gives power to the district judge to appoint inspectors, so that boats may be repaired there, and thus save the time and expense of going to a distant part of the country for inspection. Mr. UNDERWOOD. I would prefer to let this bill lie over a little while. There is a very extensive yard for building boats at Paducah, in Kentucky. That is not a port of entry nor of delivery, and the judge of our district court resides some two hundred and fifty or three hundred miles from that place, where a great many steamboats are built. There is an absolute necessity to have inspectors of the boilers and hulls of steamboats at the shipyard at the mouth of the Ohio river, at Paducah. It is a very important point; and under the law as it is now construed by our district judge, the inspectors can only be appointed at ports of entry or delivery, according to the idea of my friend from Massachusetts. Now, this grievance has been complained of by the people of Paducah, and with a view to obviate this grievance under which they suffer, they have petitioned and I hope that petition will be duly considered by the Committee on Commerce-to have a port of delivery at that point. I feel the same kind of interest in the navigation of the waters of the western rivers which the Senator from Arkansas expresses, and for the purpose of seeing how far this bill will apply to and embrace the waters of Kentucky, as well as those of Arkansas, I would prefer greatly that it might lie over for the present, that I may see if it will not obviate the grievances of the people of Kentucky as well as those of Arkansas. Mr. BORLAND. I am really very sorry that I cannot consent to the proposition of the Senator to allow this bill to be laid over. If he has any change to propose to this bill, so as to accomplish the object he desires, I will not object; but it seems to me this bill contains within itself all that is required. It does not interfere at all with any proposition with regard to other States. I dislike to resist the wish of my friend from Kentucky Mr. UNDERWOOD. I would like to embrace my own State. Mr. BORLAND. I would be glad to embrace Kentucky; but this bill was before Congress at the first session of the last Congress, and at the last session again, and was passed here. Now, this session has advanced somewhat, nearly two months of the session have passed, and the bill has now come up in its regular order; and if we pass it over it will be difficult to get it up again. I repeat, that the bill was prepared at the office of the Secretary of the Treasury, and that it cannot interfere in any way with the existing general laws on the same subject. Mr. UNDERWOOD. My friend will perceive that if there is any difficulty in the way of getting his bill through, in consequence of laying it over for the present, the difficulty will be far greater with regard to any one that I might bring forward for the benefit of Kentucky, for I should have to commence de novo. My object is to avail myself of his bill to benefit the people of Kentucky, for I wish to embrace his popularity to carry the bill. If I am compelled to introduce a bill, it will be thrown off to the end of the session, and perhaps I shall not get anything at all. It will save everything for Kentucky, if he will allow his bill to be passed over. Mr. BORLAND. I would yield to the suggestion of the honorable Senator from Massachusetts, but that this bill has been long delayed. It passed the Senate at the last session, but did not pass the House for want of time, and as I deem it very important that it should be passed, I hope it may be considered and passed now. I think the Senator is mistaken with regard to the introduction of any new principle. It does not interfere with the existing licenses; they remain under the existing laws. It simply provides that the vessels may be required to receive their inspection in other places than those now specified. If the honorable Senator will read the last section of the bill, he will see that it refers to inspection instead of licenses. I will further state, that when I originally, introduced this bill, it was to make Arkansas a collection district, and Little Rock a port of entry; but before it was acted upon by the Committee on Commerce, it was sent to the Secretary of the Mr. DAVIS. The Committee on Commerce, Treasury. I addressed to him a letter, and in- at the last session, reported a bill embracing this formed him precisely what was the object I had subject very fully, with provisions somewhat new in view, which was to put Arkansas on the same in regard to the mode of making these inspections, footing as the other States with regard to the in- changing the system and adopting a new plan, the judges of the district court, within the collec- bill has been committed to the Committee on Comspection of steamboats. Under the general law, embracing all the waters of the country. That tion district, have the power to appoint steamboat merce at this session; we have had it under coninspectors. But Arkansas is not a collectionsideration, and we anticipate an early report on district, and the judge of the district court for that subject. It has only been delayed for the Mr. BORLAND. I shall be very glad to oblige the Senator, and I will yield to the suggestion and agree to pass over the bill informally, for I wish to avail myself of his popularity also. |