cation from the President of the United States, transmitting the correspondence of Captain Long and others, in regard to the conduct of M. Kossuth, while on board the United States steam frigate Mississippi.

Mr. SMITH. I move that the communication be referred to a select committee of five, to be appointed by the Chair, and in addition, Mr. Speaker, I would like to have the letter addressed to me by Captain Long made a part of the document, and printed with the other letters.

Objection being made, the letter referred to was not permitted to form a part of the document. Mr. SEYMOUR. I move that the communication be referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs.

Mr. HOUSTON. I will make a suggestion to my colleague, [Mr. SMITH,] which is, to let the papers go upon the table and be printed, and after that it will be seen whether there is any necessity Mr. SMITH. I am willing, but I desire that the letter I referred to shall be printed with them.

for referring them to a select committee.

Mr. JONES, of Tennessee. I have no objection to printing the communication from the Department, but I think it wrong for us to include in it private correspondence.

A VOICE. I object.

Mr. SMITH. Allow me to make a single remark in reference to that. The only object I have had in calling out this correspondence is, to vindicate Captain Long and the Navy. The letter which he has addressed to me contains a very distinct statement of the whole affair, and I trust that when I announce that my sole object is to vindicate him, the House will make the letter a part of the document, and have it printed with the other papers.

the convention with Brazil, setting forth the obstacles which have impeded the conclusion of the business of that commission. MILLARD FILLMORE. WASHINGTON, February 16, 1852.

On motion by Mr. TAYLOR, it was Ordered, That the communication be referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs and be printed.

Also, a communication from the Treasury Department, transmitting a letter from the Secretary of the Interior, covering an estimate of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, for an appropriation to cover the expenses appertaining to the support of a party of Omaha Indians now in this city; which was referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs.

Mr. HOUSTON. I move that this document be printed.

Mr. JOHNSON, of Arkansas. It is entirely unnecessary. But if it is to be printed, I only ask that the Committee on Indian Affairs may be permitted to act upon it before it is printed. To print it will take some two or three weeks.

Mr. STEPHENS, of Georgia. All Executive documents ought to be printed; if not, we can

never afterwards ascertain what communications the President has made. They should be printed and put upon our files, and inserted in the volumes of the Executive documents.

Mr. JOHNSON. I have no objection to its being printed.

The document was then ordered to be printed. Also, a communication from the Treasury De

Also, a communication from Louis Kossuth, returning his thanks to the Government and Congress of the United States for the treatment he had received at their hands.

Mr. JOHNSON, of Arkansas. I move that it

be referred to the Committee of Ways and Means. [Laughter.]

Mr. STEPHENS, of Georgia. I move that it lie upon the table, and be printed.

Mr. EVANS. I intend to speak one hour upon the proposition to print.

Pending the motion of Mr. STEPHENS, and upon the motion of

Mr. TOOMBS, the House, according to order, adjourned until Tuesday next at 12 o'clock, m.

PETITIONS, &c.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman asks unanimous consent to introduce it.

Mr. JONES. I withdraw my objection. Mr. JOHNSON, of Tennessee. I renew the objection.

The question then recurring upon the motion to refer the communication to the Committee on Foreign Affairs

Mr. SMITH. I would like to inquire whether it is not in order to make a motion to raise a select committee?

The SPEAKER. It is in order, and the Chair entertains the motion; but under the rules, the motion of the gentleman from New York, [Mr.SeyMOUR,] must be first put.

Mr. GAYLORD. I move to lay the communication upon the table, and that it be printed. The question was then taken on this latter motion, and it was agreed to.

The SPEAKER also laid before the House the following communication from the President of the United States, viz:

To the House of Representatives:

I communicate to the House of Representatives herewith a report to me, dated the 13th instant, from the Secretary of the Interior, respecting the delay and difficulty in making the apportionment among the several States of the Representatives in the Thirty-third Congress, as required by the act of 23d May, 1850, in consequence of the want of full returns of the population of the State of California, and suggesting the necessity of remedial legislation.

The subject is one of much importance, and I earnestly commend it to the early consideration of Congress. MILLARD FILLMORE.

WASHINGTON CITY, February 14th, 1852. On motion by Mr. MEADE, it was Ordered, That the communication and accompanying papers be referred to the Committee on the Judiciary and be printed.

referred to the Committee of Ways and Means. But if it is for the building of new light-houses, then it should go to the Committee on Commerce.

Mr. SEYMOUR, of New York. I will state that it is for the building of a dyke for a lighthouse. It is a new work.

Mr. HOUSTON. Then it should be referred to the Committee of Commerce.

The communication was then referred to the Committee on Commerce, and ordered to be printed.

Also, a communication from the Treasury Department, transmitting a report of the First Comptroller, showing the contracts made by that Department during the year 1851; which was laid upon the table and ordered to be printed.

Also, a communication from the Treasury Department, transmitting a communication from the Secretary of the Interior, accompanied by Mr. Downing's estimates, therein referred to.

Mr. HOUSTON. Estimates of that kind have usually gone to the Committee of Ways and Means. A few days since, however, a communication from the President of the United States upon the same subject, was, by a vote of the House, referred to the Committee on Public Buildings and Grounds.

The communication was referred to the Committee on Public Buildings and Grounds, and ordered to be printed.

Also, a communication from the Navy Department, transmitting, for the use of the House, three hundred copies of the Navy Register for the year 1852; which was laid upon the table, and ordered to be printed.

Also, a communication from the Department of the Interior, transmitting a statement prepared by the Commissioner of the General Land Office, of

To the House of Representatives:

In answer to the resolution of the House of Representatives of the 26th of December last, requesting information in regard to the seizure of the brig "Aroc," at Jeremie, in the Island of St. Domingo, I transmit a report from the Secretary of State, and the documents by which it was accompanied. MILLARD FILLMORE.

WASHINGTON, February 12, 1852.

Ordered, That the communication be referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs and be printed.

of land in the Symmes patent, in the State of Ohio, with the opinion of the Attorney General thereon; which was referred to the Committee the Judiciary, and ordered to be printed.

Also, a communication from the Post Office Department, transmitting estimates of the revenues and expenditures of that Department for the quarter ending September 30, 1851, showing that the amount received for postages collected and postage stamps sold during that quarter, was

To the Senate and

House of Representatives of the United States:

I transmit to Congress a letter addressed to the Secretary of State by the Commissioner of the United States under

to the Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads, and ordered to be printed.

Also, a communication from the Commissioner of Public Buildings, transmitting his annual re

By Mr. SCHERMERHORN: The remonstrance of 166 citizens of the city of Rochester, New York, against the further extension of the Woodworth patent.

By Mr. BOYD, of New York: The remonstrance of 82 citizens of Washington county, New York, against the further extension of the Woodworth patent.

By Mr. HOW, of New York: The petition of 278 citizens of the State of New York, for an appropriation to improve the harbor of Little Sodus Bay.

Also, the petition of sundry citizens of the State of New York for same object.

By Mr. MACE: The memorial of the citizens of Lafay ette, Indiana, signed by A. S. White, as President of the meeting, and J. F. Bingham, Secretary, asking for a grant of land to the State of Indiana, Illinois, and Iowa, to construct the Lafayette, Peoria, and Burlington Railroad.

By Mr. MILLER: A memorial of sundry citizens of New Mexico, in relation to the revenue laws of that Territory, and praying relief.

By Mr. WELLS: Two remonstrances by citizens of Montgomery county, New York, against the extension of the Woodworth patent.

By Mr. EDGERTON: Memorials of the assistant marshals of Fulton and Putnam counties, Ohio, for additional compensation for taking the census.

By Mr. DOTY: The memorial of the Rock county, Wisconsin, Agricultural Society, in favor of establishing an Agricultural Bureau.

Also, a petition of citizens of Appleton, Wisconsin, for a grant of land to aid the Rock River Valley Railroad Company to construct a road from Chicago to Lake Superior. Also, the petition of Joseph Cass, Fried. Seifer, and other settlers on the Menomonee Tract, for a preemption of two years, &c.

Also, the petition of D. Lamb, C. L. Fisher, L. S. Warren, and others, for a mail route from Ceresco, Dartford, Princeton, Harrisville, Westfield, &c.. to Prairie La Crossé.

By Mr. GAYLORD: The petition of John Finnus, Matthew Scovill, and Charles Clymer, assistant marshals for taking the Seventh Census in Ohio, asking additional compensation.

By Mr. GAYLORD: The petition of John Timms, Matthew Scoville, and Charles Clymer, assistant marshals, for taking the Seventh Census in Ohio, asking additional compensation.

IN SENATE. MONDAY, February 23, 1852. Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. C. M. BUTLER

PETITIONS.

Mr. WADE presented the memorials of A. Simpson, James S. Hume, Gilbert Ashby, John Wildbuhur, Josiah F. Price, William M. Baker, and S. G. Bigelow, assistant marshals for taking the Seventh Census in Ohio, praying additional compensation; which were referred to the Committee of Claims.

Mr. SEWARD presented a petition of citizens of Western Pennsylvania, (Pittsburg and vicinity,) asking Congress to declare their recognition of the law against forcible intervention in the internal affairs of other Governments, and to prevent its infraction; which was ordered to be laid on the table.

Mr. BADGER presented the memorial of Haynes Lennon, assistant marshal of Columbus county, North Carolina, asking additional com

pensation for taking the Seventh Census; which was referred to the Committee of Claims.

Mr. SOULE presented a resolution of the Legislature of Louisiana, in favor of the establishment of a naval depôt and navy-yard at New Orleans; which was ordered to be laid on the table.

Also, a resolution of the Legislature of Louisiana, in favor of the establishment of a post office in that part of the parish of Assumption lying on Grand river, and on the mail route between Donaldsonville and Opelousas; which was referred to the Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads.

Mr. BRODHEAD presented resolutions of the Legislature of Pennsylvania, in relation to the harbors on the Delaware river and bay; which were referred to the Committee on Commerce, and ordered to be printed.

Also, a resolution of the Pennsylvania State Agricultural Society, praying the establishment of an Agricultural Bureau; which was referred to the Committee on Agriculture.

Also, two memorials of citizens of Schuylkill county, Pennsylvania, praying a modification of the tariff of 1846, and an increase of the duty on iron; which were referred to the Committee on Finance.

Also, a petition of inhabitants of Pennsylvania, praying that the transportation of the mail on Sunday may be prohibited by law; which was

referred to the Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads.

Also, two petitions of citizens of Philadelphia, praying an extension of Woodworth's patent for a planing machine; which were referred to the Committee on Patents and the Patent Office.

Also, two petitions of citizens of Pennsylvania, remonstrating against an extension of a patent granted to Austin and Zebulon Parker for improvements upon water-wheels; which were referred to the Committee on Patents and the Patent Office.

Also, two petitions of citizens of Montgomery county, Pennsylvania, praying a modification of the bounty land law; which were referred to the Committee on Public Lands.

Also, a petition of citizens of Northampton, Pennsylvania, remonstrating against an extension of Woodworth's patent for a planing machine;

which was referred to the Committee on Patents - and the Patent Office.

Mr. CHASE presented six memorials of assistant marshals for taking the Seventh Census in the State of Ohio, praying additional compensation; which were referred to the Committee of Claims.

Also, a memorial of citizens of Ohio, praying that the transportation of the mails on Sunday may be prohibited by law; which was referred to the Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads.

Also, five petitions of citizens of Cleveland and Ohio City, Ohio, praying the construction of a ship-canal around the Sault Ste. Marie; which were ordered to be laid on the table.

Also, a memorial of citizens of Cincinnati, Ohio, praying the construction of another canal around the Falls of the Ohio river; which was referred to the Committee on Roads and Canals.

Mr. HAMLIN presented a petition of inhabitants of Gouldsborough, Maine, praying that buoys may be placed at the entrance of the harbors of West Gouldsborough and East Sullivan; which was referred to the Committee on Commerce.

Mr. BRIGHT presented seven memorials of assistant marshals for taking the Seventh Census in Indiana, praying additional compensation; which were referred to the Committee of Claims.

Also, the memorial of Abraham K. Moore and about one hundred inhabitants of Indiana, praying the establishment of a mail route from Hagerstown to Macksville, in that State; which was referred to the Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads.

Mr. MALLORY presented the petition of Chandler C. Yonge, late district attorney for the northern district of Florida, praying payment for official services duly allowed by the district court, but for which payment is suspended at the Treasury Department because of a defect in existing laws to authorize the same; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

Also, the petition of the heirs of Christopher Hillary, an officer in the army of the Revolution, praying commutation pay; which was referred to the Committee on Military Affairs.

Mr. FISH presented a memorial of the New York Chamber of Commerce, praying for the immediate removal of the United States Mint from Philadelphia to New York; which was referred to the Committee on Finance.

A motion by Mr. FISH that the memorial be printed, was referred to the Committee on Printing. Mr. NORRIS presented a memorial of assistant marshals for taking the Seventh Census in Hillsborough county, New Hampshire, praying additional compensation; which was referred to the Committee of Claims.

Mr. JAMES submitted a communication from Albert C. Greene and others, of Providence, Rhode Island, in relation to an increase of the salary of the United States district judge for that State; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

REPORTS FROM STANDING COMMITTEES. Mr. BORLAND, from the Committee on Pensions, to which was referred the memorial of John McVey, reported a bill for his relief; which was read and passed to the second reading.

He also, from the same committee, to which was referred the memorial of Thompson Hutchinson, submitted a report, accompanied by a bill for his relief; which was read and passed to the second reading.

He also, from the same committee, to which was referred the memorial of Elizabeth Jones, reported a bill for the relief of Elizabeth Jones, and the other children (if any) of John Carr; which was read and passed to a second reading.

He also, from the same committee, to which was referred the bill from the House of Represent atives for the relief of John W. Robinson, reported it back without amendment.

Mr. FOOT, from the Committee on Pensions, to which was referred the petitions of Mary S. Wetmore and the widow of Lieutenant Colonel Æneas McKay, reported adversely thereon.

Mr. GEYER, from the Committee on the Judiciary, to which was referred the memorial of John Jackson, Joseph Pineau, and Louis A. S. Smith, relief; which was read and passed to the second submitted a report accompanied by a bill for their reading. The report was ordered to be printed.

He also, from the same committee, to which was referred the bill to repeal the provision in the act entitled "An act making appropriations for the civil and diplomatic expenses of the Government for the year ending the 30th June, 1852, and for other purposes," approved March 3, 1851, relating to the salaries of the officers of the Territories of the United States, reported it back with an amend

He also, from the same committee, to which was referred the memorial of the inhabitants of Rhode Island, for the liberation of Drayton and Sayres, asked to be discharged from the further consideration thereof; which was agreed to.

Mr. DOWNS, from the Committee on the Judiciary, to which was referred the memorial of Benjamin S. Roberts, asked to be discharged from the further consideration thereof, and that it be referred to the Committee on Military Affairs; which was agreed to.

Mr. SHIELDS, from the Committee on Military Affairs, to which was referred the memorial of the Mayor and Common Council of Chicago, Illinois, submitted a report accompanied by a bill, to authorize them to excavate a portion of the public reservation at that place, with a view to the improvement of the navigation of the Chicago river; which was read and passed to the second reading. The report was ordered to be printed.

BILL INTROduced.

Mr. DODGE, of Iowa, by unanimous consent, asked and obtained leave to introduce a bill to United States in the district of Iowa; which was regulate the terms of the district court of the read a first and second time by its title, and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

RESOLUTIONS AGREED TO.

Mr. SHIELDS submitted the following resolution for consideration; which was agreed to:

Resolved, That the Secretary of War report to the Senate the amount which has been paid to officers of the Army, on account of double rations, during the year ending July 1, 1851.

Mr. SHIELDS submitted the following resolution for consideration; which was agreed to:

Resolved, That the Secretary of War report to the Senate the amount paid to officers holding brevet commissions, above the amount of their pay in the line, under the provis ions of section 2 of the act approved April 16, 1818, during the year ending July 5, 1851.

Mr. JAMES submitted the following resolution for consideration; which was agreed to:

Resolved, That the Committee on the Judiciary inquire into the expediency of increasing the salary of the judge of the district of Rhode Island.

Mr. MALLORY submitted the following resolution for consideration; which was agreed to;

Resolved, That the Committee on the Judiciary be instructed to inquire into the expediency of increasing the salary of the district judge of the United States for the northern district of Florida.

BILL PASSED.

The engrossed bill for the relief of Mrs. E. A. McNeill, widow of the late General John McNeill, was read a third time, and passed.

WASHINGTON'S BIRTH DAY.

Mr. CLEMENS observed, early in the day, that it had been the custom to pay some respect to the memory of Washington on the occasion of his birth day. On Friday last the Senate neglected to pass any resolution for its observance, and he therefore now suggested an adjournment.

It was, however, desired by several Senators having been done, the Senate adjourned. first to dispose of the morning business; and that

IN SENATE.

TUESDAY, February 24, 1852. Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. C. M. BUTLER.

PETITIONS.

Mr. WADE presented two memorials of assistant marshals for taking the Seventh Census in the State of Ohio praying additional compensa tion; which were referred to the Committee of Claims.

Mr. RUSK presented a memorial of John W. Bunton, and a memorial of Margaret P. Hallett, administratrix of John Hallet, deceased, praying the appointment of a tribunal to review the decis ions of the late Board of Commissioners for the settlement of claims of American citizens against Mexico; which were referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.

Also, the petition of Julius A. Pratt, praying that he may be employed to clear out the river San Antonio, in Texas; which was referred to the Committee on Military Affairs.

Also, the memorial of John B. Boyle, complaining of the mal-administration of the postal system in the United States, and proposing a remedy; which was referred to the Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads.

Mr. SMITH presented a memorial of the assist ant marshals for taking the Seventh Census in compensation; which was referred to the CommitFairfield county, Connecticut, praying additional

tee of Claims.

Mr. COOPER presented three petitions of citi zens of Pennsylvania, remonstrating against an extension of the patent granted to Austin and Zebulon Parker for improvements in water-wheels; which were referred to the Committee on Patents and the Patent Office.

Also, three memorials of citizens of Philadelphia county, and a memorial of citizens of Lancaster county, Pennsylvania, remonstrating against an extension of the patent granted to W. W. Woodworth for a planing machine; which were referred to the Committee on Patents and the Patent Office.

Also, a memorial of citizens of Philadelphia, praying an extension of Woodworth's patent for a planing machine; which was referred to the Committee on Patents and the Patent Office.

Also, two memorials of citizens of Schuylkill county, Pennsylvania, praying a modification of the tariff; which were referred to the Committee on Finance.

Also, a petition of journeymen cigar-makers, of Lancaster, Pennsylvania, praying an increase of the duties on cigars; which was referred to the Committee on Finance.

Also, six memorials of inhabitants of Pennsylvania, praying that the transportation of the mails on Sunday may be prohibited by law; which were referred to the Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads.

Also, the memorial of William G. Morehead, late consul of the United States at Valparaiso, praying compensation for the time he acted as chargé d'affaires; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.

Also, two memorials of citizens of the western part of Pennsylvania, praying the construction of a ship canal around the Sault Ste. Marie; which were referred to the Committee on Roads and Canals.

Also, the memorial of Mary F. B. Levely, widow of Henry Levely, a captain of a private armed vessel during the last war with Great Britain, praying a pension on account of wounds and disabilities received in the service; which was referred to the Committee on Pensions.

Also, a memorial of H. G. Helfenstein and others, citizens of Pennsylvania, praying that provision may be made by law to enable them to receive the amount of their claims against Texas at the Treasury of the United States; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

ence.

He is not now present; and unless some other gentleman is disposed to move that they be referred to a select committee, I will ask that the Committee on Foreign Relations be discharged from the further consideration of these memorials, and move that, for the present, they may be laid upon the table.

The committee was accordingly discharged from their further consideration, and it was ordered that these memorials be laid upon the table.

PAPERS WITHDRAWN AND REFERRED.

On motion by Mr. PRATT, it was

Ordered, That the petition of the legal representatives of Joseph Ford, an officer of the army during the Revolution, praying a pension, on the files of the Senate, be referred to the Committee on Revolutionary Claims.

On motion by Mr. SMITH, it was

Ordered, That the memorial of C. Alexander and T. Barnard, on the files of the Senate, be referred to the Committee of Claims.

REPORTS FROM STANDING COMMITTEES. Mr. GWIN, from the Committee on Naval Affairs, to which was referred the report of the Secretary of the Navy of 6th January, and several petitions of officers and seamen of the United States Navy, reported a bill providing additional com

Also, a memorial of the Select and Common Councils of the city of Philadelphia, praying the erection of artificial harbors in the Delaware river and bay; which was referred to the Committee on Commerce. Also, resolutions of the Legislature of Penn-pensation to officers and men of the navy who sylvania, in relation to the harbors on the Delaware river and bay; which were referred to the Committee on Commerce.

Also, a memorial of citizens of Pennsylvania, Delaware, and New Jersey, praying the construction of piers and harbors in the Delaware river and bay; which was referred to the Committee on Commerce.

Also, the petition of Catharine Strubing, heir of James Deimer, deceased, praying compensation for certain lands granted by the British Government to James Deimer and disposed of by the United States; which was referred to the Committee on Private Land Claims.

Mr. JONES, of lowa, presented a petition of citizens of lowa, praying the establishment of a mail route from Quasquaton to the county seat of Benton county, in that State; which was referred to the Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads.

Mr. JAMES presented a memorial of engineers of the navy, praying a reorganization of the corps to which they belong; which was referred to the Committee on Naval Affairs.

A motion by Mr. JAMES that the memorial be printed, was referred to the Committee on Printing.

Mr. FELCH presented six memorials of citizens of Michigan, praying a grant of land to the State for the construction of the Oakland and the

have served, or are still serving, on the coast of California and Mexico, and for other purposes; which was read and passed to the second reading.

He also, from the same committee, to which was referred the bill from the House of Repre

sentatives for the relief of the heirs of John Jackson, reported the same without amendment.

Mr. FISH, from the Committee on Naval Affairs, to which was referred the memorial of Richard M. Bouton, asked to be discharged from the further consideration thereof, and that it be referred to the Committee on Military Affairs; which was agreed to.

Mr. ATCHISON, from the Committee on Indian Affairs, to which was referred the petition of Lewis Ralston, asked to be discharged from the further consideration thereof, and that the papers relating thereto, which were transmitted to the chairman of the Committee on Indian Affairs the

22d January last by the Secretary of the Interior, be returned to that Department. It was so ordered.

Mr. RUSK, from the Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads, reported a joint resolution modifying the existing laws for the government of the Post Office Department in relation to California and Oregon; which was read and passed to the second reading.

Ottawa railroad; which were referred to the Com-tary

mitte on Public Lands.

Also, the petition of Isabella S. Crough, praying that the pay and allowances due her son, Michael Doyle, as an officer of the army at the time of his death in Mexico, may be paid to his legal representatives; which was referred to the Committee of Claims.

Mr. GWIN presented additional evidence in relation to the claim of Joseph Hill and Sons; which was referred to the Committee of Claims; and On motion by Mr. G, it was

Ordered, That the report of the Committee of Claims, on the petition of Joseph Hill and Sons, be recommitted to the Committee of Claims.

MEXICAN CLAIMS.

Mr. SHIELDS, from the Committee on MiliAffairs, to which was referred the petition of the guardian of the heirs of the late Major Thomas Noel, of the United States Army, praying the settlement of his accounts, submitted a report, accompanied by a bill for their relief; which was read and passed to the second reading. The report was ordered to be printed.

He also, from the same committee, to which was referred the petition of the heirs of Christopher Hillary, asked to be discharged from the further consideration thereof, and that it be referred to the Committee on Revolutionary Claims; which was agreed to.

Mr. BORLAND, from the Committee on Military Affairs, to which were referred the memorials of Benjamin S. Roberts, presented the 12th of January, 1852, and the 11th of February, 1852, asked to be discharged from the further consideration of the same; which was agreed to.

He also, from the same committee, to which was referred the petition of Rufus L. Baker, asked to be discharged from the further consider Mr. MASON. I am instructed by the Com-ation thereof; which was agreed to. mittee on Foreign Relations, to ask that that committee may be discharged from the further consideration of a number of petitions which I hold in my hand, addressed to the Senate, praying an examination or inquiry into the manner in which the claims against Mexico were examined and treated under the late commission which sat under the Mexican treaty. If the Senate will indulge me for a moment, I will state that the petitioners ask that the committee, to which were referred these memorials, may have power to prosecute their inquiries by sending for persons and papers. The Committee on Foreign Relations, however, have considered it impracticable to conduct their inqui

He also, from the Committee on Printing, to which was referred the motion to print the memorial of the Chamber of Commerce of New York, presented the 23d instant, relating to the removal of the mint from Philadelphia to New York, reported that the memorial be not printed; and the report was concurred in.

Mr. BRODHEAD, from the Committee of

Claims, to which were referred the documents relating to the claim of B. Juan Domercq, submitted a report, accompanied by a bill for the relief of Don B. Juan Domercq, a Spanish subject; which was read and passed to the second reading. The report was ordered to be printed.

Mr. JONES, of Tennessee, from the Committee on Military Affairs, to which was referred the petition of Gad Humphreys, reported a bill for his relief; which was read and passed to the second reading.

NOTICE OF a bill.

Mr. HUNTER gave notice of his intention to ask leave to introduce a bill to modify the several acts regulating the warehousing of imported merchandise, and for other purposes.

ELECTORAL VOTES.

Mr. BORLAND by unanimous consent, asked and obtained leave to introduce a joint resolution; which was read, as follows:

Joint Resolution in relation to the number of electoral votes each State will be entitled to in the presidential election of 1852.

Be it resolved, &c., That the number of electoral votes to which each State shall be entitled in the election of President and Vice President of the United States in 1852, shall be equal to the number of Senators and Representatives to which each of said States will be found entitled by the apportionment under the enumeration of 1850, as provided by the act for taking the Seventh, and subsequent Censuses," approved May 23, 1850.

The resolution, on the motion of Mr. BORLAND, was read a second time, with a view to reference. Mr. BORLAND. If it be in order, Mr. President, I will remark, for a moment, upon the character and object of the resolution, before I move its reference.

We have printed, and upon our desks this mornUnited States, laying before us a report from the ing, a communication from the President of the Secretary of the Interior, showing why he has been unable to perform the duty of making the apportionment of Representatives upon the basis of the new enumeration, as required by the act of May 23, 1850; the reason stated being the defective returns from the State of California. This communication has been referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. In connection with it, and as a part of the action of the committee and of the Senate in regard to the questions it raises, and tained in this resolution is most important-necesrequires to be settled, I think the declaration consary, indeed, on account of peculiar circumstances to enable the people of the several States to exer

cise the elective franchise in the ensuing presiden

tial election.

I have hesitated to bring this question before the Senate, and should not have done so but for the magnitude of its interest to all the States, and particularly to the State I have been sent here to represent; and further, for finding that opposite opinions on the subject are entertained alike throughout the country, as indicated by the newspaper press, and among the members of this body. For myself, I have held from the first but one opinion; but as I am always disposed to distrust somewhat my own opinions, especially upon questions like this, when I find them not concurred in by gentlemen whose capacity to judge of such questions I greatly respect, and concede to be, in general, greatly superior to my own, I desire this difference of opinion to be decided by the authoritative action of Congress.

In my own opinion-which with some diffithe act of 1792, and the census act of 1850, taken dence I submit to the Senate-the Constitution, together, clearly and certainly establish the position assumed in my resolution, that the number of electoral votes which each State will be entitled to give in the ensuing presidential election, will be the number of Senators and Representatives to which it will be entitled by apportionment under the recent enumeration; that is, that the election will be held and the votes given upon the basis of the census of 1850, and not that of 1840. In support of this opinion I refer to the Constitution, and the legislation under it on this subject. Providing for the census, or enumeration of the people, the Constitution prescribes:

"The actual enumeration shall be made within three years after the first meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent term of ten years, in such manner as they shall by law direct."Const. U. S.,

art. 1, sec. 2.

Until the first actual enumeration, the number

of Representatives was arbitrarily fixed by a special provision; thirty thousand being the minimum of population entitling to one Representative, and New Hampshire having three, Massachusetts eight, &c.

For the election of President and Vice President it is provided that

« Ench State shall appoint, in such manner as the Legis

lature thereof may direct, a number of electors equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives to which the States may be entitled in Congress," &c.-Const. U. S., art. 2, sec. 1.

To carry out these provisions of the Constitution Congress passed "An act relative to the election of a President and Vice President of the United States," the first section of which is as follows:

"That except in case of an election of a President and Vice President of the United States prior to the ordinary period as hereinafter specified, electors shall be appointed in each State for the election of a President and Vice President of the United States within thirty-four days preceding the first Wednesday in December, one thousand seven hundred and ninety-two, and within thirty-four days preceding the first Wednesday in December, in every fourth year succeeding the last election, which electors shall be equal to the number of Senators and Representatives to which the several States may, by law, be entitled at the time when the President and Vice President thus to be chosen should come into office: Provided, always, that where no apportionment of Representatives shall have been made after any enumeration at the time of choosing electors, then the number of electors shall be according to the existing apportionment of Senators and Representatives."

APPROVED, March 1, 1792.

Until 1850, the practice had been to pass an act, at the end of every ten years, "to provide for taking the census; ;" and subsequently, when the

returns of the enumeration, &c., had been received, to pass another "act for the apportionment of Representatives among the several States, according to the census. As examples of this legislation, I refer to the act-the title of which I have just quoted-for taking the Fifth Census, approved March 23, 1830, and the subsequent act for apportionment under the same census, approved May 22, 1832.

This practice was abandoned in 1850; and in providing for "taking the Seventh and subsequent Censuses," it was deemed best, and was provided accordingly, in the same bill, for making the apportionment of Representatives-and consequently, of presidential electors. Accordingly it was, among the new provisions, enacted:

"That from and after the 3d day of March, 1853, the House of Representatives shall be composed of two hundred and thirty-three members, to be apportioned among the several States in the manner directed in the next section of this act."

And further:

"That so soon as the next and each subsequent enumeration of the inhabitants of the several States, directed by the Constitution of the United States to be taken, shall be completed and returned to the office of the Department of the Interior, it shall be the duty of the Secretary of the Interior to ascertain the aggregate representative population of the United States, by" &c., "which aggregate population he shall divide by the number two hundred and thirty-three, and the product of such division, rejecting any fración of an unit, if any such happen to remain, shall be the ratio or rule of apportionment of Representatives among the several States under such enumeration; and the said Secretary of the Department of the Interior shall then proceed, in the same manner, to ascertain the representative population of each State and to divide the whole number of the representative population of each State by the ratio already determined by him as above directed, and the product of this last division shall be the number of representatives apportioned to such State under the then last enumeration.""

["Act for taking the Seventh and subsequent Censuses," &c., sections 24 and 25. Approved March 3, 1850.]

be so.

I repeat, that from these citations of the Constitution and Laws, I deduce the opinion that the enumeration of 1850 is the basis of the apportionment of Representatives in the next Congress, and of electors for the ensuing presidential election in November next. The act of '92, which I have quoted, is specific in its provision that this shall The condition that it prescribes, namely, that the apportionment under the new enumeration shall have been made prior to the election, is provided for in the act of 1850, and will be fulfilled by the Secretary of the Interior, who, by a simple arithmetical computation, will, as soon as the returns shall be complete, ascertain and announce the apportionment, and that certainly before the election in November next. And, as if to make this intention and provision the more clear and emphatic, the proviso at the close of the section makes an express and contrasting provision, that in the event that an apportionment under any new

enumeration shall not have been made prior to the election, then the number of electors shall be the same as under the old apportionment.

This, to my mind, is conclusive of the question. Moreover, the uniform practice in all preceding presidential elections has been in accordance with this opinion, or I might, perhaps, with more propriety, say that my opinion has been based upon the Constitution and Laws, as I have quoted them, and as they are elucidated by the uniform practice

of the Government.

I do not think I have overrated the importance of this question. It certainly involves the highest rights and interests of the States-the exercise of the elective franchise in the election to the highest offices in their gift. To enjoy that right, and exercise that franchise in an effective manner, it is indispensable for them to know how many votes they are respectively entitled to. But upon this point, as I have before remarked, there are opposite opinions; some contending that they are to vote under one apportionment, and others insisting that another apportionment is to determine the number of votes they shall give. If the old apportionment is to be observed, my own State will have but three electoral votes; whereas, under the new one she will have four. Differences much greater than this, with other States, will be made by the adoption of the one, or the other, apportionment. Some States will lose, and others will gain votes and relative weight in the election, to the extent, in several instances, of from three to four, and perhaps of five votes.

I urge, then, not only the importance of the question itself, but the urgent necessity of disposing of it, by early action upon the resolution I have submitted. I move its reference to the Committee on the Judiciary.

The motion was agreed to.

CONVENTION WITH BRAZIL.

Mr. MASON. I ask the Senate to take up a joint resolution, which I offered the other day, to extend the time of the commission under the convention with Brazil. It is necessary that, if anything is done in relation to it, it should be done, at the latest, by the second of March, and that day is now near at hand.

The joint resolution was read a second time, and considered by the Senate as in Committee of the Whole.

The resolution is as follows:

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the act entitled "An act to carry into effect the Convention between the United States and the Emperor of Brazil, of the 27th day of January, in the year 1849," approved March 20, 1850, shall be and the same is hereby continued in force for the period of nine months from and after the first day of March, in the year 1852.

Mr. MASON. The necessity for the extension

of that commission is shown in a communication. from the Secretary of State, as communicated to us by the President of the United States. There is a provision in the treaty with Brazil which stipulates that all the claimants against Brazil shall have evidence furnished them from that country to establish their claims, if need be; but, from the extent of territory through which that evidence was to be sought, it was found impracticable to obtain that evidence before the commission would expire. The Secretary of State consequently recommends that the commission should be extended for nine months; but, on consultation with the Senator from Maine, [Mr. HAMLIN,] and he with the commissioner, I have become satisfied that it would be most expedient not to extend the time for a period longer than four months; and I move "nine," in the ninth line, and inserting the word to amend the resolution by striking out the word "four," so that it shall read, "shall be, and the same is hereby continued in force for the period of in the year 1852." four months from and after the first day of March,

olution was reported to the Senate. The amend The amendment was agreed to, and the joint resthe Whole was concurred in, and the joint resolument adopted by the Senate as in Committee of tion was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading; and was subsequently read a third time and passed.

CHARLES G. HUNTER.

Mr. CLEMENS submitted the following resolution for consideration:

Resolved, That the Committee on Naval Affairs be in

structed to inquire into the expediency of refunding to Charles G. Hunter the amount of losses sustained by him while commanding the steamer "Scourge" and the schooner "Taney," for supplies, for which the proper vouchers were not taken.

RAILROADS IN IOWA.

On the motion of Mr. JONES, of Iowa, the Senate resumed the consideration of the bill granting the right of way and making a grant of land

to the State of Iowa in aid of the construction of certain railroads in that State.

The pending question was on the amendment submitted by the Committee on Public Lands, as a substitute for the entire bill.

The amendment was agreed to.

Mr. UNDERWOOD then renewed his amendment, as an additional section, which, after being under discussion for some time, he withdrew a few days ago, to facilitate action upon the committee's substitute.

Mr. GEYER addressed the Senate until the usual hour of adjournment; when, without finishing, he yielded the floor, and the Senate adjourned.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
TUESDAY, February 24, 1852.

The House met at twelve o'clock, m. Prayer by the Rev. C. M. BUTLER.

The Journal of Friday was read and approved. The SPEAKER. The first business before the House is House bill No. 104, being a bill granting the right of way and making a donation of public lands to the State of Missouri, to aid in the construction of certain railroads therein. The question immediately pending is the motion to refer the bill to the Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union; upon which question the gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. ORR] is entitled to the floor.

Mr. JOHNSON, of Arkansas. I would ask the permission of the gentleman from South Carolina to make a report from the Committee on Indian Affairs. I would not make this request if it were not for an important matter.

Mr. ORR. Several days have elapsed since I obtained the floor, and I am not disposed to delay submitting my remarks any longer. I wish to proceed now. I would like to oblige my friend.

Mr. PHELPS. I ask my friend to allow me one moment, that I may modify the amendment proposed by me to the amendment of my colleague, [Mr. HALL.]

Mr. ORR. I have no objection to yielding for that purpose.

Mr. PHELPS. I make the following modification of my amendment.

[A copy of this was not obtained. It will be published hereafter.]

Mr. ORR. I propose submitting a few remarks upon the bill now before the House for consideration. I have examined its provisions with great care and attention, and have come to the conclusion to cast my vote for it. I shall, therefore, proceed to state briefly the reasons which have operated upon my mind in bringing me to that conclusion. The first question that is presented to the investigation of the House is this: Has the Congress the constitutional power to make the donations contemplated in this bill? In the Constitution is the following clause:

"That Congress shall have power to dispose of and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory of other property belonging to the United States."

I suppose that the power conferred by this clause upon the Congress of the United States is as ample, full, and complete, as any other power vested by that instrument in Congress. And the only limitation to that power, in my opinion, is an implied trust that the Congress, in making that disposition of the public lands, shall dispose of them in such a manner as most effectually to promote the interests of all the States. Now, this bill proposes to carry out, as I conceive, the constitutional power vested in the Congress for dispos ing of the public lands. I do not think Congress would have the power to give away all of the public lands; for in that way the Government would not be carrying out this implied trust. By virtue of her right as the proprietor of the public domain, the Government has the right to give away one half of the public lands, that the remaining half may be enhanced in value. Is not that a sound principle? Is it not a correct principle? I do not

design entering into an elaborate constitutional argument upon this subject; but I will quote some authorities which may satisfy the minds of gentlemen who doubt upon this point, which are more concise and infinitely better than any argument which I might make. To them I desire to call the attention especially of the members from the old States who seem to be prejudiced against this bill, because, forsooth, it does not provide for giving lands to the old States. The first authority is that of Mr. Calhoun. I deed not say, Mr. Speaker, that that authority with me, perhaps has more weight than the authority of any other statesman living or dead. Whether gentlemen agree with Mr. Calhoun in his general views, or not, it will be conceded by all, I suspect, that he was at least a strict constructionist of the Constitution of the United States, and that he was the last man who figured in public life who would have been disposed by his acts to confer upon the General Government greater powers than those which the Constitution plainly give. In the debate in 1848 in the Senate, on the bill making a donation of public lands to the State of Illinois, Mr. Calhoun participated. He said:

"The question in this case is a very simple one. We are authorized by the Constitution to dispose of the public lands. Here is a public improvement, projected either by the State, or by individuals in the State through which it will pass, and by which the value of the public lands will be enhanced. If, then, it will add to the value of our lands, ought we not to contribute to it? Would we not, as individuals, thus act? This is not a novel principle. It has been acted upon for more than twenty years. The case of the canal connecting the Illinois river with Lake Michigan is a striking one. There, alternate sections were given to make a canal; and I suppose I can appeal with confidence to the Senators from that State, whether the lands reserved to the United States were not disposed of afterwards readily?

"Mr. BREESE, (in his seat.) Thousands of acres were disposed of, which would otherwise never have been sold.

"Mr. CALHOUN. I have seldom given a vote the result of which gratified me more than the vote which I gave on that occasion. I then presided in that chair which you now occupy, and gave the casting vote. I take to myself, therefore, some share in the credit of that magnificent improvement. Indeed, I do not think that there is a principle more perfectly clear from doubt than this one is. It does not belong to the category of internal improvements at all. It is not a power claimed by the Government as a government. It belongs to the Government as a landed proprietor. And I will add, that it is not only a right but a duty, and an important duty. Now, what has been considered an equitable arrangement between the Government and the State which may undertake an improvement passing through the public lands? Long since, it was agreed that the grant of alternate sections was a fair contribution on the part of the United States, considered as a proprietor, and from which the United States would be a very great gainer. It appears to me to be, an equitable arrangement; and I doubt whether, in any case, either of a canal or a railroad passing through the public lands, the United States will not be a gainer. To that extent I am prepared to go, be the road long or short; if it be long, you gain the more: if it be short, you gain the less: and you contribute in proportion to your gain."

That is one authority to which I wish especially to call the attention of members from the old States, who are disposed to raise a constitutional question against this bill. There is another authority, which I think will be considered upon this side of the House [Democratic] a very high one, from which I will read. General Cass, in that debate, in presenting the reasons why he would support the bill, said:

This bill does not touch the question of internal improvement at all. It asserts no right on the part of this Government to lay out a road, or to regulate the construction of a road. The Federal Government is a great land-holder; it possesses an extensive public domain; and we have the power, under the Constitution, to dispose of that domain; and a very unlimited power it is. The simple question is, what disposition we may make of the public lands? No one will contend for the doctrine that we cannot give them away to a State. As the Senator from Kentucky has said, every President has signed bills asserting the principle that these lands may be disposed of by the General Government, without restriction as to the purpose of such disposition. We may bestow them for school purposes, or we may bestow a portion for the purpose of improving the value of the rest. What right have you to sit still and see your lands growing in value, through the instrumentality of individuals, without rendering any aid in furtherance of that object: It is the settlement of the lands that makes them valuable."

General CASS subsequently, in the same debate, in reply to a constitutional issue made by the gentleman from Alabama, [Mr. Bagby,] in a more pointed manner maintained the constitutional power of Congress to dispose of a portion of the public domain to enhance the value of the remaining portion. He said:

"I will answer the Senator. The General Government has no power to make any railroad or canal through any State; but the disposal of a portion of the publie domain to raise the value of the rest, is clearly within the power of this Government."

I find, Mr. Speaker, in the 15th volume of the "Congressional Globe," another debate upon the bill granting alternate sections of the public lands to the State of Michigan, in which a number of Senators participated. I believe that at that time Mr. Niles, of Connecticut, and Mr. Bagby, of Alabama, were the only two Senators who raised the constitutional question. In that debate Mr. Calhoun participated, and said:

"As far as the Michigan bill was concerned, he understood the principle was simply giving alternate sections of the public land for the purpose of enhancing the value of the remainder. Upon this point he would say that he had not the slightest doubt that the Government not only had the right. as proprietor of the public domain, to grant portions of that domain for such a purpose, but that it was the duty of the Government to do so. The Government, in his opinion, ought to be ashamed of allowing their lands to be enhanced in value by the exertions and at the cost of a State, without contributing in some degree to produce this result."

On that occasion, Mr. Niles, in reply to these observations, charged Mr. Calhoun with inconsistency in voting for that bill, and with an abandonment of his doctrines upon the subject of internal improvement. Mr. Calhoun replied to the Senator from Connecticut, as follows:

"He (Mr. C.) acted now on the principle on which he had acted from the beginning-a principle perfectly clear; and not only was it clearly the right of the Government to make these grants, but he considered that it was the duty of the Government to do so. They did not in so doing act in their sovereign capacity. The question of internal improvements was not at all involved, but simply that of proprietorship, whether, when anything was done to enhance the value of their lands in the vicinity of the works, they were not called on and bound in good faith to contribute something as the proprietors."

He said, further:

"But, in this, and in all cases where a road passed through the public lands, and application was made when the work had been commenced, and there was a reasonable probability that the value of the public lands would be enhanced, he was in favor of contributing largely, and in so doing he abandoned no principle. As far as he could judge of the localities, the canal would be of vast importance. The lands intermediate between the termini would be greatly increased in value. As to the railroad he could not express any opinion, but was desirous to see it completed, and for that purpose was willing to grant the desired appropriation, on condition only that the Government should have the use of it when required for the conveyance of stores and troops."

It appears that explanation did not satisfy Mr. Niles, and he expressed the conviction that there was no difference at all between voting for the Cumberland road and for giving alternate sections of the public lands, Mr. Calhoun replies:

"Mr. C. remarked, in reply, that if the gentleman could not see a distinction between the case of the Cumberland road-a work undertaken by the General Government-and the case in which the Government, in its proprietary character, contributes to works undertaken by States or individuals, he (Mr. C.) could only express his regret. To him the difference was as great as that between night and day.

In the one case there was an exercise of the right of sov

ereignty, in the other simply that of ownership."

in works of internal improvement. There is no analogy, sir, at all.

This bill proposes to donate one half of the publie lands within six miles on either side of the railroad to aid in the construction of that work. Does this reduce the revenue, accruing from the sale of the public lands into the Treasury of the United States? Not a farthing; and why? Because the bill provides that when you give away alternate sections, that those reserved to the Government shall be doubled in value; and thus those which you are now trying to sell at $1 25, lands which would remain, probably, in market for twenty, thirty, or forty years at that price, are raised in value to $2 50, with the confident assurance founded upon universal experience, that those lands will sell more rapidly then at that enhanced price than they do now at $1 25 per acre. If this was a proposition simply to give the alternate sections without those remaining being increased in value-if, in other words, it reduced the revenue of the Treasury of the United States from the sale of the public landsthen I admit the objection of my friend from Tennessee [Mr. JONES] would be a valid one. that objection does not exist to this bill. It is a phantom flitting only before the imagination of my friend. That which has given rise, I suppose, to it is the fact that he sees no provision in this bill to extend lands to the old States.

But

I think I have demonstrated that nothing is abstracted from the Treasury by the grants for the construction of these works, and that all the resources out of which and from which the funds are to come into the Treasury, are not reduced. If this is so, how can it be charged that it is involving the Government of the United States in a system of internal improvements, which has been warred against by the Republican or Democratic party throughout all time. My friend from Tennessee [Mr. JONES] also in the same speech intimated that it was clearly anti-Democratic, as well as unconstitutional. What are the facts? Almost every single one of the present heads, or what are called leaders, of the Democratic party, have supported bills identical with this bill in principle, without an exception scarcely.

I believe Mr. Polk, while he was a member of Congress here in 1828, voted for a bill similar to this, to aid in the construction of canals. Mr. McDuffie voted for such bills, as you have already heard from some of the gentlemen who have preceded me in this debate. General Cass, Mr. Douglas, Mr. Davis, of Mississippi, Mr. Calhoun, and Mr. Houston, in fact the whole of those who are now or were heretofore looked up to as the leaders of the Democratic party, have advocated and supported bills identical in principle with the bill now upon your table. It is not, therefore, anti-Democratic. You may take the vote by which the Illinois bill passed the Senate, or the vote by which the Mississippi bill passed, and you will find that a majority of the Democrats voted for it. Upon the Mississippi bill there were but eight Senators of the entire Senate who voted against the passage of the bill. I think I shall be able to show that this bill as reported by the Committee on Public Lands is infinitely a better bill for this Government than the Mississippi bill. I will show when I come to speak of the bill itself, that it is not to be scouted from this Hall, first, either upon the plea that it is unconstitutional, or second, that it is anti-Republican or anti-Democratic. I do not think that either of these pretexts will be available to drive the bill from this Hall, and I think the gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. JONES] does injustice to his own party when he makes an imputation of that sort; for I take it that even in this House there is, perhaps, a majority of the members of the Democratic party who will vote for these bills.

If I should conclude, Mr. Speaker, to write out the remarks which I am submitting, I will perhaps incorporate some other authorities. At present, I will not trouble the House by reading any more scription of internal improvements objected to, as authorities with reference to that point. The deI understand, by the Republican or Democratic party, is that where the Government appropriates money out of the Public Treasury for the purpose of building roads, or constructing canals in certain localities. In the first place, it is said, and said, I believe, truly, that Congress has no right to levy money upon the people of the United States, for the purpose of constructing such works. That power is not granted by the Constitution. Conceding even that the Government possessed the power, one of the strong objections, and to my mind an insuperable objection against the exercise of it, would be that you levy money indiscriminately, all over the country, upon all of the citizens, and in constructing these works of interual improvement, you benefit sections only. The advantage would be local merely. Certain portions of the country would be favored, and others would not; and it is, therefore, best to leave the construction of these works with the States, who will take care of their own interests in the premises. Their What advantage will the Government derive? citizens will be taxed for the construction of those The first advantage is this. It will bring lands works, and they will receive the benefit accruing into market which have been exposed to sale, and by the taxation for that purpose. But does this have not found a purchaser for thirty years. The case come within that principle? I think one gen-road for which this identical bill provides, passes tleman, at the opening of this debate, intimated that this bill was liable to all of the objections which had been urged against the Government embarking

Having disposed of this constitutional question more by authority than by argument, and having also disposed of the question of Democracy, I desire to direct the attention of the House to the advantage which is to result to the Government from the passage of the bill.

through a portion of Missouri, and through public lands, that have been subject to sale and entry from fifteen to twenty-five years. Those lands