After deducting from this sum certain balances of appropriations, amounting to $2,897,086 47, which are necessary to effect the objects for which they were severally made, or have been deducted from the estimates for the service of the ensuing year, a balance of $6,466,969 30 remains; which, with the receipts into the Treasury during the year 1824 constitutes the means for defraying the current service of that year. 2. Of the Public Debt. The funded debt, which was contracted before the year 1812, and which was unredeemed on the 1st day of October, 1822, amounted to - - $17,189,852 60 And that which was contracted subsequently to the 1st of January, 1812, and was unredeemed on the 1st of October, 1822, amounted to Making the total amount of funded Making an aggregate of During the same period, there was paid, in reimbursement of the deferred six per cent. stock Reducing the funded debt, on the 1st of October, 1823, to 327,022 88 -$90,451,834 24 Since that day there has been added in Treasury note six per cent stock, Making an aggregate of 716 75 -$90,452,550 99 It is estimated that the reimbursement of deferred stock, in the fourth quarter of the present year, will amount to Which will reduce the funded debt, unredeemed on the 1st of January, 1824, to $274,588 85 -$90,177,962 14 The amount of Treasury notes outstanding on the 1st of October, 1823, is estimated at And the amount of Mississippi stock unredeemed on that day at All which is respectfully submitted. $26,122 00 $21,258 87 WM. H. CRAWFORD. The first section having been read— Mr. CALL, Delegate from the Territory of Florida, advocated the measure proposed by the bill, as one imperiously demanded by the exigencies and peculiar circumstances of that country, and eminently calculated to advance its settlement and prosperity. The population of what was lately the Floridas, he said, lies at the two opposite extremities of the territory, 75,852,848 58 Augustine and Pensacola; the two points to be connected by the road now proposed. The course of the road passed through a region of JANUARY, 1824.] DEBATES OF CONGRESS. Roads in the Territory of Florida. [H. OF R. The object to be ac country till now very imperfectly known, but | every-day occurrence. whose fertility was calculated to attract emi-complished was one of great importance to the gration. The late treaty, by which the whole United States, in a national view, and might, of this country had been transferred to the without impropriety, occupy the leisure of a jurisdiction of the United States, opens a fine small portion of her troops. As to its exposing field for emigrating enterprise, and, from the them to disease, he had himself lived for years richness of the soil, there was little doubt but in Florida, had traversed it in all directions and that the interior would, in a short time, become at all seasons, was thoroughly acquainted with densely peopled. The road which at present its climate, and he did not apprehend any such connects the two points he had mentioned, consequence as the gentleman seemed to antitakes a circuitous route of more than seven cipate. Besides, if the bill shall now pass, the hundred miles, through parts of Georgia and labor will be finished before the more sickly Alabama; whereas, the direct course of the months arrive. The road we ask for, said Mr. new road would make the distance to be trav-C., can soon be made. We do not contemplate, elled about three hundred and seventy-six miles. The petition on which the bill is founded, asks only for $20,000 to defray the expenses of making this road-an amount which, when the nature of the country, and the magnitude of the undertaking is taken into view, will appear, to every candid person, very moderate. The estimate had been made as low as circumstances would allow, but it was hoped that, by a judicious expenditure, that amount might be Almost the whole of the rendered sufficient. very fertile tract, through which the road is proposed to pass, is in the hands of the United States Government, as public property; few or no grants having been made of lands in the interior. The road will, therefore, be a measure of policy to the Government, from its effect on the value of its lands, as well as of great benefit to Florida. at present, any great or costly road, such as it will occupy a long period to complete; all that we ask or look for will expose the soldiers to no great amount either of labor or danger. Were it a time of war, indeed, we should not think of so employing them; but it is a season of profound peace, and no detriment can arise to the public safety or interest from doing it. In fact, the road must be made in this way, or not at all; for the country is so sparsely settled that there is not in the territory a population, either in sufficient number, or of the proper kind, to accomplish it. Mr. COOKE, of Tennessee, wished to know from the gentleman who objected to this employment of the troops, how they could be better employed? We have had, not long since, a sad experience to teach us that, if not employed in something that is useful, they will soon employ themselves in what is mischievous. We have got them; we have paid for them; we must feed them; and of what service are they to us if we may not employ them? Mr. GURLEY, of Louisiana, moved to amend the bill by striking out all that part of it which provides for the employment of the United States troops in making the road. Favorable Mr. GURLEY, in reply, said, it was possible he as he was to all measures of internal improvement, and to the particular object now pro- might have been deceived in his apprehensions; posed, he was not disposed in the accomplish-he presumed the gentleman from Florida was ment of it, to jeopardize the lives of the soldiers by employing them in the work. It was a fact well known, that the employment of the troops in works of this description, had, in many instances, proved fatal to them. He had personally witnessed this, and knew it to be true. It had for some time been the policy of the United States so to employ them, but, when this policy was extended to southern climates, the soldiers became victims of the occupation. He repeated the assurance that he was friendly to the object of the bill, and would vote for it were this feature removed. better acquainted with the circumstances of that country than he was; and he believed they were both disposed to act on the same principle. He was persuaded, if his fears were not visionary, and danger did really exist, all the gentlemen who were friendly to the bill would be as ready as himself to avoid incurring it. Certainly, the death of our soldiers was to be deprecated. We give a bounty to get them, and when they die, the Government is a loser. What he had stated as to the danger of the He knew, and could climate, he had advanced from experience and personal observation. Mr. CALL, in reply, said, he hoped the prove, that, out of a full company recruited in amendment would not be adopted, as it would Boston, in May, 1821, and employed that sumin effect defeat the bill altogether. The gen- mer in erecting public buildings at Baton tleman from Louisiana, while desirous of ex-Rouge, only fifteen were left alive at the close empting the troops from the labor of making the road, had proposed no substitute for them. For himself, Mr. C. said, he was as much disposed to foster the interests and preserve the life and health of our soldiery as any man, and as much opposed to setting them at a menial or degrading employment; but this was not such an employment of them, nor was it a new proposition, but, on the contrary, a matter of Was it right to expose our of the season. troops to a danger of this kind? It might be very true that, if employed at all, in time of peace, they could not be better employed than in making public roads. But, was there any necessity for employing them? cannot employ soldiers every day in the year in actual labor, are we to disband them? Our soldiers are the salvation of the country; to Because we them we look when her soil is invaded or her liberty threatened. It might be that the climate of Florida was attended with no such danger as he had mentioned, though, from its situation, he should expect its climate greatly to resemble that of Louisiana. He once more avowed that he was entirely the friend of the measure; and, if no substitute for his amendment could be provided, he should be unwilling, by insisting on it, to prevent the passage of the bill. He was decidedly of opinion that no better use could be made of the public money than to apply it to roads, canals, and internal improvements. We could not leave to posterity a better inheritance. [JANUARY, 1824. occupied. If they had experienced unusual mortality at the South, it was from the effects of the climate, not those of the moderate labor to which they were exposed. The troops now proposed to be employed were not to be sent into the climate of Florida; they were already stationed there, and it was a settled point, that the President might employ them at his discretion. The Romans always employed their soldiers on roads; this practice was common with the ancients, some of whose noblest monuments of public utility were the work of their armies. It was surely useless to keep soldiers in idleness, when useful and healthful employment could be found for them. Mr. SANDFORD, of Tennessee, suggested that the fears of the gentleman from Louisiana might be obviated, and the general measure not prevented, if he modified his amendment, so as to confine the employment of the troops to certain months of the year, so as to avoid the sickly season. Mr. HENRY, of Kentucky, said that the troops in Florida were stationed, and would be kept in that country, to maintain our possession of it; no new destination of troops, therefore, was contemplated by the bill. Both the points intended to be connected by the proposed road, were military stations. They were far apart, and in case one of them should be attacked, it was fit that there should be a direct and speedy communication between them. The power to employ the troops is discretionary, and in whose hands, asked Mr. H., is it reposed? In the hands of the Commander-in-Chief of the Army. If the President of the United States, in the exercise of his sagacity and vigilance, should perceive danger to arise from such em Mr. TRIMBLE, of Kentucky, said he should be sorry were the amendment to prevail. The question of employing the troops of the United States in laboring at public works, was one which had been frequently discussed upon this floor; and he believed the mind of Congress, and of the nation, was made up on its propriety. The honorable gentleman from Louisiana had spoken of the mortality attending the Southern climate. But were Congress to relinquish the idea of employing the soldiers on this road, and to send five hundred citizens from civil life to do the work, would not they be in as great danger as the soldiers, or was it important, in the question of climate, whether a man wore a military coat or a homespun one? If the object sought was the saving of the wear and tear of human life, then it was surely humanity to employ the soldiers; for, suppose we have in Florida five hundred troops, and we send in addition five hundred citizens, then the climate makes war upon one thousand human beings instead of five hundred. He remem bered, indeed, that General Wilkinson had in-ployment of the soldiers, he has it in his power, formed the nation that a soldier is a gentleman, and must do no labor; and yet the same great general, almost in the very same paragraph, had set this gentleman to carrying a knapsack, with six days' provision, on his back. For himself, his judgment had always been in favor of employing the troops in making roads upon our frontier. Forts, indeed, he would not set them to build; not because it was laborious, but because forts usually were built, and could be built, both better and cheaper, by contract. Mr. SHARPE, of New York, recurring to the statement of the gentleman from Florida, insisted on the economy of employing the troops on this object. Here was a road of 350 miles to be made, and there were already 750 troops in the territory through which the road is to pass. These troops receive, when working on roads 10 or 15 cents per day, additional wages, (no small matter to a soldier;) was it not betfer to hire hands at 10 or 15 cents a day, than to send to the North for workmen, who must be paid at the rate of 75 or 100 cents? Mr. HEMPHILL observed that our soldiery had frequently been employed in works of this description, and it was a general observation, that they were never healthier than when thus and doubtless will have it in his wish, to avoid that danger. But the danger is visionary. Would not the soldier himself, asked Mr. H, prefer employment to the dull monotony of garrison duty—to the eternal recurrence of the same scene in the same place? The fears expressed on this subject contradicted all theory and all experience; inaction has ever been found to produce both moral and physical maladies-while, on the other hand, employment is healthful alike to body and mind. The question being taken on the motion of Mr: GURLEY, to strike out the second section of the bill, it was decided in the negative by a large majority. After some further conversation on the details of the bill, it was ordered to be engrossed, and read a third time on Monday. MONDAY, January 5. Costs in Patent Cases. Mr. WEBSTER, from the Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was recommitted a bill concerning costs in certain cases, reported the same, with the amendment directed by the instructions of the House, viz: the substitution of one hundred dollars in place of thirty dollars, as the minimum of damages awarded by a jury, on which costs should be allowed. The question being on ordering the bill to be engrossed for a third reading as amended Mr. WEBSTER said, that, on the introduction of this bill to the House, a few days ago, he had stated the reason for proposing this bill, to be, that, though the law limited the recovery of costs, in the courts of the United States, in general cases, to suits involving an amount not less than five hundred dollars, there was a propriety of a reduction of the minimum in the case of suits by patentees, because it was supposed to be matter of necessity for the patentee to sue in the Federal courts. An honorable member had, on a former occasion, suggested that the State courts have jurisdiction in cases of this description; but, Mr. W. said, if the honorable member would refer to the law, he would see that the act of Congress which creates the right prescribes the remedy, and provides that the patentee may sue for it in the circuit courts of the United States, and under that phraseology it was presumed that he could not sue elsewhere than in those courts. [H. OF R. witnesses with him, at the risk, if he fails, of having treble damages to pay, and, if this bill passes, costs to boot? He could scarce conceive of a measure better calculated to enablo designing men to roam at large and prey upon the community. He thought, for his part, that the law was already hard enough. It gave already enormous advantages to the patentee over his opponent; and if costs were to be superadded, it destroyed all prospect of successful contest. Costs, it must be remembered, are, in their nature, very indeterminate; their amount might increase to such a sum as would ruin a man. To be sure, the amendment now reported makes the bill better, so far as it goes; but, even under the bill, as amended, if a patentee does but obtain a verdict for thirty-four dollars, he gets his costs also allowed him, because treble the verdict runs over one hundred dollars, and brings him within the provisions of the bill. Is it not proper, asked Mr. B., that the pretended patentee shall first be made to establish his right before his opponent is threatened with treble damages and costs? He thought the law should at least be left unaltered; for himself, he felt more disposed to curtail than to extend it. Mr. LIVERMORE said, that, at first, he had viewed the object and provisions of the present bill as proper and expedient; but, on further reflection, he had seen reason to alter that opinion. He thought, however, that the fault of the system did not lie so much in that feature of it which allowed costs where damages over one hundred dollars were obtained, but in that which previously allowed the verdict of the jury to be treble. Why should not suitors under the patent law be placed on the same footing with other suitors? The alteration he wished to prevail was to repeal the treble damages and allow costs in all cases. But if it should be deemed proper to alter that provision, then he thought that costs should be given, rather where the amount was under one hundred dollars than over that sum. If a verdict was obtained for ten dollars and treble, the additional twenty dollars was not likely to be enough to cover the costs. He wished to see the whole system placed under the Committee on the Judiciary to be remodelled; he would also give the State courts concurrent jurisdiction with those of the United States, in cases under the patent law. Mr. BUCHANAN had objections to the whole bill. What, asked he, is the law in the case of patentees as it now stands? A most extraordinary distinction over other clients is made in their favor, by granting them judgment for three times the amount of damages awarded by a jury. And what does the bill, now before the House, propose to do in favor of those favored individuals? To superadd costs to that treble verdict. He would ask, whether such a measure is right; whether it is politic; whether it is just? He thought it would be neither. He thought it far better to let the law remain as it now stands. What had been the history of this country on the subject of patent rights? It was known to all, that the privilege granted by the patent law, had been extensively diffused through the Union. The number of patents actually issued was very great; the number pretended to be enjoyed was greater still. Impositions were multiplied. In some districts of the Union very large amounts of money had been collected from such as were afraid of the expense of a lawsuit, by persons claiming to have a patent for the use or manufacture of certain articles; and, after they had gone through a whole region, thus practising on the fears or ignorance of the inhabitants, it turned out, Mr. WEBSTER, in reply to Mr. BUCHANAN, when at last some one had hardihood enough said that he felt no particular anxiety on the to contest their claim, that they had no right subject of this bill; but, having charge of the at all. This was especially the case in those bill, it seemed proper of him to say something States which were of extensive size, and the in its defence. The House would recollect, he distance from the circuit court occasioned for- said, that this whole case of patents is taken, midable expenses in resorting to trial. The by the law, out of the hands of the State courts, claimant brings a patent in his hand, and thus the jurisdiction over it being exclusively rehas prima facie evidence of the validity of his served to the courts of the United States. The right; he asks, perhaps, but eight or ten dol-power of legislating on this subject is taken lars for the article; who would not rather pay from the States by the Constitution of the Unitthat sum than run the risk of travelling one or ed States. And, at this time of day, and betwo hundred miles, to the circuit court, taking | fore this Assembly, Mr. W. said he need not argue that the right of the inventor is a high property; it is the fruit of his mind-it belongs to him more than any other property-he does not inherit it-he takes it by no man's gift-it peculiarly belongs to him, and he ought to be protected in the enjoyment of it. Precisely as the arts advance, Mr. W. went on to say, does property of this description become valuable; where the nicest machinery is in operation, it is there that the improvements of inventors are in the highest estimation-and with regard to those branches of industry which have been most successful in this country, they are more indebted to the ingenuity of inventors-to the power of mind in the improvement of machinery, than to another species of aid which they have received from time to time. It is to encourage these inventions that our patent laws are designed. Is it any answer to this argument in their favor, that impositions are sometimes practised under cover of these laws? Is it not so with every thing else? With regard to land, for example-are there not many persons pretending to have titles to land who really have no title? Are there not as many speculations in landed property as in the property of mind? And shall a man not recover his right to land because the world is full of pretensions of right to land where no right exists? Surely not. It was said by an honorable member from the West the other day, that the people in his part of the country did not know that there was such a thing as a patent office in the country, or such a clause in the constitution as that which relates to patent rights. Mr. W. said he did not know that on this account the House should accommodate its legislation precisely to that state of information. The error was not in the constitution or the patent laws, but in the want of knowledge among the people, and could only be corrected by its diffusion. In restricting the patentee to the recovery of mere judicial damages, Mr. W. continued, justice was not done to him. He cannot sue for all his right at once, because the violations by which he is deprived of it are numerous. Suppose you were to compel a man, in suing for land, to sue for it acre by acre he might get his land, indeed, but he would be ruined by the process of recovery. It was because the particular injury in the case of the violation of a patent right was small, and the expense of redressing it great, that the provision of this bill appeared to be expedient. A redress of the actual injury was not sufficient in this class of cases-if the penalty for the violation was not sufficient to act in terrorem, it was nothing. Do not all penal statutes, Mr. W. asked, go on the ground, that damages are not only to be given to indemnify a sufferer in a particular case, but to such an amount as to deter others from doing the like? The argument of the gentleman from Pennsylvania, besides, went too far. If the damages are awarded at five hundred dollars, as the law now stands, costs are allowed; whilst, if the dama (JANUARY, 1824. ges be but ten dollars, they are not allowed. What justice was there in this? Where an action is brought to recover damages for the use of an invention or improvement in machinery, the common rule is, to settle the amount of damages at the sale price of the article; and one of the injurious consequences to defendants themselves, from the present state of the law, is, that the juries give as much damages as will carry the costs. He could assure the gentleman from Pennsylvania, whatever might be said in other parts of the country, there was no right which an independent jury of the part of the country in which he resided would protect with more certainty or vigilance, than the patent right. In a clear case, where the intention to deprive the inventor of the benefit of his patent was obvious, the jury would, in almost any case, give damages to the full amount of five hundred dollars. This bill, therefore, would, in this respect, be beneficial to the defendants themselves. the part of patentees there were so many things to be proved-for instance, that the invention is new, that it is useful, that the specification is accurate, &c.-so much nicety was required, as to throw sufficient obstacles in his way. The right of the patentee, Mr. W. said, was one which the Constitution of the United States had authorized and enjoined upon Congress to protect; the party injured has no security or resort elsewhere, but to the courts of the United States; and if it was reasonable that in such case he should be entitled to recover costs where the damages amount to one hundred dollars, then this bill ought to pass; if not, it ought not to pass. On Mr. BUCHANAN, in reply, observed, that no one could be more disposed to protect the just rights of patentees than he was; nor could any person concur more heartily than he did in the sentiments of the honorable gentleman from Massachusetts respecting the property which an inventor has in that which is the product of his own genius; yet he held it to be a principle in legislation, while guarding the rights of one individual, not to forget or to impair those of the rest of the community. A wise legislator was bound to give equal protection to the rights of all. Ever since the passage of the patent law under the constitution, the courts had been open to patentees, and the burden of proof had always been cast on the violator of his patent. He must prove that his act was no violation of the patent, or that the patent was in itself invalid. This operated, at least in that part of the Union which he had the honor to represent, as a great hardship; yet it had been cheerfully submitted to, and the mere production of the patent was allowed to be presumptive evidence in favor of the patentee. But the law went farther; it not only threw the burden of proof on the alleged violator, but it tripled all damages against him. And now it was proposed to go farther still, and to allow all costs in the bargain, wherever these dama |