Now, hear what Kossuth says of his motive in being here at this time:

"The motive, citizens, is that your generous act of my liberation has raised the conviction throughout the world that this generous act of yours is but the manifestation of your resolution to throw your weight into the balance where the fate of the European continent is to be weighed. You have raised the conviction throughout the world, that by my liberation you were willing to say, 'Ye oppressed nations of old Europe's continent, be of good cheer; the young giant of America stretches his powerful arm over the waves, ready to give a brother's hand to your future.' do is your act interpreted throughout the world.”

He goes on to say:

"It is hence that my liberation was cheared, from Swedes down to Portugal, as a ray of hope. It is hence that even those nations which most desire my presence in Europe sow, have unanimously told me, Hasten on, hasten on to the great, free, rich, and powerful people of the United States, and bring over its brotherly aid to the cause of your country, so intimately connected with European liberty,'” Again, he says:

And taking my ground on this principle of union, which I find lawfully existing, an established constitutional fact, it is not to a party, but to the united people of the United Stues that I confidently will address my humble requests for aid and protection to oppressed humanity. I will conscientiously respect your laws, but within the limits of your laws I will use every honest exertion to gain your operative ympathy and your financial, material, and political aid for my country's freedom and independence, and entreat the realization of these hopes which your generosity has raised

in me and my people's breasts, and also in the breasts of

Europe's oppressed nations. And, therefore, thirdly, I beg leve frankly to state that my aim is to restore my father land to the full enjoyment of that act of declaration of independence, which being the only rightful existing public law of my nation."

How is it possible for his fatherland to be re

stored without war? How could we possibly aid, financially, materially, and politically, without bring

ing war?

I refer to these speeches to show that my resotions had some foundation in fact. But in additen to all this, we have another most extraordimary development. Kosssth was invited to review the militia of New York; he was invited to appear before the militia of the country with all the trappings of military gewgawism, no doubt with the privilege of expressing to those men in arms, the same sentiments that he expressed at the other retings. Here is what he says in reference to that invitation:

→ I am told that I will have the high honor to review your patriote militia. Ok, God! how my heart throbs at the kes to see this gallant army enlisted on the side of free. dim against despotism; the world would be free, and you' Lavions of humanity."

the King's heart by a magical touch, thus: "I think myself happy, King Agrippa; because I shall answer for myself, this day, before thee, especially because I know thee to be expert in all the questions and customs which are among the Jews." Here, in connection with these slurs upon our Austrian mission, and upon the respectable representative of that Government here, he softsawders Mr. Webster, endeavoring, I suppose, to obtain, and no doubt obtaining, by that soft-sawdering, the influence of some of Mr. Webster's friends. But he mistakes the American heart. Our triumphs bring pleasure and delight to us. Our friends rejoice when the victory is over, it it not ours to turn the knife in the wound; we are not cold enough for that. Mr. Webster's triumph in the little matter of diplomacy was very complete over Mr. Hulsemann-very gratifying, very satisfactory. Did Mr. Webster enjoy the pain which it gave his respectable adversary? No. He rejoiced not in the pain he inflicted; but in the intellectual pleasure of looking upon his own bantling a great little letter! Now, I tell Kossuth that Mr. Webster feels great disgust for this heartless effort to revive an old quarrel, and to insult Mr. Hulsemann by referring to him in words of contempt coupled with a flattering allusion to the Secretary of State I refer to this for the purpose of asking if it became an exile who had been brought to this country by the mediation of the Government, sanctioned by the people, so soon and so unblushingly to begin his interference in our public as well as our private affairs?

speech which he made in New York-to which speech I take no exception whatever I have no doubt that he had seen or heard of my resolutions before he delivered it, because it is entirely free from the incendiarism which marked his former speeches-but in that speech, he says that General Washington never recommended national non-inspecies of fallacious logic by which he endeavors tervention, but only neutrality, and he resorts to a to draw a distinction between "neutrality" and national "non-intervention." Everybody knows, Mr. Speaker, what has been our policy. It makes no odds whether Washington recommended it in so many words. His word "neutrality" was quite sufficient, and upon it has been built the policy that has ruled us in all time. And what has been the result of that policy? Why, from the small beginning of three millions, of inhabitants, we have now got twenty-three millions; from a small number of States, we are now over thirty; from a ragged population, we present the best dressed popu

But I must hasten on. This man, in the last

Now, I ask if there was not some reason for the res Actions which I offered? I ask the House to les at this man, with his powerful eloquence, with his great ingenuity, with his greater charac-lation in the world; and from poverty we have ter, coming as he does from the fields where liberty's battles were fought and won and lost-I ask the House to view him in his speeches and in spoons, with all its candor, and to say if there was not some grounds of apprehension that ⚫ those inflammatory harangues would incite the young and the ambitious into an expedition? How borg would it take New York, with its immense wealth and shipping resources, to supply and fit out an expedition? It is known that New York was the life, soul, and centre of the ill-starred Cuban expedition.

But I pass on to the general positions which he Essumes in some of his other speeches. Was it generous in this man-was it returning our hospiality in a proper manner, to come here and so immediately, so directly, so unblushingly, so unhesitatingly to commence a direct interference in our public and private concerns. What does he say? Not content with receiving the homage of the people in their popular assemblies, he assails Congress and advises us to recall our Minister from Vienna! What a height of impudence is that! He tells us that we can spare Mr. Hulsemann. Here is his language:

Now, as to your minister al Vienna, how you can combine the letting him stay there with your opinion of the couse of Hungary, I really don't know; but so much I know, that the present absolutistical atmosphere of Europe is not very propitious to American principles. I know a man who could tell some curious facts about this matter. But as to Mr. Hulsemann, really I don't believe that he would be so ready to leave Washington. He has extremely well digested the caustic pills which Mr. Webster has administered to him so gloriously."

Now notice the magical skill of this arch elocutionist. See with what ingenuity he mixes the flattery with the censure. Why, he is almost as polished and as ingenious as St. Paul, who, when he pleaded before Agrippa smoothed his way to

risen to the greatest wealth and pros perty. Why and how did we get all these? We got them by an adherence to the great principle of staying at home and minding our own business. It is a principle upon which a private man thrives. It is a principle upon which private families prosper. It is a principle upon which a neighborhood has peace and prosperity and enjoyment. It is that great principle which has raised us up to be the greatest government on earth. But Kossuth says that we may depart from that policy now-that it was wise when we were young, but that now we have grown up to be a giant and may abandon it. Here is another bit of philosophy for you. We can all resist adversity. We know the usesand sweet are they-of adversity. It is the crucible of fortune. It is the iron key that unlocks the golden gates of prosperity. I say, God bless adversity. It pricks me. I bleed and am well. But the rock upon which men and upon which nations split is PROSPerity. This man says that we have grown to be a giant and that we may depart from the wisdom of our youth. But I say that now is the time to take care; we are great enough; let us be satisfied; prevent the growth of our ambition, prevent our pride from swelling, and hold on to what we have got. Do you remember the story of the old governor, who had been raised from rags? His King discovered in him merit and integrity, and appointed him a satrap-a ruler over many provinces. He came to be great, and it was his custom to be escorted throughout the country several times during the year, in order to see and to be seen. He was received and acknowledged everywhere as a great man and a great governor. But he carried about with him a mysterious chest, and every now and then he would look into it, but let nobody else see what it contained.

There was a great deal of curiosity excited by this chest, and finally he was prevailed upon by some of his friends to let them look into it. Well, he permitted it, and what did they see? They saw an old ragged and torn suit of clothes, the clothes that he used to wear in his humility and in his poverty, and he said that he carried them about with him in order that when his heart began to swell, and his ambition to rise, and his pride to dilate, he could look on the rags, they reminded him of what he had been, and thus he was enabled to resist the temptations of prosperity. Let us see whether this can illustrate anything in our history. Raise the veil, if there is one, which conceals the poverty of this Union, when there were but thirteen States. Raise the veil that conceals the rags of our soldiers of the Revolution. Lift the lid of the chest which contains the poverty of our beginning, in order that you may be reminded, like this old satrap, of the days of your poverty, and be enabled to resist the advice of this man who now tells you that you were wise in your youth, but that now you are a giant and may depart from that wisdom. Remember now the use of adversity, and let us take advantage of it and be benefited by it, for great is the man, and greater is the nation, that can resist the enchanting smiles of prosperity.

In referring to our humble beginning, and our great and astonishing growth, I am induced to pause a moment, and ask why is it that we should so lightly and carelessly treat propositions of this sort, which involve, as it is admitted this proposition does involve, the very principle by which we have grown to our present condition? What was the cost of this great and glorious Confederacy? We cannot find it by going back and searching the old Quartermaster's reports. We cannot find it in dollars and cents-we know not how to estimate it by this method. The true place to find the cost is in the battle-fields of the Revofeet of your soldiers-the history of those brave lution-in the rags, the deprivations, the bleeding who fell in their youth. In this contemplation, I cannot arrive at an estimate of the cost of these States. Now, I ask, if it is wise in this legislative assembly so lightly and carelessly to pass by the wisdom of our fathers?

men,

In reference to this question of non-intervention, Mr. Kossuth rather exultingly asks, in answer to some objections, if France did not give us active and material aid in the days of the Revolution? Certainly; but that was her business, and_not ours-that was her policy, and not ours. It is very simple in Mr. Kossuth to ask such a question. He should read history; the little tags he picks up from editors and reporters and conferring friends will not suffice. Do the advocates of this resolution-the advocates of the abandonment of our non-intervention depend upon this question as an argument for them? Is it not known in history that France had possessions contiguous to the colonies, and that it was her business to protect them? It was her policy to come here and afford us aid against England, as well for her own sake as for ours. There is an answer to any little exultation any man may have, in referring to the French question. I say it was her policy to desire to defeat England, as well as her inclination, to aid a suffering and oppressed people as we were at that time, which brought her to our shores.

And now, as I have a few moments left, I beg leave to call your attention to another fact. have passed over many things which I should like to dwell upon, but I turn to consider another question, which is a part of his MISSION, and that is the question of RELIGION. Religion! I have a book, written by his biographer, and, of course, his friend, in which he says that one of Kossuth's objects is "to beat down the Catholic religion!" "That in the struggle in the Hungarian controversy depended the prevalence of the Protestant religion!" That is, the Protestant religion would rise or fall with the Hungarian struggle. This man goes on to show that Kossuth's object is to destroy the Catholic religion. (Teft's Book.) I refer to this in order to ask, whether freedom in religious worship is not one of the corner-stones of our institutions. I ask if it is proper in the Congress of the United States, by its assembled wisdom, to say to this man, "Come here-stir us up, in order that we may superintend secret expeditions against Austria; come here to feast, drink, loaf, and lounge, teach us politics, and in

of time-I trust it will be thousands of years hence

by some accident of nature, we may be blotted out, and this which is now the Western abiding place of liberty, may be the Eastern home of kings, and the Eastern land, by some freak of nature, may be covered up, and these monuments of re

hallowed by the footsteps of kings may be thousands of feet under the earth. Then, and not till then, will there be a genuine republican government on the Eastern continent. Now, I say that all your sympathy is thrown away, and all your fighting for a man struggling to be a head of a republic in the East, is but to elevate a prince into places of power, in order that he may oppress his serfs. The present Republic of France is but the nursery of new Robespierres and Dantons, whose days of blood are not far off!!

terfere with our religion, also?" Shall we say this? Sir, our notion of religious liberty is derived from the Pilgrim Fathers-was founded upon the Rock of Plymouth-and is diffused through all our institutions, so that the humblest log-cabin in the Far West, if dedicated to Christian worship, is as sacred in the eyes of the law as the lord-gality and nobility may be buried, and the places liest cathedral in the Eastern world. And yet, you invite this man to come here to carry on his. crusade upon religious subjects. Crusade! A word that reminds us of the days of chivalry; and if we would yield a moment to the false appearances of this day, we might say that Burke was wrong when he exclaimed "The days of chivalry were gone. The apostles of this man have already proclaimed him to this country as another Peter the Hermit. Ah! there is another exhibition of the religious part of his mission. I am willing to acknowledge, that Kossuth must be a man of consummate eloquence. I am perfectly satisfied of that fact. I have read his speeches with great admiration, mixed up with a little indignation, and that opinion I have expressed. I am not a man to turn my eyes from the face of genius. Wherever it exists, whatever may be its sentiments, I love to look upon it, because I know that in the face of genius there is the image of God. I am willing to say, that Kossuth possesses all the charms to make him a most accomplished man and a gentleman, and I should consider it my misfortune if he should pass through here without my seeing him, and, if I dared, I should venture to make his acquaintance. I do not think that the idea of a mission like that of Peter the Hermit will be tolerated in this country. What was the object of Peter's mission? It was to raise an innumerable army to fight in the cause of religion. He was said to be a man of great and exceeding eloquence, as no doubt he must have been, to have produced such a wonderful effect. I ask, you then, are we ready for another Peter the Hermit? Are we ready to be instructed by some Eastern monk? Why, sir, we have enough orators at home-men born in the West cradled in the wilderness, where everything around them is grand; and if men grow where grandeur surrounds them, they cannot help being orators. If we want any Peter, we do not want him from the East. We want Peter the Hunter, from the West.

"Westward the star of empire takes its way." Let our instructions come from that source.

I will make another observation, and that is in reference to the idea of establishing republican governments in Europe. New governments there are continually rising and falling; and have they not been trying to establish republican governments there for the last thousand years? Have they ever succeeded? And why not? Because of their antiquities, and their monuments breathing, smacking, and smelling of nobility and royalty, and because half of the people are pretendates. Where that state of society exists, one man will always want to be superior to the others, and the idea of human agrarianism is a mere absurdity. Look at the present condition of France. What a mockery upon republican institutions. Having driven out her King-having achieved the first step-having done all that was necessary, she could not take a common name for her President. She had to take a princely name-a name connected with royal and princely blood. What a mockery! What chance would such a republican name as Jones, Davis, Johnson, Thompson, or Smith have [laughter] of being President of republican France? I tell you. that Republics exist where God has so ordained, and nowhere else; and all your sympathy for eastern Republics is thrown upon the water, with- || out the virtue of the bread. Republics exist where men are born free-where there are no monuments of royalty-where there are no antiquities, no heraldries to remind one of the superior origin of his blood. God has written it, and it is inevitable, that no Republics shall exist for a long period of time in their true character, where the monuments of the country are indelibly connected with nobility and royalty; but they shall exist in the Western hemisphere, where the anointed king has never There is no regal atmosphere placed his foot. here. There are no histories, no heraldries, no songs to inspire us with the idea that one man shall be superior to another, except in the love and affections of the people. As long as that state of things exist, we will be free. But in the course

When did Kossuth become a republican? Never until he reached England. What was he fighting for? Why, for the permanence of the Hungarian constitution. Here is the Hungarian constitution, as he says to us himself in his New York speechhere is the constitution he was trying to perpetuate. "Hungary is a free and independent Kingdom"(KINGDOM)" having its own self-constituent existence and constitution, and not subject to any other nation and country in the world. The only tie between us and Austria, was that we were bound to elect to be our Kings the same dynasty, which were also the sovereigns of Austria." Here you see that this free constitution and this free country fought for by Kossuth in the Hungarian struggle, had a King! And all Kossuth wanted, was to establish their ancient constituencies. There is the republic for whose perpetuation he was striving and fighting.

He comes here now to this country almost a red republican-a much better republican than ourselves, who were born republicans. But I am proud of his conversion. I congratulate him and the cause of liberty throughout the world, that American atmosphere has had such a magical effect upon him.

I had some interesting authorities, which I would like to read if I had time, but I will close my remarks by thanking the House for their kind indulgence in hearing me.

Mr. HIBBARD. I move to lay on the table the motion to reconsider the vote on the adoption of the title.

The question was then taken, and the motion to reconsider was laid upon the table.

RESOLUTIONS.

Mr. FITCH asked the unanimous consent of the House for the purpose of introducing a preamble and resolution, which was read for information, as follows:

Whereas on the 2d of January, 1818, the House of Representatives of the United States declared that the then existing war with Mexico was "unnecessarily and unconstitutionally begun by the President of the United States," which declaration, if uncontradicted, may hereafter lead to erroneous opinions of the cause of that war, and the views and motives of those engaged in its active prosecution; therefore

Resolved, That the said declaration was a libel upon our country's cause, a stigma upon the memory of the brave dead of that war, and a reproach upon the living who fought its battles; that it was unfounded in fact, and expressed not the opinion of the people of the United States, but that only of an accidental majority in Congress.

Mr. STEPHENS, of Georgia. I object to their introduction.

Mr. FITCH moved a suspension of the rules, to enable him to introduce the resolution; upon which motion

Mr. STEPHENS, of Georgia asked for the yeas and nays; which were ordered; and, being taken, were-yeas 102, nays 53; as follows:

YEAS-Messrs. Aiken, Willis Allen, Andrews, John Appleton, Averett, Babcock, Bartlett, Thomas H. Bayly, Bissell, Bocock, Brenton, Albert G. Brown, Buell, Busby, Thompson Campbell, Cartter, Caskie, Clark, Cobb, John G. Davis, Dawson, Dimmick, Doty, Dunham, Eastman, Edmundson, Edgerton, Faulkner, Ficklin, Fitch, Florence, Freeman, Thomas J. D. Fuller, Gaylord, Gorman, Grow, Hall, Hamilton, Isham G. Harris, Sampson W. Harris, Hart, Hendricks, Henn, Hibbard, Holladay, Houston, Howard, Ingersoll, Jackson, Andrew Johnson, John Johnson, Robert W. Johnson, Daniel T. Jones, George W. Jones, J. Glancy Jones, Preston King, Kurtz, Letcher, Lockhart, Mace, Edward C. Marshall, Humphrey Marshall, McCorkle, McDonald, McLanahan, McMullin, McNair, Meade, Millson, Molony, Murphy, Murray, Nabers, Andrew Parker, Peaslee, Penn, Phelps, Polk, Price, Richardson, Robbins, Robie, Robinson, Ross, Savage, Scurry, David L. Seymour, Origen S. Seymour, Skelton, Sniart, Smith, Frederick P. Stanton, Richard H. Stanton, Abraham P. Stevens, Stuart, Sutherland, Sweetser, George W. Thomp

son, Thurston, Venable, Alexander White, Wilcox, and Wildrick-102.

NAYS-Messrs. Abercrombie, Allison, William Appleton, Bell, Bennett, Bowie, Bowne, Briggs, Brooks, Burrows, E. Carrington Cabell, Caldwell, Lewis D. Campbell, Chandler, Chapman, Chastain, Clingman, Conger, Cullom, George T. Davis, Evans, Ewing, Fowler, Gentry, Goodenow, Hascall, Haven, Hebard, Hillyer, Horsford, John W. Howe, Thomas M. Howe, Hunter, George G. King, Kuhns, Landry, Mann, Martin, Meacham, Miller, Henry D. Moore, John Moore, Morehead, Newton, Outlaw, Samuel W. Parker, Penniman, Perkins, Porter, Sackett, Schermerhorn, Schoonmaker, Benjamin Stanton, Alexander H. Stephens, Taylor, Tuck, Walbridge, Walsh, Ward, Washburn, Watkins, Welch, Wells, and Williams-53.

Mr. BRECKENRIDGE, who was without the bar when his name was called, asked permission to record his vote.

Mr. STEPHENS, of Georgia, objected. He had been there, he said, for eight years, and never knew the privilege to be accorded to any one. So the rules were not suspended.

Mr. CLINGMAN, from the Committee on Territories, by general consent, reported the following resolution; which was read and adopted, viz:

Resolved, That the President be requested to communicated to this House all such information as may be in his possession, calzulated to show the actual condition of things in the Territory of Utah; and especially to enable the House to ascertain whether the due execution of the laws of the United States has been resisted or obstructed; whether there has been any misappropriation of the public funds; and whether the personal rights of our citizens have been interfered with in any manner.

Mr. SMART, by unanimous consent, introduced the following resolution; which was read and agreed to, viz:

Resolved, That the President of the United States be requested to communicate to this House, if not incompatible with the public interest, any information he may have received respecting the seizure and confiscation of the barque "Georgiana," of Maine, and the brig "Susan Loud," of Massachusetts, by the Spanish and Cuban authorities: together with all applications and correspondence in reference thereto; and that he inform the House what measures (if any) have been taken for the indemnification, by the Spanish Government, of the captains, owners, and crews of said vessels.

The resolution was adopted.

Mr. MEADE asked the general consent of the House to introduce a resolution; which was read, as follows, viz:

Resolved, That the President of the United States be requested to communicate to this House, if not incompatible with the public interest, information, if any, in his power, first, as to the conclusion of the treaty between Spain, France, and Great Britain, in respect to the Island of Cuba, and the nature of that treaty; second, as to the relative strength of the British, French, and United States squadrons in the West India seas; and thirdly, whether additional appropriations are necessary to increase our force on that station.

Mr. CARTTER objected to the introduction of the resolution.

Mr. MEADE moved a suspension of the rules to enable him to introduce it; which question was put and agreed to.

The resolution was then adopted.

Mr. HOUSTON, from the Committee of Ways and Means, by general consent, reported the following resolution:

Resolved, That the Committee of Ways and Means be authorized to employ a clerk at the usual rate of compen

sation.

The question was taken upon the adoption of the resolution, and it was agreed to.

Mr. HOUSTON, from the Committee of Ways and Means, by the unanimous consent of the House, reported the following resolution; which was read and agreed to:

Resolved, That the Committee of Ways and Means be authorized to cause such repairs to be made in their committee room as the majority of such committee may deem necessary, not to exceed in cost the sum of $20.

Mr. EVANS asked and obtained- leave, and introduced a bill, of which previous notice had been given, to amend an act entitled "An act for the punishment of crime in the District of Columbia;" which was read a first and second time by its title, and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

Mr. SIBLEY, by unanimous consent, introduced the following resolution; which was read and adopted, viz:

Resolved, That the Secretary of War be requested to inform this House, 1st. What progress has been made, if any, in the construction of certain roads authorized by Congress in the Territory of Minnesota; 2d. What amounts of the sum appropriated by Congress for that object has been expended, and for what specific purpose; 3d. What additional sum, in his opinion, will be necessary for the completion of the roads so authorized.

LOUIS KOSSUTH.

Mr. WILDRICK, from the Committee on

Enrolled Bills, reported as correctly enrolled the joint resolution of welcome to Louis Kossuth; which was presented to the Speaker, and received his signature.

REFUNDING OF MONEYS TO CALIFORNIA. Mr. MARSHALL, of California, on leave, introduced the following bill, of which previous notice had been given, to authorize and direct the payment of certain moneys into the treasury of the State of California, which was collected in the ports of said State as excise upon imports since the ratification of the treaty of peace between the United States and the Republic of Mexico, and previous to the admission of California into the Union.

The bill having been read a first and second time by its title,

Mr. MARSHALL moved its reference to the Committee on Military Affairs; and it was so referred.

Mr. JONES, of Tennessee. I object to the reference to that committee.

The SPEAKER. The objection comes too late.

Mr. JONES. I move a reconsideration of the vote by which the bill was referred to the Committee on Military Affairs.

The question was put, and the motion was agreed to.

Mr. JONES. I now move that the bill be referred to the Committee of Ways and Means.

Mr. MARSHALL. The reference that I moved, of this bill to the Committee on Military Affairs, was a very appropriate one under all the eircumstances. The moneys which that bill provides to be refunded to the State, or rather to the treasury of California, were collected under a military administration, and are now in some part of the military department in this city. The matter is one that comes properly under the cognizance of the committee to which I have moved its reference. There are other reasons, air, which I had intended some time or other in the course of this session to state-but perhaps it would be as well to state them now-why I prefer the Committee on Military Affairs to the Committee of Ways and Means. At the head, and the one next to the head of the latter committee, are gentlemen very distinguished for their economy-for an economy that induces them to negative everything which looks like an appropriation. I desire to refer my bill first to the Committee on Military Affairs-an appropriate and proper comme. I want it to escape, if possible, altogether the hands of the Committee of Ways and Means. These are the motives. Everybody understands them. If the bill ever falls into the hands of that committee, it is buried. I know that now. I therefere propose that the bill be referred as indicated and I rely upon the generosity of the House to stain this reference, that it may, at least, have a fair chance that at least it will not be prejudged before it is even presented.

Mr. JONES. I think the gentleman from California has certainly not made up his opinion of the Committee of Ways and Means from any knowledge that he has. I ask that gentleman if he ever heard of a bill referred to the Committee of Ways and Means, as now constituted, or as constituted at the last session of Congress, which was buried, or was permitted to sleep in that committee? I ask him, sir, if this is not a prejudgment and warning without knowledge upon his part? If the gentleman's bill is right, he has nothing to fear from me, or from the committee. If the gentleman will go back and look at the records of this House, and see when the Congress of the United States refused to give to his new State a territorial government after its organization in 1848-refused to give it the protection and benefit of our laws and government-and a proposition was brought here, sir, to send the tax-collector among that people, and levy taxes upon them, and make them pay tribute to a Government which denied them its protection and laws, he will find one individual -the one who now addresses you, sir, and who is a member of the Committee of Ways and Means-who voted against sending the tax-collector to his people without first giving them the benefit of the laws and government under which we claime dthat that people belonged to. Now, sir, I say again, that if his bill is right, I do not prejudge it. If it is right-if this money was collect

The

ed before they had the benefit of our laws-they should have the benefit of the money. Committee of Ways and Means is the appropriate committee, in my opinion, for it, and not the Committee on Military Affairs. I hope, sir, that the House will do with it what they may think, in their judgment, is right. I would merely ask for the reading of the rule defining what sort of jurisdiction the Committee on Military Affairs shall have, and what the Committee of Ways and Means.

Mr. HOUSTON. The very extraordinary course taken by the gentleman from California, and the unfounded and extraordinary remarks he has made with reference to myself, require that I should say a word upon the subject. I do not intend to give to it at present but a moment's consideration. The gentleman from California is, no doubt, well informed upon the matters coming before him, and under his peculiar management and jurisdiction. I do not pretend to deny to him transcendent abilities, peculiar knowledge, and a mind calculated to grapple with all subjects. And while he has, no doubt, his proper share of liberality, would it not have been well for him to have informed himself more correctly before he advanced any objection to the Committee of Ways and Means, or any of its members, and before he thus wantonly assailed, without, I apprehend, the least foundation in fact, the chairman and other members of that committee? I undertake to say that his declarations, as far as I am concerned, are gratuitous and unjust. From what, sir, does he judge of my course upon that subject? Does he know that I have prejudged his bill? And has he any reason for saying that I have such opinions of economy that I am unwilling to vote appropriations for anything, or give countenance to any proposition, that will draw money from the Treasury, however just the demand upon that Treasury? Sir, I was not in the last Congress. I presume the gentleman has not consulted my votes while I had the honor, formerly, of a seat here; and if he has, then he is more in fault, because my votes show, through the whole course of my legislative career here, that I voted for most of the propositions for appropriations that were deemed by the majority of the Committee of Ways and Means as necessary and right to the proper administration of the Government. Has he consulted the Journals thereof? I had the honor of being a member of the Committee of Ways and Means for several years, during the time I was a member of this House; and although I have been regarded as strict in my opinions of economy, I have never yet found any one who has been willing to hazard the expression, (for it is a hazard,) that I would prejudge a proposition of this character, or any other.

Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from California probably did not weigh the import of the language he used. He ought to know, if he does not, that we are here acting under the same solemn injunctions that are resting upon him. We have our duties to discharge to the country, and it ought to be presumed, at least, that we are as willing to discharge these duties as the gentleman himself; and if he had exercised that charity which he would wish others to exercise towards him, he would never have committed the blurder of making the unfounded and gratuitous attack upon the Committee of Ways and Means that he has made. Mr. Speaker, I am satisfied that the appropriate committee for the investigation of the bill presented by the gentleman from California, is the Committee of Ways and Means.

I have no desire, as one of the members of that committee, to have charge of the bill. If the bill should be committed to the Committee of Ways and Means, so far as my action is concerned, as one of that committee, I will give it the same careful and candid investigation which I intend to give to all other propositions that may come before that committee. I would examine into its merits, and if I supposed it had merits sufficient to entitle it to the favorable consideration of the committee and the House, I would give it my sanction; otherwise, I would not. And upon the subject of appropriation, allow me to say here, for myself, as defining the position I occupy, and the course I mean to pursue upon that subject-that I intend, as far as my action goes as a member of that committee and this House, to give to the Administration in power fair and liberal appropriations to carry on this

Government. Beyond that I do not intend to

go.

I do not prejudge the estimates from the Departments. I do not pretend to say whether they are large, or whether they are small. When they come properly before me I will judge of them; but, as a general rule for my conduct as a member of the Committee of Ways and Means, and a member of this House, I intend, as I before said, to give the Administration in power fair and liberal appropriations to carry on the Government. I intend to pass, according to the best judgment I have, upon all bills that it may be the pleasure of the House to submit to that committee. It may, and I have no doubt will be the case, that I shall be found against some of the bills that will come before the committee. That is the case with members upon all committees. Every member must, at times, meet with disappointment in not getting his bills through the committees and the House. It is natural. We do not all view the merits of a bill alike. We differ in opinion upon the subjects involved, and it is natural that it should be so. While I have said thus much, and while I have declared here in my place that I will give my support to appropriations which I consider fair and liberal for the Government, I will not be found amongst those who are disposed-and I hope there may be none in this Congress-to waste and squanderthe public money. I regret exceedingly the remarks of the gentleman from California, [Mr. MARSHALL,] which made it necessary for me to say a word. They were so unjust, and so unfounded in fact, it was due to myself that I should say what I have said.

Mr. HIBBARD obtained the floor; but gave way to

Mr. MARSHALL, of California, who said: I am surprised, Mr. Speaker, at the storm that seems to be raised around me for a few suggestions I felt myself obliged to throw out. I conceived that the Committee of Ways and Means would have felt itself preeminently flattered at what I said. I found their character, for economy, prévailing so universally here, that I thought it was a thing at which they had aimed all their political life. I meant it as a compliment, though it did not suit me exactly; and I thought when the charge made by me against them found its way into the papers, and went to their constituents, that their political fortunes would be made forever. [Laughter.] Well, I did not mean to prefer against them any very grave charge. I did not mean anything that ought to occasion feelings of resentment, when I said that this bill, and all bills of this character, would be prejudged in that committee. I have no doubt these gentlemen will, in the spirit of a California committee, give this bill a fair hearing, as they say--just as our committees do give a fellow a fair trial, and then hang him. [Laughter.] He will have an admirably fair trial; but this is a bill in which I take an interest. It is a just and fair bill. It provides for the refunding of a sum of money to which California is entitled, if any country upon earth had a right to any money. Refunding is a proverbially difficult operation in the Congress of the United States. It is a matter of peculiar difficulty to get money paid back after it has once passed into the coffers of the United States, as this has done. I say, therefore, the bill labors under peculiar difficulties, and I have been obliged to say all this, and do all I have done. I felt I was obliged to do it in justice to my constituents, because I knew, if in addition to the difficulties that beset it naturally and necessarily, it is referred to the aforesaid Committee of Ways and Means, that it was a gone bill. I know that; and I therefore do urge the reference of this bill to that committee which is equally as appropriate as the Committee of Ways and Means. Such reference is not without example-without precedents in the history of this very body. Mr. Clay made his celebrated report upon the public lands from the Committee on Manufactures, to which it was referred. Everybody recollects that. I say there is nothing inappropriate-no violation of rules in the reference which I wish to make to the Military Committee, as it is the only one which will have the collateral information necessary to a fair inI do therefore vestigation, and a correct report. urge its reference to the Military Committee, and not to the other. The object of the bill might have been gathered from its title. It is this: It is to repay to the State of California the money which was collected under the military occupation